'He's Not Bashful' Ted Olson Evaluates Neil Gorsuch's Silence in Union Fees Argument
"He's not bashful," Gibson Dunn's Ted Olson said. "He knows he's in the middle of this thing. He knows that he's the vote that's going to tip it one way or the other. And he knows how he's going to come out. But he decided to be very coy."
February 27, 2018 at 06:14 PM
4 minute read
From his first argument on the Supreme Court last year, Justice Neil Gorsuch established himself as an active questioner, flouting the traditional break-in period to the reported consternation of some colleagues.
By the count of at least one prominent appellate lawyer, Walter Dellinger of O'Melveny & Myers, Gorsuch peppered attorneys with 45 questions that day in April 2017. So it was with some surprise how Gorsuch participated in Monday's argument in the latest challenge to fair-share union fees: He did not ask a single question.
Reflecting on the loquacious justice's silence—at least in the case Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees—Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher partner Ted Olson could only offer speculation Tuesday on a panel discussion in Washington hosted by the National Association of Attorneys General.
“The transcript of the argument is very interesting and illuminating to read, and I read it over yesterday afternoon and this morning again. You see that split of the four members—[Stephen] Breyer, [Ruth Bader] Ginsburg, [Elena] Kagan, [Sonia] Sotomayor—on the one side and the other four on the other side. And who didn't say a thing? Justice Gorsuch didn't utter a sound,” said Olson, who served as U.S. solicitor general under the George W. Bush administration.
“He's not bashful,” Olson added. “He knows he's in the middle of this thing. He knows that he's the vote that's going to tip it one way or the other. And he knows how he's going to come out. But he decided to be very coy. The very next argument yesterday morning, he was all over the place.”
Though he has consistently voted with the court's conservative wing, Gorsuch finds himself the potential swing vote in the union-fees case because the justices were deadlocked 4-4 the last time they took up the issue. The justices heard a similar case in 2016, Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, and appeared ready to rule that mandatory fees to public sector employee unions were unconstitutional. But the death of Justice Antonin Scalia left the court deadlocked.
Legal scholars pondered Gorsuch's reticence in the unions case, sharing thoughts on Twitter, but there were no easy conclusions to draw. “We should know by June,” tweeted Jonathan Adler, a professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law.
Should we be surprised Justice Gorsuch asked no questions in Janus? He asked no questions in Husted either.
— Jonathan H. Adler (@jadler1969) February 27, 2018
Gorsuch's style on the bench has reportedly grated on his fellow justices. On the “First Mondays” podcast, NPR reporter Nina Totenberg in October said Gorsuch “ticks off some members of the court—and I don't think it's just the liberals.” Justice Clarence Thomas in November pushed back against that idea, saying in a Fox News interview: “He is a good man. I have no idea what they are talking about.”
Monday's silence wasn't the first time Gorsuch was mum on the bench. He didn't ask questions in the employment arbitration case Epic Systems, argued on the first day of the term. And stayed out of the fray in the Ohio voter-roll case in January.
That's not to say Gorsuch has stayed quiet in every high-visibility case. He fired off questions at, among other arguments, Masterpiece Cakeshop and the Wisconsin redistricting case Gill v. Whitford.
Read more:
5 Key Moments From Supreme Court's Union-Fee Arguments
Gorsuch Won't Need an Introduction From This Advocate in Union-Fee Case
Latest Rap on Gorsuch: He's a Rotten Writer
Neil Gorsuch Dines With US Senators, and It's the Talk of This Town
Justice Ginsburg Scorns 'History Lesson' in This Gorsuch Dissent
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAmerican Bar Association Calls for Enforceable Supreme Court Ethics Code
Fired by Trump, EEOC's First Blind GC Lands at Nonprofit Targeting Abuses of Power
3 minute read‘What’s Different About Jarkesy?’ 5th Circuit Weighs if FCC Forfeiture Order Is Constitutional
Trending Stories
- 1Big Law Firms Sheppard Mullin, Morgan Lewis and Baker Botts Add Partners in Houston
- 2Lack of Jurisdiction Dooms Child Sex Abuse Claim Against Archdiocese of Philadelphia, says NJ Supreme Court
- 3DC Lawsuits Seek to Prevent Mass Firings and Public Naming of FBI Agents
- 4Growth of California Firms Exceeded Expectations, Survey of Managing Partners Says
- 5Blank Rome Adds Life Sciences Trio From Reed Smith
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250