Liberal Media Accuses Neil Gorsuch Of Plagiarism — But Here’s What His Alleged ‘Victim’ Is Saying
Chris Enloe, TheBlaze
Mainstream media outlets BuzzFeed News and Politico ran stories late Tuesday that accused Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch of plagiarizing a section of his 2006 book on assisted suicide and euthanasia.
According to the accusations, Gorsuch copied two paragraphs from a 1984 Indiana Law Journal article by lawyer Abigail Lawlis Kuzma — who today serves as a deputy attorney general in Indiana — about the 1982 “Baby Doe” case. The alleged plagiarism is less than 300 words in a book with more than 130,000 words.
BuzzFeed News uses indirect language to describe the alleged plagiarism. In their headline, they say Gorsuch’s work “appears to be copied” while in the story they say Gorsuch’s book “repeats language and sourcing” from Kuzma’s law article — wording that hardly stands up to the weighty accusation.
Early Wednesday morning, Politico even made the allegations their top story. When visitors went to their website, it was the first story they saw:
Meanwhile, the White House, Gorsuch’s team and the alleged victim are pushing back against the accusations.
White House spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement, according to Politico:
This false attack has been strongly refuted by highly-regarded academic experts, including those who reviewed, professionally examined, and edited Judge Gorsuch’s scholarly writings, and even the author of the main piece cited in the false attack.
There is only one explanation for this baseless, last-second smear of Judge Gorsuch: those desperate to justify the unprecedented filibuster of a well-qualified and mainstream nominee to the Supreme Court.
According to Kuzma, Gorsuch’s work does not constitute legal plagiarism.
“I have reviewed both passages and do not see an issue here, even though the language is similar. These passages are factual, not analytical in nature, framing both the technical legal and medical circumstances of the ‘Baby/Infant Doe’ case that occurred in 1982,” Kuzma said in a statement.
“Given that these passages both describe the basic facts of the case, it would have been awkward and difficult for Judge Gorsuch to have used different language,” she explained.