Nice guys don’t support discrimination against mothers.
As debate over the relative merits of filibustering Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch swirls, some moderate Democrats have defended the judge as a “nice guy,” or have argued that he’s highly qualified. They argue that Democrats should not behave like Republicans, and that Gorsuch’s qualifications demand that he be confirmed.
This argument is one that can only be made from a position of incredible privilege. People who view Gorsuch as a nice guy inadvertently reveal that they think some groups of people, notably women, just don’t matter when making moral assessments. Gorsuch is not a nice guy. It’s sexist to argue otherwise.
About Those Sexist Comments Gorsuch Allegedly Made
Just before confirmation hearings began, a former Gorsuch student alleged the judge had made sexist comments during a law school class. Judge Gorsuch, she claimed, insisted that women take unfair advantage of maternity leave, then endorsed the practice of asking women in interviews if they intend to have children. The law bans discrimination against mothers has a form of gender discrimination.
Predictably, Gorsuch denied the allegations. We can’t know for sure what he said. But Gorsuch has consistently ruled against women’s rights. He argued that employers shouldn’t have to cover birth control in insurance plans if doing so contradicts their religious beliefs in Hobby Lobby Stores v. Sebelius, for example. He’s also an avowed opponent of abortion rights.
Given his history of siding against women, and considering the long-standing Republican opposition to maternity leave and anti-discrimination laws, it makes perfect sense that Gorsuch made sexist comments. Gorsuch has a vested interest in denying the sexist statements. Why should we believe him, particularly when his other positions point toward his sexism?
Women Are Human, Too: Why Sexists Can’t Be Considered Nice People
Republican supporters and moderate Democrats who want to keep the peace with Republicans insist that we should ignore Gorsuch’s sexist views and comments. He’s basically a nice person, they argue. He’s honest, they tell us. He cares about the Constitution.
The problem is that, to accept that Gorsuch is a nice guy, you have to view women’s fundamental human rights as some sort of asterisk to the moral compass. In this view, the rights of half the population are a small matter. You can support, and even contribute to, women’s maltreatment and still be a perfectly fine human being.
The things we think matter. And what a Supreme Court nominee thinks have the power to affect the lives of every single woman in this country. To insist that Gorsuch’s ideas don’t matter, or that sexism is a small sideshow, you must believe that women don’t matter. Good people don’t discriminate against mothers, and they don’t see women interviewees as conniving manipulators.
Then There’s the Trucker
As if Gorsuch’s sexist ideology isn’t enough, we’re also supposed to accept that good guys like Gorsuch prioritize property over people. In an employment dispute, Gorsuch sided with the employer of a trucker who likely would have frozen to death if he had followed company policy.
Gorsuch views fertilized eggs as sacred, but a living, breathing human being’s interests pale in comparison to that of a corporation. It seems employers can endanger their employees in the interest of profit, but women can’t have abortions to save their lives or well-being. It’s hypocrisy of the highest order.
This is not the behavior of a good person. It’s certainly not the sort of legal precedent good people want coming out of the Supreme Court.
Why Neil Gorsuch is Unqualified
Moderate liberals may, at this point in the argument, concede that Gorsuch is a sexist. Perhaps he’s even a bad guy who would set worse precedent. They argue that he’s still qualified, and should therefore be confirmed.
Gorsuch is not qualified. Someone who insists that employers ask women about family planning decisions either does not know the law,or has no desire to follow it. His insistence that a trucker was technically capable of following his employer’s demands—at the risk of dying to do so—indicates a poor judicial temperament.
Insisting Gorsuch is qualified is a lot like insisting he’s a good guy. We’re supposed to ignore actual evidence in favor of blind proclamations, and to treat Gorsuch’s record as a trivial matter. Qualified judges do not support employment discrimination. They don’t believe employees should die to do their jobs. And they certainly don’t view women as less deserving of rights than men.
People who insist Gorsuch is qualified and decent have the privilege of ignoring the lived experience of at least half the population. It’s time for liberals to collectively agree that sexism and disregard for human life disqualify a person for any position at all—particularly one on the highest court.