March 1.7, 20'] 7

The Honorable Charles Grassley, Chairman The'H'onorable Dianne Feinstein, Ranking Member
United States senate .Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary
2-24 Dirltsen Senate Of?ce Building 152 Dirksen Senate'Df?ce Building

Washington, DC 20510 Washington, 

Dear Chairman Grassley, .Rankmg'h/Iember Feinstein, 'andrhembers of the Senate? Judiciary
Committee,

I am writing-today to Share my personal ?esperiences as-a law student who took Legal "Ethicsand
Professionalism-?om Judge Gersuch during the spring semester of values shared
during that class Were concerning" and should be' explored furtherlduringjhis con?rmation
hearings for the United States Supreme-Court.

O'n'the evening of Aprillil??, 2016, we had our second to last class-cf the semester. The; assigned
material for that class session focused onstressors found inthe practice. of law, especially how
such ?isSues- as rant-agenda, and longworli days could affect?professionalism.

Aswas thenorni for-the class, udge?orsuch had ahandfu'l of people assigned to be on panel-for-
.for. that day?s class. Judge Gorsuch would call on those students to explain.
any. cases assigned for class and to walk-through any hypotheticals preSented in that-ending
material. The discussion Would then open to the Wider class.- For the bulk of the semester Judge
Gersuch had. Welcomed than}.r opinions of what the right easiest to an issue Was, encouraging-
back?and forth discussion. H'owe'tr'en at the end of Judge Gots'uch would. sum
up what he ea-w-to be the. correct- answer.

In our reading tar-prepare for class for April there was a. hypothetical of'a law student
inte'rviewing- feir law firm jobs. The female student had large debt and wanted to work .atja ?rm to
pay back her loans. She also-intended to start. a family with her husband in the near?ature. The
r?aiSed the- question of?whatShe should tell future employers about her plans. do
not remember how many classmates. spoke about what the female student should say or their
exact siews en-what'the female student should disclose in; her -interview.- I do remember a' lively
student-discussion about the dif?culties of law school debt for all
student, regardless. of gender.

At some point Judge'Gorsuch stopped this and-wont life
balance-in he asked the classtc'raise'their hands if'they knew ofa
female who had used a Company to get maternity bene?ts and then: left right alter having a baby:
ludge Gorsuch specifically targeted females. and maternity leave.;This question was net about
parents .Or'men shifting priorities after having; children. It was solely focused on wome?n?using
their companies

[do not remember it" any "Students raised their hands, bath was no mere than-a 'small handful of

students. At that? point Judge Gorsuch became more. animated saying ?C?mon guys?. .He' then
announced that all our hands should be raised because ?many? women-use their'coinpanies for
maternity bene?ts and thenle?aVe theco'mpany a?e?r the'baby is born. Judge- GorsuCh focused on;
women having babies, not men expanding their fainilies.- Judge GorsuCh argued that. because
many women.le'tt'the'irxcompan'ies we all knew women who purposefully naedtheir companies.
Judge .Gorsuch-?s Comments? implied that 'Wotnen intentitJnally manipulate. companiesand plan to
disadvantage their companies the ?rstiinterview,

The discussion. continued'a?er that. Severalfstudent's, ineluding s'or'n?e male, students, raised their
one} ?concerns about a werk-life balance and the challengesof excelling. at both. work and raising-
a' family. Howe?tier, Judge Gorsuch continued to steerlthe conversation back to, the exclusive
jasue of females havi'ri'gchildren. Judge .Gorsuch outlined how law ?rms, and companiesin:
general, had to, ask female interviewees about pre gnancy plans in order- to protect the company.
At least one student countered that. an employer-'- could not ask questions about an interviewee? a-
pregnancy plans. However, Judge Gorsuch the class that that-was wrong-t

Instead Judge Gorsuch told the class that not only could afuture employer? ask female
interviewees about their pregnancy and family plans, companies must ask females about their
family and. pregnancy plans to: protect the. company. udge'Go'rsuch tied this back to: his original
comment that companies need to- ask these questions in order to protect themselves-against the,
female employees.

Throughout this class Judge G'orsu'ch con?rmed to it veryclearthat the-question of
commitment to work over family was one that'only women hadtoganswer. for. There was no
discussidn of the inane employment when having: children or the dif?culties
children and meeting the high billable hours required. in law firms. Instead,
Judge Gorsuch continued to steer the conversation back to the problems women pose 'for
companies and the protections-that companies need .?f'rom. women.

I, was-disneSSed-by the tenor of this conversationl was surprised and upsetthata bright,
.-arti_culate, and educated federal judge could think so little of female attorneys, even more so
considering that in that class. half. of the students were: female. I raised my concerns about Judge
Gorsuch?s'comments to the-administration at University of Colorado Law School shortly'after

udg?e Gorsuch made therein the spring also voiced-my fruStrati'on with his opinions
the next-day on a faceboolc group for female lawyers. me that amen-educating.
female l'a'wyers- would. be discounting their worthpublicly. Now. it concerns-me that. a man who is
for our highest court holds that discounts the worth of working females.

Respectj?rlly,

R. Mt)
. nnifer?R. Sisk, Esq.

Denver, Colorado