Source: https://progressive.org/public-school-shakedown/gorsuch%E2%80%99s-record-reveals-ruthless-and-cruel-decisions-agains/
Timestamp: 2019-04-18 20:54:41+00:00

Document:
This article deserves credit for posting links to its sources--that takes integrity. I followed the link to the Hwang v. Kansas State University case, and was surprised. From my perspective as a lawyer, the case seemed pretty clear cut and simple. The way the case is described here in Progressive.org's article is a gross missrepresentation of the case. It's sad because so many people will read Progressive's article, never check the sources, and have no clue as to the level of misrepresentation it propagates (at least with the Hwang v. KSU case). For example, the article here states, "[b]efore evidence could be presented in the case" judge Gorsuch ruled Hwang's request was unreasonable, and dismissed the case. That statment exploits the layperson's lack of understanding of the appellate court process and the concept of "judgments as a matter of law." Moreover, the Hwang case never even uses the word "evidence," and the admission of evidence isn't even an issue in the case. And, if it were, it would be an issue of whether to overrule a district court's decision to reject or admit certain evidence, which the appellate court would determine as a pure question of law (not fact). This whole article makes it seem like it would be appropriate for a judge to rule based on its emotions rather than the law. I did not check any other case, so I cannot speak for the entire article, but I can say with confidance, Progressive.org's representation of the Hwang case could be construed as sophisticated propaganda--cherry picking just enough information, and presenting it in just the right light, to push an agenda. I don't know why any publication would want to risk that. Again, I did not cite check the entire article, so I can't judge its representations of the other cases. However, its Hwang representation is enough to discredit the integrity of the entire website as a whole if not corrected. Progressive.org's next integrity test is whether they post this comment. Their rule states that comments will be posted if they're "on-topic and not abusive." I'm definitely on topic, and have attempted to maintain a standard tone of intellectual discourse. If what I've written here is considered abusive in our society, then our society has a sickness we must diagnose and cure.
ACLU lawyer Claudia Center replies The case *was* pretty clear cut and simple. Ms. Hwang worked for a huge employer. The leave extension she needed was finite – only until the end of the flu epidemic. There was no basis for deeming the leave she needed as categorically unreasonable or as imposing an undue hardship. And as I explained in the blog, a string of circuit courts *except* this panel that considered this precise question ruled the other way. In other words, there is extensive appellate authority with holdings that are the opposite to the Hwang case. These courts ruled on motions for summary judgment – after the opportunity for discovery and presentation of evidence – that leaves of absence for significantly longer periods of time than that needed by Ms. Hwang may be a form of reasonable accommodation under Title I of the ADA. This is all detailed in the amicus brief that is linked in the blog. See, e.g., Garcia-Ayala v. Lederle Parenterals, Inc., 212 F.3d 638 (1st Cir. 2000); Ralph v. Lucent Technologies, Inc., 135 F.3d 166, 171-72 (1st Cir.1998); Cehrs v. Northeast Ohio Alzheimer's Research Ctr., 155 F.3d 775, 782 (6th Cir.1998); Nunes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 164 F.3d 1243 (9th Cir. 1999); Haschmann v. Time Warner Entertainment Co., 151 F.3d 591, 601 (7th Cir. 1998).
The Hwang case was an outrageous outlier from the ordinary ADA employment case in general (which is typically fact-intensive, and not decided on the pleadings), and from ADA leave cases in particular. In other words, it is an outlier because it dismissed the case on the pleadings, without permitting discovery or evidence for consideration during a motion for summary judgment. Extremely unusual. And it is an outlier because it dismissed the case on the basis of a leave extension that was shorter than those blessed by other appellate courts.
"Two cases stand out during Judge Gorsuch’s time at Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals.
A safety net it is not."
I am not an attorney and use information from trusted sources to evaluate judicial decisions.
It seems in this case, it might be of value for you to take this up with the ACLU.
In the meantime, I will contact ACLU's Senior Staff Attorney who wrote the article for an explanation.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.