Gorsuch Urges Narrow Intel ERISA Ruling as Supreme Court Weighs $0 Underperformance Standard
Updated
Updated · Newsweek · Oct 6
Gorsuch Urges Narrow Intel ERISA Ruling as Supreme Court Weighs $0 Underperformance Standard
1 articles · Updated · Newsweek · Oct 6
Summary
Justice Neil Gorsuch told the Supreme Court on Tuesday to avoid deciding whether retirement-fund underperformance alone proves imprudence in Anderson v. Intel, steering the case toward how courts should compare funds instead.
ERISA focuses on the investment process rather than returns, and Intel argued weaker performance can reflect different strategies—not misconduct—unless plaintiffs identify a meaningful comparable fund.
Justices across the bench pressed that comparator issue: Clarence Thomas warned against comparing "apples and oranges," Elena Kagan said the match need not be identical but must be "kind of an apple," and Amy Coney Barrett questioned whether a comparator is required.
Plaintiffs say Intel's heavy use of hedge funds and private equity hurt workers' retirement savings and that courts should assess all allegations together, not hinge the case on a single benchmark test.
The ruling could reshape how easily workers challenge decisions over trillions of dollars in employer-sponsored retirement accounts, depending on whether the court sets a low or high bar for a "meaningful benchmark."