inequality ," i would suggest that we not pretend that we don't know how this nominee views a woman's right to choose to make around health or decisions. i ask unanimous consent that the following three documents be entered into the record. the letter opposing judge barrett's nomination from the naacp. a statement opposing her nomination from the planned parenthood federation of america and planned parenthood action fund. and, a report opposing judge barrett's nomination from the naacp legal defense and educational fund. sen. graham: without objection. sen. harris: thank you, mr. chairman. sen. graham: are you tired, judge? judge barrett: i'm looking forward to the end of the hearing today, i must admit. >> me too. i'm still going to ask you questions.

a lot of my colleagues have talked about the old that you willtake -- both that you take if you are sworn in as a justice of the united states supreme court. what is in growth? what does it say? judge barrett: that both requires a judge -- taking the oaths of the judge -- to do equal justice to all, without fear of favor and regardless of wealth. whatirly apply the law, is oils down to. to not give preferential treatment and express bias. sen. kennedy: it says you will administer the law in an impartial manner, doesn't it? judge barrett: yes it does, senator. sen. kennedy: it says you will support and defend the constitution, doesn't it? judge barrett: m-hmm. sen. kennedy: a pretty serious

both, isn't it? judge barrett: it is. sen. kennedy: are you going to take that old if you are confirmed? judge barrett: yes. sen. kennedy: you are not lying? judge barrett: not lying. i took that dose before i began as a judge in the seventh circuit and i have not violated that a. i would take it again. oaths are serious to me. sen. kennedy: senator harris called you a liar. she said if you take that out, you will be lying. that you have already made up your mind. reticular the dealing with abortion and the affordable care act. let's cut to the chase. she said you are a liar. are you a liar? judge barrett: i am not a liar, senator kennedy. sen. kennedy: tell me again. look me in the eye. if you take that dose, will you mean it? judge barrett: i will mean it. sen. kennedy: you swear to god? judge barrett: i swear to god. and i have sworn to the seventh

circuit. sen. kennedy: you will never break that out? judge barrett: i will not break that out. sen. kennedy: no matter what your personal feelings are? judge barrett: no matter what my feelings are. sen. kennedy: sen. kennedy: so when senator harris and her colleagues say you are a liar, they are wrong? judge barrett: they are. let's see.y: you are 48 years old. you are an honors graduate of rhodes college -- an extraordinary liberal arts school. an honors graduate of notre dame law school. for twoked distinguished federal judges. you have been a law professor. you are a devout christian. you have raised seven children. to waxed too --

too metaphysical here, but do you have personal values as a result of this? judge barrett: i would hope that no one would consider me to be nominated for anything if i didn't have values. sen: kennedy: do you have personal opinions? judge barrett: of course i have personal opinions. sen: kennedy: do you have principles? judge barrett: i have principles. i would not be fit for office if i didn't. let's suppose that we had a nominee appear before us. it happens to be a man. he said, i've been nominated for a federal judgeship. and i finished law school, that i had not cracked a logbook since law school, since civil procedure. and i don't have any opinions. i don't have any principles.

i don't read newspapers. i don't even read the news. i haven't read a book since law school. i'm like bluto in animal house. [laughter] i'm just fat, drunk, and stupid. i think the germans are the ones that bombed pearl harbor. i think climate change, i think -- didn't it cause the cold war. -- cold war? but i your guy. ambecause i don't have any values. i'm a blank slate. that's what is required, isn't it? for me to be impartial? do you think we ought to confirm that gentlemen? then chieftt: well, justice rehnquist wrote an opinion on this issue addressing recusal.

basically, that if someone reaches middle years, if one would be a justice on the mindme court and had a that was a blank slate and had no opinions, then would question one such a person's fitness for office. sen. kennedy: my colleagues seem to think you are only qualified if you are dumb. if you have a blank slate. if you have never thought about the world. you have thought about the world? judge barrett: i have. sen. kennedy: have you thought about social problems facing our world? judge barrett: yes. sen. kennedy: social -- economic problems? judge barrett: sure. sen. kennedy: have you thought about the merits or lack thereof of nuclear energy? judge barrett: no, i really haven't. sen. kennedy: how about affirmative action? judge barrett: yes. sen. kennedy: how about climate change? have you read about that? judge barrett: i have read about climate change. sen. kennedy: and you have

opinions you have thought about? judge barrett: i am certainly not a scientist. i have read things about climate change. i would not say i have firm views on it. sen. kennedy: how about -- have you thought about the merits of a flat versus progressive income tax? judge barrett: i have thought fleetingly about that. [laughter] these are not things that i -- i am not a tax lawyer. sen. kennedy: i am not trying to trap you. judge barrett: sure. how about justice kagan? i have always been impressed with her credentials. reggie would've princeton. i think she went to harvard law. was dean of harvard law school. you think she has thought about the world? sen. kennedy: am sure she -- judge barrett: i'm sure she has, and i am very impressed. sen. kennedy: do you think she

has thought about climate change and has personal feelings? judge barrett: i don't know. probably, but i cannot say what justin kagan has thought or not about. sen. kennedy: you have personal feelings about abortion, don't you? judge barrett: i do have personal feelings about abortion. sen. kennedy: have you ever thought about how we deliver health care in this country? judge barrett: i do, but one of the things about the judicial role i have repeatedly emphasized is that i have got personal views and personal feelings on a range of matters, just like every human does, and just like every judge or justice does. sen. kennedy: that is what i'm getting at. my colleagues say -- and senator harris said, even know you have a personal opinion about abortion that you will violate your own to put aside those personal feelings and fairly decide abortion cases. is that true? judge barrett: that, i gather, was the thrust of what she was

saying, yes. sen. kennedy: is she right? judge barrett: no, she is not right. sen. kennedy: let's talk about the affordable care act. you have thought about the delivery of health care. you have seven children. judge barrett: i spent a lot of time. sen. kennedy: you've probably been to an emergency room. you have formed opinions about the delivery of health care. should you recruit -- recuse yourself? judge barrett: well, senator kennedy, everyone has opinions. any opinions i have are just not relevant to the resolution of the case. the affordable care act case or anything else. and a lot of my opinions, you know, are not ones that are expert. for example, in scientific matters, taxing matters, i may have dinnertable discussions but i do not purport to be an expert. sen. kennedy: another link now, because this is serious. judge barrett: ok. sen. kennedy: some of my colleagues and senator harris

say you are lying. are you lying? judge barrett: i am not lying. sen. kennedy: are you going to take that oath and abide by it? judge barrett: yes. sen. kennedy: will you ever break that oath? judge barrett: i will not. sen. kennedy: one of my colleagues -- i don't remember which 1 -- said that because president trump appointed you -- or nominated you, rather -- that if there is a case that happens to go before the united states supreme court after you are confirmed dealing with the election, they asked you to recuse yourself. remember that? judge barrett: mm-hmm. sen. kennedy: you said you would go through the process. judge barrett: of determining the recusal question, yes. sen. kennedy: you did not commit yourself to recusing. you said you would go to the process. judge barrett: i committed to going through the process of determining whether to recuse. i did not commit. sen. kennedy: now, president trump nominated judge kavanaugh, now justice kavanaugh.

did anybody ask him to recuse himself when the president's tax reforms were before the court? judge barrett: i don't know. sen. kennedy: justice gorsuch was nominated by president trump and confirmed by the senate. did anybody ask him to recuse himself when president trump's tax returns were before the court? judge barrett: i don't know if any motions were filed. sen. kennedy: do you know who paula jones is? she sued the president of the united states, didn't she? judge barrett: president clinton. sen. kennedy: clinton v. jones, famous case. president clinton nominated justice ginsburg and justice breyer to the united states supreme court. they heard that case. did anybody ask justice ginsburg to recuse herself because president clinton nominated her? judge barrett: i don't know if any motions were filed. sen. kennedy: do you think she should have? judge barrett: that is not

something i would opine on. i'm sure she discharged her oath. sen. kennedy: did any of my colleagues ask that justice breyer recuse himself from hearing clinton v. jones because president clinton appointed him? judge barrett: i don't think that has come up. sen. kennedy: i don't think so either. i want to finish this housekeeping, because i want to talk about the law. i want to give you a chance to respond to something. ate butthead professor boston university says that because you and your husband have two children of color, that you're a white colonist. the implication is that you are racist. and that you use your two children as props. do you use your children as props? judge barrett: senator kennedy, it was the risk of people saying things like that which would be so hurtful to my family that

when i told senator graham this morning that my husband and i had to weigh the cross -- deeply offensive to my children, who are my children, and accusations like that are cruel. sen. kennedy: they are, aren't they? how low can you go? i did not want to ask that question when your kids were here. i'm sorry you had to go through that. >> that was day two of this week's senate judiciary confirmation hearing with judge amy coney barrett, who has been nominated to the u.s. supreme court. i look at key moments continues tomorrow with highlights from day three and four of the hearing. go online to c-span.org to find

links to all four days of judge barrett's. votes thisry meeting thursday. they gaveling at 9:00 a.m. eastern with a vote scheduled at 1:00 eastern time. if approved, the nomination would go to the senate friday. senators have been expected to stay in session until they vote on confirmation. we will have live coverage of the vote thursday on c-span with the senate debate live friday on c-span2. you are watching c-span, your unfiltered view of government, created by america's cable television company, brought to you by your television provider. c-span's washington journal. every day we take your calls live on the air, and we discussed policy issues that

impact your. coming up sunday morning, the director of the center for history of medicine at the university of michigan will discuss covid-19 and what can be learned from past pandemics. and then journalist susan glasser and peter baker talk a formerir new book on white house chief of staff james baker. watching c-span's "washington journal" sunday morning at 7:00 eastern. be sure to join the conversation with your phone calls, texts, and tweets. >> members of the house ways and means committee on oversight held a hearing recently looking into the u.s. tax code and changes that could be made to prevent wealthy taxpayers from taking advantage of loopholes to decrease the amount of taxes they pay. this hearing is about two hours and 15 minutes. minutes. >> good afterno >> good afternoon. welcome to you all. '