d.c. circuit. mr.chairman, i have a statement that i'd like to make part of the record without objection. >> without objection. >> thank you. i want to ask a little bit of the questions that you have been asked here today. the rationale given for a second hearing that was requested is that there might be some new information that would be revealed that might change the minds of some of those who have previously expressed some skepticism as to whether you should be confirmed or not. but i think this is my observation not yours. but i think what we've seen is part of a -- what has become a fairly common practice in the course of these hearings and that is to ask you questions, the nominee questions that they cannot or should not ethically answer. and that coupled frequently with demanding documents which are not in your possession in which you cannot produce because they're of subject of privilege. and then there's, of course, the claim that you are somehow too extreme, out of the mainstream. unfortunate

d.c. circuit. you know who the chief judge of the d.c. circuit is? it's merrick garland.eels today? merrick garland is a class act. he's moved on with his life. the idea that he never got the moment that kavanaugh is going to get. he got the moment of being announced, but he never got -- the other person is -- >> trump's sister. >> trump's sister, whose advice was not taken. but hillary clinton. brett kavanaugh made his name by investigating not just whitewater but the monica lewinsky part, the sexual details. >> the tawdry, sorted, deep and dark stuff. >> making his name for himself got him on the trajectory he's on today. hillary clinton has to watch yet another supreme court nomination that she thought she was going to get. >> can i add one more name? that's thomas hardiman. last year, remember he was the runner-up. this year they kept talking about his star rising. obviously he's not the choice. it just seems like he was kind of hung out a little bit. i felt like brett kavanaugh always had the inside track, but a lot of the reporting that the white house was suggestin

d.c. circuit. mr. chairman, i have a statement that i'd like to make part of the record without objection. >> without objection. >> thank you. i want to ask a little bit of the questions that you have been asked here today. the rationale given for a second hearing that was requested is that there might be some new information that would be revealed that might change the minds of some of those who have previously expressed some skepticism as to whether you should be confirmed or not. but i think this is my observation not yours. but i think what we've seen is part of a -- what has become a fairly common practice in the course of these hearings and that is to ask you questions, the nominee questions that they cannot or should not ethically answer. and that coupled frequently with demanding documents which are not in your possession in which you cannot produce because they're of subject of privilege. and then there's, of course, the claim that you are somehow too extreme, out of the mainstream. unfortunat

d.c. circuit. he has an extensive record and has published more than 300 opinions wears clear writing and reasoning. judge kavanaugh has built a long and distinguished record. he paints a clear picture of how he would conduct himself as a member of the nation's highest court. it's a firm understanding that judges interpret laws as they are written. we do not choose them to make policy. some of our colic see the role of judges differently. president obama summed up this ultimately well when he was running for president. he explained that he sought to appoint judges who harbor particular empathy for certain parties in certain cases. that's great if you happen to be the party in the case with whom the judge likes. not so great if you are the other guy. we have it doesn't allow for the rule of law or what federal courts plan our democracy. so, i respectfully submit that then and now, some of our democratic colleagues seem to me to be confused. they seem to be confusing the nature of a political office

d.c. circuit. circuit. judge kavanaugh poe owe sess an -- possesses an impressive resume, an outstanding legal mind, and an exemplary judicial temperament. he served 12 years on the nation's most consequential circuit court. during that tenure he's proven to be one of the most thoughtful jurists in our country. and importantly, that record demonstrates an understanding of a judge's proper role in our constitutional republic. judge kavanaugh understands that in the united states of america, judges are not -- not -- unelected super legislators whom we select for their personal views or policy preferences. a judge's duty is to interpret the plain meaning of our laws and our constitution according to how they are written. judges need to be unbiased. they need to treat all parties fairly. they need to approach every case with open ears and an open mind. judges' decisions must turn on the facts of each case and be based on the text that it is their job to interpret. by all accounts, judge kavanaugh is precisely t

d.c. circuit court before being elevated to the supremes. on the d.c. circuit court where he sits now, judge kavanaugh has served under the chief judge of that court, merritt garland who was nominated in the spring of 2016 to fill the seat left by the death of antonin scalia. nominated by barack obama. because he was nominated by barack obama, republicans in the senate would not allow a hearing on the nomination. they cited the election coming later that year. close observers will note there is also an election coming later this year but nobody knows if democrats will be able to apply the same standard this time to wait on hearings on brett kavanaugh until after the election the way the republicansed my that standard last time. the democrats will apparently try that but they're not in power and we don't know if they'll be able to pull it off. we shouldn't lose sight of what a remarkable thing this is that just happened tonight. president trump, after less than 18 months in office, not yet halfway through one term as president, is already making his secon

d.c. circuit court of appeals, that would add to the d.c. me court that includes john roberts and ruth bader ginsburg. as is clarence thomas, and a lot of people called the d.c. circuit the farm team for good reason. he's authored some 300 opinions at the d.c. circuit court of appeals which gives him a rich judicial history. mitch mcconnell is talking to the president over the weekend and said that's a pretty big paper trail. also, judge cavanaugh has a history with the bush family and, he was appointed to the d.c. circuit court of appeals by george w. bush but it looks like all the indications we are getting hard that president trump has decided to go with the choice that he thinks will satisfy conservatives and will satisfy enough people on the senate and for him to get confirmed. the one i want to give the viewers are flavor for the kind of reporting we do every day. you are sitting through this and not speculating, carefully reporting what we know accurately. 2 minutes ago i talked to a source who said there was a person who spoke to the

d.c. circuit court of appeals for a dozen years now. since he has been on the d.c. circuit court, you should also know that kavanaugh has been serving all these years under the chief judge of that court. whose name is -- merritt garland. who was nominated in the spring of 2016 to fill the supreme court seat vacated by the death of scalia. nominated by barack obama. because he was nominated by barack obama, republicans in the senate would not allow a hearing on the nomination. they cited the election coming later that year. close observers will note there is an election coming later this year but nobody knows if democrats will be able to apply the same standard this time to wait on the kavanaugh hearings the way republicans pushed the garland nomination to the horizon and ultimately off the edge. the democrats will apparently try to do that, but we don't know. after less than 18 months in office, donald trump is already making his second nomination to the supreme court. only nine people on the court. this comes at a time when the choice is fraught and consequential in

d.c. circuit. most west virginians and americans know, i think, that the reverence that senator byrd had for the constitution. during his speech judge kavanaugh spoke of reading the text of article 1 with senator byrd and senator byrd was among the democrats who voted to confirm judge kavanaugh to the d.c. circuit. i think that judge kavanaugh's record on the d.c. circuit and his experience merit a bipartisan confirmation conference, the same type of bipartisanship that senator byrd showed when he vowed for judge -- voted for judge kavanaugh. the confirmation process for a well-qualified supreme court nominee does not have to focus on trying to guess how justice kavanaugh might rule in a particular case. as a matter of fact, i think that would be a futile exercise and quite damaging to the process at the same time. if we're looking for a fair umpire, there's no reason that a nominee with a strong record of applying the text of the constitution and the law should not be confirmed with overwhelming s

d.c. circuit court of appeals for a dozen years now. since he has been on the d.c. circuit court, you should also know that kavanaugh has been serving all these years under the chief judge of that court. whose name is -- merritt garland. who was nominated in the spring of 2016 to fill the supreme court seat vacated by the death of scalia. nominated by barack obama. because he was nominated by barack obama, republicans in the senate would not allow a hearing on the nomination. they cited the election coming later that year. close observers will note there is an election coming later this year but nobody knows if democrats will be able to apply the same standard this time to wait on the kavanaugh hearings the way republicans pushed the garland nomination to the horizon and ultimately off the edge. the democrats will apparently try to do that, but we don't know. after less than 18 months in office, donald trump is already making his second nomination to the supreme court. only nine people on the court. this comes at a time when the choice is fraught and consequential in

d.c. circuit. i have served with 17 other judges, each of them a colleague and a friend. my judicial philosophy is straightforward: a judge must be independent and must interpret the law, not make the law. a judge must interpret statutes as written, and a judge must interpret the constitution as written, informed by history and tradition and precedent. for the past 11 years, i have taught hundreds of students, primarily at harvard law school. i teach that the constitution's separation of powers protects individual liberty, and i remain grateful to the dean who hired me, justice elena kagan. as a judge, i hire four law clerks each year. i look for the best. my law clerks come from diverse backgrounds and points of view. i am proud that a majority of my law clerks have been women. i am part of the vibrant catholic community in the d.c. area. the members of that community disagree about many things, but we are united by a commitment to serve. father john enzler is here. forty years ago, i was an altar

d.c. circuit. have served with 17 other judges, each of them a colleague and a friend. my judicial philosophy is straightforward. a judge must be independent and must interpret the law, not make the law. a judge must interpret statutes as written, and a judge must interpret the constitution as written. informed by history and tradition and precedent. for the past 11 years, i have taught hundreds of students, primarily at harvard law school. i teach that the constitution's separation of powers protects individual liberty. and i remain grateful to the dean who hired me, justice elena kagan. as a judge, i.e. higher for law clerks each year. i look for the best. my law clerks from diverse backgrounds. i am proud that a majority of my law clerks have been women. i am part of the vibrant catholic community in the d.c. area. the members of that community disagree about things but we are united by a commitment to serve. father john and slayer is here, in 40 years ago i was an altar boy for father john. the

d.c. circuit. they all come from the d.c. maybe they thoughtg.amily and the trumps don't get along but george w. bush sent out a note tonight on the nomination to say president trump has made an outstanding decision to nominate judge kavanaugh he has faithfully applied the constitution through his 12 years at the d.c.o circuit and a man of the highest integrity he will be a good justice to the supreme court of the united states. now they are on to the nomination process and that willou be bruising to make at this point veryru predictable john roberts thank you. right here on fox news chief national correspondent usually in the white house but at the edit clock hour you are trying to fill in on every hour. what he said about repairing the constitution let me read from a speech that he t gave that shows that judicial philosophy this comes down to original resume constitutionalism. the president said the constitution has written that judge kavanaugh said the same thing many times. it is very different from what the left wants. hillary clinton picked

d.c. circuit. i was the chair of the judiciary committee at the time. i was impressed by his credentials at that time. his broad knowledge of the law in his demeanor. at only 39 years of age, he knew more about the law than most lawyers who have practiced a lifetime. i think anybody could look at that. as a concern to the d.c. circuit in 2006 following years of obstruction by senate democrats. i was pleased and proud to support his nomination to the d.c. circuit. i followed his work on that court for the last dozen years with great interest. they spent a dozen years on that court, the second greatest court in our country. without criticism by the way, or at least without fair criticism, he has been a true intellectual leader offering landmark opinions on the separation of powers, administrative laws, national security, it is no understatement to say that he is among the most distinguished and influential judges in the entire country. the supreme court has adopted his positions in the positions of his opinions no less than 11 times. he has authored disse

d.c. circuit court. and so the president having taken his constitutional step of nominating a supreme court justice, we have a job to dig into his record, to go through it thoroughly, to demand the release of every single that might be relevant so you the american people might know if this next justice with your rights, liberties and your freedom. and then and only then should we have a hearing and take a vote. we must know this man's record because where he's going with our court and our freedoms and our rights can best be principle difficulted by how he is behaved and so many issues in the bush administration, in conversations and indecisions of the federalist society and in his seat on the d.c. circuit. . . harry blackmon. the year after he wrote the opinion in roe v. wade. i've argued cases in this building, four of them. i have deep respect, in fact, reverence, for the united states supreme court as a central pillar of our democracy. to speak truth to the powers across the street and down pennsylvan

d.c. circuit. >> if confirmed to the d.c. circuit, i would follow roe v. wade faithfully and fully. >> what is your opinion? you're not on the bench yet. you've talked about these issues in the past to other people, i'm sure. >> the supreme court has held repeatedly senator and i don't think it would be appropriate for me to give -- >> not going to answer the question. >> kavanaugh's nomination could also have major implications for special counsel robert mueller's russia information. kavanaugh is a strong propoe poen innocent of broad executive powers writing in 2009 the indictment and trial of a sitting president would cripple the federal government. rendering it unable to function with credibility in either international or domestic arenas. some social conservatives expressing disappointment that the president chose the establishment favorite. >> it just seems like trump in this case just bowed to the elite in washington. and i think that's going to rub a lot of people the wrong way. >> reporter: but sources tell cnn that the president was hardened that

d.c. circuit. it was observed that the d.c. circuit had more judges than was decided tond it was take one of those judges and transfer it to the ninth circuit. -- and i haveyou said this before, i think when the history of this era is written the heroes will be our independent judiciary and our free press. not necessarily anybody in this body, but i think they are the bulwarks in this difficult and challenging era. i think that the independence of our judiciary is critically important. my view is that the political branches can always be critical of our judiciary but they have to do it with the type of respect for that independence, and for the fairness and objectivity of our judiciary that is appropriate to encourage judges to look at the facts in the law regardless of partisan divide. >> in general i would agree. i have one last question for professor ring hand. nominee refuses to answer what a senator believes are what would you, recommend that a senator should do? nominees make choices in this process about which questions t

d.c. circuit court, the second most important court in the nation. that is primarily because it is located here in the district of columbia. most of the major cases involving administrative authority, federal power and at finding their way one way or the other through the d.c. circuit court of appeal. he has had a great judicial career, he has written on a variety of topics. i would say he is pretty well known, you will hear a lot of demands for additional information, i am for as much transparency as can be provided. senators have a right to get their hands on us much information on the nominee and his qualifications, how he might perform as a supreme court justice. i hope it does not turn into a delay of game tactic, he has had a long career in the government, worked at the white house as staff secretary, for those unfamiliar means he is the last person who sees a piece of paper before presented to the president for signature. that does not mean he is the publisher or author of that paper, many times it is to make sure it is correct, accurate, veri

d.c. circuit. many said that because of the numbers we and the democratic minority had no chance of defeating a determined republican majority in repeating the affordable care act. that, in fact, turned out to not be true. because millions of americans recognize their healthcare was at stake, and they called, the active, they got engaged, they spoke out, they came here to our capital. it is my hope that americans won't just look at the numbers of art to caucuses but that they will realize that courts matter, that this nominee will impact on your life. and as we dig into his record, you will take up your role as citizens and speak out and communicate to your senator and to this congress your passion for our making sure that the freedoms hard-won over decades by key decisions of this court will not be rolled back in the event this man is confirmed. and the way to know that is to know his record and to hold him accountable. i look forward it to your voice and to your role in making sure we win this fi

d.c. circuit. he is obviously deeply immersed in the separation of powers and the law governing the administrative state. one of the ways he will replace justice kennedy and potentially change the court -- i am not saying move it in one direction, but potentially change the court -- is in what cases they'll choose to hear going forward. and there may be more of a bend toward hearing some of the cases and some of the issues that the court has thus far declined to take up, including the law nerdily exciting but significant question of how much deference is due to agencies, when they are interpreting their own regulations, interpreting statutes. john m.: now let's open it up. questions? jordan? >> jordan lawrence with alliance defending freedom. there are so many things i could ask, but i will go in a more esoteric direction with the soss v. bauer. this is the case about the police who had a surge of somebody's house and the woman couldn't pray. i think it was the 10th circuit said there was qualified

d.c. circuit court of appeals, judge kavanaugh made a pledge under oath. judge kavanaugh pledged to members of this body that if confirmed he would, quote, interpret the law as it's written and not impose personal policy preferences. not my words. his words. kavanaugh went on to pledge that he would, quote, exercise judicial power prudently and with restraint. not my words. his words. brett kavanaugh pledged that he would, quote, follow precedent in all cases fully and fairly. not my words. his words. brett kavanaugh pledged that he would above all, quote, maintain the absolute independence of the judiciary, which is in his words, and i quote again, the crown jewel, the crown jewel of our constitutional democracy. i took brett kavanaugh at his word in 2006. i trusted him when he made those pledges. i thought of mr. kavanaugh as a young lawyer, the opportunity to fulfill his promise to faithfully uphold and interpret our laws as written. i expected him not to reject his personal policy preferences or the ideology of special interests and groups like the her

d.c. circuit court of appeals. i learned some lessons in that office. i had some thoughts about how it all operated and as the chairman noted i tried to make a contribution to the improvement of the public legal system by writing an article in the georgetown law journal that i identified better ways, in my judgment, to conduct investigations of high level executive branch officials. i then went to kirkland and elliss -- ellis, where i became a partner, represented institutional clients of the firm and did pro bono work for several years. in 2001, i joined the white house counsel's office under judge al gonzalez n that office i did some of the standard work issues, fice, ethics separation of powers issues. i also worked with many members of the staff of this committee and other members of congress on civil justice issues such as class action reform, medical is separation of powers issues. i also worked with liability reform, and the very important insurance legislation in 2002. i also worked on judges on the nomination of judges and had the opportunity t

d.c. circuit. judge kavanaugh poe owe sess an -- possesses an impressive resume, an outstanding legal mind, and an exemplary judicial temperament. he served 12 years on the nation's most consequential circuit court. during that tenure he's proven to be one of the most thoughtful jurists in our country. and importantly, that record demonstrates an understanding of a judge's proper role in our constitutional republic. judge kavanaugh understands that in the united states of america, judges are not -- not -- unelected super legislators whom we select for their personal views or policy preferences. a judge's duty is to interpret the plain meaning of our laws and our constitution according to how they are written. judges need to be unbiased. they need to treat all parties fairly. they need to approach every case with open ears and an open mind. judges' decisions must turn on the facts of each case and be based on the text that it is their job to interpret. by all accounts, judge kavanaugh is precisely t

d.c. circuit, the second most powerful court in the land. he has gotten positive reviews. important to me is not just someone's qualifications and their legal background but also their character. character is incredibly important for a supreme court that's going to have to deal with so many issues, important issues to us and our families going forward. this guy is someone of deep and strong character. he's compassionate, he has the humility to be able to listen, he's got a big heart. i have known this fight for over 15 years. he served in the second bush administration. i also served there, got to know him and his wife there, and before that as well, during the

d.c. circuit court when it aired on c.-span late last night here in the united states and in that hearing he did confirm that roe versus wade is the law of the land and the precedent matters and he said precedent matters last night when he was unveiled as the nominee i don't have don't share the confidence of my fellow colleague here that we know with certainty how any of these judges would rule of the eight that are on the court now only one has ever expressed specifically what they would do on roe versus wade and that's clarence thomas and he is willing to overturn roe versus wade the other eight are not on the seven plus now this nominee are not on the record we can speculate about it one of the questions is going to be what will the challenge be and this goes back to part of why kavanagh was attractive to conservatives attractive to the trump white house attractive to senate republicans and that is it's not about political preferences it's not about the outcome that you want it's not about a judge acting as a legislato

d.c. circuit judge thousand six following years of obstruction by senate democrats. i was pleased and proud to support brett's nomination to the. d.c. circuit. i followed his work on that court the last dozen years with great interest. he spent a dozen years on that court, the second greatest court in the country. without criticism by the way. or least i should say without fair criticism. he has been a true intellectual leader, offering landmark opinions on the separation of powers, administrative law, national security. it is no overstatement to say that judge kavanaugh is among the most distinguished and influential justice. >> you can find the rest of the floor debate on the kavanaugh nomination on c-span.org and live coverage of the senate gavel to gavel on c-span two. from both sides of the aisle today speaking about the supreme court nomination from before. here on c-span, we're taking you live to the house in just a moment, debating a number of financial regulation bills today and legislation to give the congressional gold medal to larry dobie, who is the seco

d.c. circuit. chief congressional course modified manual has its report about what we can expect about the next steps. >> tomorrow judge brett kavanaugh will be in the high-stakes and most likely bruising process seeking confirmation to the supreme court. with the senate majority leader pushing to get this done i have november's midterm elections. >> should evaluate this president's nominee fairly based on his or her qualifications. and we should treat the process with respect and dignity that it deserves. >> mcconnell recommended john kyle to guide the nominee through the senate confirmationy the senate judiciary chairman warranty won't allow any stall tactics. >> i have already heard several weak arguments made in an attempt to delay the confirmation hearing, but the democratic leaders have shown their hand. the motive is to block any nominee from the president's list. >> democratic outside groups will look to put intense pressure on moderate susan collins of maine and lisa murkowski of alaska to

d.c. circuit court called to has been look at abortion rights. and it is the case of having to do with an illegal immigrant to anten abortion while in office of resettlement re-holding facility. the d.c.ote first for circuit, the judges that will against her, that first of all, she didn't have a right to have the title government spend its resources to assist her to get an abortion. clear law. that has been law for 30 years. the supreme court has said as much in cases. secondly, he said there was no reason why she couldn't work this out. hering a sponsor to help through the process of obtaining an abortion. he was reasonable and principled. and the full d.c. circuit court of appeals, all 10 judges, took over the case and issued a new opinion, setting aside brett kavanaugh's position to roll in her favor. later on, the supreme court vacated that decision. the d.c. circuit isn't the date, there are not many cases where the court is called those cases and in one of those future u.s., he took a middle line which hardly makes him a danger to women. co

d.c. circuit. i think his record and experience merit a bipartisan confirmation process for the same type that senator byrd showed when he voted for judge cavanaugh. all of the noise and debate outside the chamber, the confirmation process for well-qualified supreme court nominee does not have to focus on trying to get how justice cavanaugh might rule on a particular case. as a matter of fact i think that would be a futile exercise and damaging to the process at the same time. if we were looking for fair umpire which we are looking for, there's no reason a nominee with a strong record of applying the text of the constitution and the law should not be confirmed with overwhelming support. president trump made clear that he would appoint judges with respect to the constitution. i believe he kept his commitment when he nominated bret cavanaugh to become a supreme court justice. the process is just beginning. we are in a process for the record will be scrutinized. we will have hearings and i hope all of

d.c. circuit. those of us that thought the affordable care act should be repealed, because he may not be a sure vote to do that. and even if he were, there's still five votes to preserve it. the left-wing groups might want to put away then their crystal ball. even "the new york times" fact checker threw cold water on the argument that kavanaugh was a sure vote against the affordable care act. "the new york times" labeled the left-wing attacks, quote, unquote, exaggerated. another attack on judge kavanaugh is that he's hostile to abortion rights. but this attack misrepresents his record on the d.c. circuit. there, judge kavanaugh acknowledged that the court must decide the case based on roe v. wade and subsequent abortion decisions. he applied the precedent as presidents requires judges to so do. we hear the same fearmongering over abortion every time that there's a supreme court vacancy. i remember from 38 years ago when sandra day o'connor was going to be the first woman appointed to the supreme c

d.c. circuit and that is considered the the twenty seven yankees of the best of bench possible for future skoda judges they deal almost exclusively with administrative cases and i'm going to tell you them there are some of the most boring reading you have ever had the opportunity to even get to you know people have a couple of things a couple of misunderstandings let me clarify something and listen carefully and put this in the record books and freeze this role against wade will never be overruled it will never be reversed it will always be the law of the land i promise you i guarantee you the legislature has made a limited someone there may be some curtailing in terms of what is funded it what is not but a woman's fundamental reproductive right to an abortion whatever you want to call it will never ever be interrupted or impinged upon you have my word on this this is a scare tactic and a waste of our time what it may be comforting for some pit folks but i'm sure that the democrats on the senate side will continue to raise these concerns you know. and i prefer that you have read a lot of

d.c. circuit. her efforts involve persuading not too enthusiasm attorney general griffin bell and later benjamin sibaletti to advance my name on the list. when president clinton nominated me in 1993 to fill a vacancy, barbara was again in my corner from the start to the finish. barbara devoted many years of her life to writing the b biographer of clara shortridge foles. first woman to be admitted to the practice of law in california. published in 2011 it is a great work. i recommend it highly. in my review of book for stanford law review, i wrote, it's the culmination of a quarter century's effort to restore foles to her rightful place in the history of women's struggles to achieve full citizenship stature. it is the work of remarkable range and depth, a fitting tribute to a woman of unbreakable spirit who time and again refuses to give way to despair or to take no for an answer to be accorded the right to do everything lawyers do in our society. in 2016 barbara published another book. this one abo

d.c. circuit. her efforts involve persuading a not to enthusiastic attorney general, griffin bell and later benjamin. to advance my name on the list. when president clinton nominated 1993 to fill a supreme court vacancy, barbara was in my corner from the start to the finish. barbara devoted many years of her life to writing this biography. this is the first woman to be admitted to the practice of law in california. this was published in 2011, it is a great work. i recommend it highly. in my review of the book, i wrote the trials of clara votes is the combination of a quarter century effort to restore folds to her rightful place in .he women of history study it is the work of remarkable range and depth. if fitting tribute to a woman of unbreakable spirit, who time and again refused to give way to despair or to take no for an to be affordedse the right to do everything lawyers do in our society. in 2016, barbara published another book. this one was about her own life. i have brought it with me so you