senator leahy: would that change the decision in broun vs. board of education? mr. duncan: as i understand it was a unanimously decision and the court went out of the way. senator leahy: they had to wait one to leave. mr. duncan: to justice warren a great judicial statesman, made sure to -- that the court's decision would foster an acceptance of that decision. i think that's an extremely important function, especially for the supreme court. less so perhaps for circuit court. the circuit courts are not in that position very often. that exalted position to the supreme court. still, i clerked for john dewey. he had a reputation on the court where judge king, she would come to judge dewey and because he was such a moderate person, he was a peacemaker, she would come to him and when the judges were getting irritated at each other, i guess. he told me that one time. he made an impression on me. he was an excellent judge. big role model for me. senator grassley: i feel i got to give a little bit of history about whether it's right or wrong to have two circuit judges on the

mr. leahy: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. leahy: madam president, what is the parliamentary situation? the presiding officer: the senate is considering the kan nomination. mr. leahy: i thank the distinguished presiding officer. they are going to put it in place a couple of things here. mr. leahy: madam president, over the past ten months, the attorney general has testified pf the senate -- before the senate on three occasions. this is about his contact with russian. he has provided supplementary testimony, but no matter how much he tried, he's not getting his story straight. on numerous occasions numerous disclosures of his communications involving russia have raised serious questions about his testimony. they raised questions about his testimony, and not one of these disclosures have come -- has come from the attorney general. these disclosures were not from the attorney general correcting what he said before. all of it came from the press or court record

mr. president, the amendment that i am offering with senators leahy, brown, harris, baldwin, udall, reed, markey, heinrich is very straightforward and simple. i'm glad that a number of my republican colleagues are on the floor because they can help me as we go forward on this amendment. what my amendment would do is establish a point of order to prevent cuts to social security, medicare, and medicaid benefits, which could only be waived by two-thirds of the senate. in other words, what we are trying to do here is make it harder for there to be do you think social security -- for there to be cuts to social security, medicare, and medicaid. now, i want everybody in america to know that this tax proposal is more than a tax proposal. it is my absolute belief that as soon as this tax proposal is completed and drives the deficit up by $1.4 trillion, i have zero doubt that my republican colleagues are going to come back to the floor of the senate and suddenly say, oh, my goodiness, the deficit has gone -- my goodness. the deficit has gone up. we have got to cut social security, medicare, and med

mr. sessions: we can. the constitutional rights of americans should be protected. actworked on the patriot when it came up with senator hatch, leahy, and others. you are a champion of civil liberties. i would just say that we can do that. the act, as written, as in law today, has been approved by the been found to not be in violation of the law. is first and foremost. i know the committee has decided to put some additional restrictions on the way the act is conducted. we did not think that was lawfully required. congress can make its own decisions, and we will continue to be able to share our thoughts about how the legislation should be crafted. rep. sensenbrenner: mr. attorney general, the day before the committee marked up this bill, the justice department was actively lobbying members of the committee to oppose the measure, stating it would dismantle section seven of two -- 702. it expires at the end of the year. we have a very short timeline. i want to ask you, whether yes or no, following my friend from us again, do you want to risk the real possibility this program will expire by insisting upon a clean reauthorization withou