actions based on the same grounds the memo made the employees feel unsafe at work according to the nlrb. the memo does constitute a quoteg discrimination and sexual harassment. consider for a moment what this ruling means for science any evolutionary biologist who studies the different risk preferences and appetite for competition is now at risk of his job these branches off science could shut down completely no matter if their findings are true. so it holds the absence of exact proportional representation in any institution by definition a result of discrimination. just as they have different capacities and cultures and skills and behaviors for representation it would just get you fired for that mad race or gender and proportionality is accelerated especially in this era. but to be calculated in conformity. as a white male to have a higher standard to get hired or promoted. californiaia polytechnic university proudly announced the lower of whites on campus was succeeding newsrooms were under enormous pressure to originate the stories to improve the diversity profile. they are obsessive

in 2008 case, the nlrb the majority wrote that the dissent meaning judge kavanaugh's dissent creates its own role. instead of following supreme court rules they said his dissent abandon the text of the applicable laws altogether. it's pretty telling when your own colleagues on the court feel so strongly about your dissent they will call him out on it. when this nomination first came from the to the senate i was skeptical. i said if the president nominee is anything like the nominees he has been sending to the lower federal courts i expect will see a nominee handpicked by the federalist society and heritage foundation intensive carrying out their right wing ideology support by the president. turned out to be worse. not only was the nominee someone who fit that description. it became clear he was someone who lack candor, credibility and character. this has been displayed at every turn. at the hearing for doctor ford and brett kavanaugh and yesterday, the editors of america magazine a well respected jesuit weekly with drew its endorsement of judge kavanaugh. they say quote while we prev

according to the nlrb associate general counsel. the memo thus constituted, quote, discrimination and sexual harassment. consider for a moment what this nlrb ruling means for science. any evolutionary biologist, psychologist, or economist, who studies the different risk preference and appetite for comp innings in among males and female is now at risk of his job. these branches of science could shut down completely, no matter that their findings are true. the think can that got mr. demore fired is now the dominant characteristic of our time. it holds that the absence of exact proportional representation of various racial, ethnic and sexual groups, in any institution, is by definition a result of discrimination. to suggest that different groups have different capacities, cultures, skills and behaviors, that explain the lack of proportional representation, is not just taboo. it will get you fired. and so the mad rage for gender and racial proportionality in the workplace is accelerating, especially in the #metoo era. from here on out,

then came a case before you called agra processor company versus nlrb. at least one-third of the workers in our nation's slaughterhouses are immigrants. it stands -- visits to iowa or illinois, probably delaware, you pick it. you're going to find a lot of immigrants doing these miserable, dirty, stinking, hot jobs. many of them are undocumented. the work is low paid and dangerous. and as the gao has noted, immigrants are pressured not to even report injuries on the job. ag raprocesses case was a notorious meat-packing company owned by someone convicted of 86 counts of fraud and money laundering in 2009. his 27-year sentence recently was commuted by president trump. agra processors had at the core of its business model the exploitation of undocumented workers. half their workers, almost 400 of them, were not authorized. workers allege the company fostered a hostile workplace. environment that included 12-hour shifts without overtime pay, exposure to dangerous chemicals, sexual harassment and child labor. a truck driver at agra processors brooklyn warehous

according to the nlrb. discrimination and sexual harassment. consider what this ruling means for science. those that study the appetite for competition is now at risk of his job. these branches of science could shut down completely no matter that the findings are true. the thinking that got him fired is the dominant characteristic to hold the absence of representation of various ethnic and racial groups of any institution by definition a result of discrimination. to suggest that different groups have different capacities or cultures or skills or behaviors to explain the lack of proportional representation is not only taboo but will get you fired. the mad rage for proportionality in the workplace is accelerating especially in the me to era. from here on out everything you read and watch in mainstream media will be calculated in conformity with the demands of diversity as a white mail no matter how talented you have to meet a higher standard to get hired or promoted this summer california polytechnic polyp - - proudly announce the crusade to lowe

epa cases for example, nlrb cases, environmental protection agency, labor relations board, securities and exchange commission will get more of those cases involving agencies of the government here in d.c. as a percentage than you would get another courts and that includes separation of powers, controversies that traditionally relating to national security cases we have guantÁnamo related cases in our court. there are cases related to government operations, separation of power, administrative law, agencies that are bigger percentage of our docket. i want to underscore they do important work and have important docket in distinctive characteristic in terms of the ninth circuit and the circuit has a good deal that the 11th circuit has a very -- all the circuits have an important docket. i just want -- i want to underscore d.c. has a lot more separation of powers, but i have a lot of friends on the other court of appeal that i don't want to diminish the work they do because it's very important work in what they do as well. >> appreciate your answer. those of us who live in the ninth circui

i don't know that we have time, but if it is a quick question. >> i actually work for the nlrb. two comments i want to make. in terms of the colin kaepernick situation, i really believe -- i was not following it at first, but he himself was taking a social position and was disciplined for that. his coworkers stepped in in agreement with the social position but also to show support for his conduct, and that becomes protected concerted activity. in this caseoyers, the nfl, the players association -- i'm sorry, the nfl. creates this rule, even if it is facially neutral, if it was done in retaliation for the employees' protected concerted activity, it would be unlawful. that was my first thinking when i heard about the role -- about the rule. because the rule does have a disciplinary component, as you were saying earlier, it becomes a mandatory subject of bargaining. i don't know when the cba expires for the nfl, but you cannot make changes midterm contracts to mandatory bargaining. so the nfl would still be limited in to disciplinary action it can take against the players. that's m

to a few cases he was involved and d alsa case of verizon 2010 case, verizon new england versus the nlrbre kavanaugh wrote the majority of test opinion in that case the d c circuit court, basically saying verizon workers wrote union to host signs on their cars if the cars were parked in a verizon lot while they were working. >> there is also a case involving a woman who was killed tragically in an accident at sea world. in that case, osha, the agency that imposes safety regulations on employers, found basis and cause for essentially findings the world did not do enough to make known the hazards tied with this work. kavanaugh, again, is somebody who puts the interests of employers and industry over the interests of little people. the ruling in that case was not a favorable one. it is consistent with all of the cases that we as seen in the economic justice context which show a predisposition to side with employers over the interests of employees. amy: i want to ask you abobout e undocumented teenager who was at the center of the lawsuit with e trump adadministration over her right to have

epa cases for example and nlrb cases, environmental protection agency. the national labor relation board and we will get more of those cases involving agencies of the government here in dc as a percentage of the docket then you would get in other courts and that includes some of the separation of powers and controversies that traditionally arise in the national security cases. we have although guantanamo related cases in our court. we have cases related to government operations, government separation of powers , the agencies are the bigger percentage. i want to that the courts of appeals do important work and the judges have important dockets and different characters of each of the courts in terms of -- the fifth circuit has immigration law. the 11th circuit has a very important dockets. all of them have important dockets. dc has more separation of powers but i don't want to -- i have friends on the other courts of appeals and i don't want to diminish the work they do because it is very important work. >> i appreciate your answer and those of us who live

. >> that's a case, a union case against walmart and the case came from the nlrb. the question was whether walmart had engaged in unfair labor practices against a union, in that case. in that case we ruled for the union against walmart in that case on the ground that the factual record supported the conclusion that the company had engaged in unfair labor practices and, therefore, violated the rights of the union members. >> now to something that i believe i've discussed with every nominee to the supreme court probably for the last 15 years. it's not about a case or your approach to the law. it's something that senator kennedy talked to you about yesterday. it isn't a very popular subject with some of the current and former justices. i think i make chief justice roberts uncomfortable when i raise the issue with him when i speak for a short period of time with the judicial conference. there was a former -- when justice sudor he made a quip about television cameras that they would have to roll over his dead body. i can respect that view. i just think it's plain wrong.

. >> that's a case, a union case against walmart and the case came from the nlrb and the question was whether walmart had engaged in unfair labor practices against a union in that case. that case we ruled for the union against walmart in that case on the ground that the factual record supported the conclusion that the company had engaged in unfair labor practices and therefore violated the rights of the union members. >> now to something that i believe i've discussed with every nominee to the supreme court probably for the last 15 years, it's not about a case or your approach to the law. it's something that senator kennedy talked to you about yesterday. it isn't a very popular subject with some of the current and former justices. i think i make chief justice roberts uncomfortable when i raised the issue with him when i speak for a short period of time at the judicial conference and then when justice suit or was o the supreme court he made a quip about television cameras they'd have to rollover his dead body. i can respect that view. i think it's wrong. i and many of my colleagues on t

. >> the s.e.c., the ftc, those are the traditional, the nlrb, the fed. all multimember independent agencies. those agencies are all the traditional humphries executor agencies. the concern i explained with the single director independent agency goes back to your point about federalist 47, which is if you have an independent agency that's completely unaccountable to congress or unaccountable to congress or the president and it's one person in charge, that becomes an extremely powerful position. >> okay. but social security has been like that for a long time. so my issue is when we were talking about executive power, you talked about how congress has to step in, right. that's a lot of the argument you've made to some of my colleagues. congress has to step in. but in this case, congress stepped in. congress said we had this major financial crisis. that's why we started this agency. we have done this. then you come in, in a minority opinion here, and you say that it's unconstitutional. i would throw another federalist society back at you, federalist quote. y

. >> everyone watches, nlrb the appointee, to appeals court judges including republican appointees found that precedent coming to the opposite conclusion. you may have preferred the dissent that you failed to follow supreme court precedent this is the case for the national labor relations act included those who were undocumented to unionize to protect themselves t you went out of your way to dissent to make sure they did not have the right to. >> i very disagree in the reason is the supreme court did say the immigrant was covered under the definition of the court we might know i have no agenda by the way that he thought he feels a law in case and that other judges disagreed. the case i had ten years ago were neighbor on restitution every other court disagreed and wrote ther majority opinion every other court after a disagree as part and they agreed with our wide-open point out might have just me report the question of the chair while wait for the hearing but what i know that she were objected to those under, with no option to injure to allow the committee to continue me fortunate. so jud

. >> the ftc, nlrb, the fed, multi-member independent agencies. the concern i explained with the single director goes back to your point about federalist 47, which is you have an independent agency that completely unaccountable to congress or unaccountable to congress or the president, there's one person in charge, that becomes an extremely powerful position. >> okay. social security has been like that for a long time. my issue is when we're talking about executive power, you talked about how congress has to step in. that's a lot of the argument you've made to some of my colleagues. in this case, congress stepped in. they said we have this major financial crisis. that's why we started this agency. we have done this. you come in, in a very minority opinion, and you say that it's unconstitutional. i would throw another federalist society at you. you quoted hamilton yesterday from federalist 83 when he said the rules of legal interpretation are rules of common sense. right? >> yes. >> okay. it just doesn't make common sense to me that we would stlou

epa cases for example and nlrb cases, environmental protection agency. the national labor relation board and we will get more of those cases involving agencies of the government here in dc as a percentage of the docket then you would get in other courts and that includes some of the separation of powers and controversies that traditionally arise in the national security cases. we have although guantanamo related cases in our court. we have cases related to government operations, government separation of powers , the agencies are the bigger percentage. i want to that the courts of appeals do important work and the judges have important dockets and different characters of each of the courts in terms of -- the fifth circuit has immigration law. the 11th circuit has a very important dockets. all of them have important dockets. dc has more separation of powers but i don't want to -- i have friends on the other courts of appeals and i don't want to diminish the work they do because it is very important work. >> i appreciate your answer and those of us who live

. >> the ftc, nlrb, the fed, multi-member independent agencies. the concern i explained with the single director goes back to your point about federalist 47, which is you have an independent agency that completely unaccountable to congress or unaccountable to congress or the president, there's one person in charge, that becomes an extremely powerful position. >> okay. social security has been like that for a long time. my issue is when we're talking about executive power, you talked about how congress has to step in. that's a lot of the argument you've made to some of my colleagues. in this case, congress stepped in. they said we have this major financial crisis. that's why we started this agency. we have done this. you come in, in a very minority opinion, and you say that it's unconstitutional. i would throw another federalist society at you. you quoted hamilton yesterday from federalist 83 when he said the rules of legal interpretation are rules of common sense. right? >> yes. >> okay. it just doesn't make common sense to me that we would stlou

adjudications where, for example, it could be a benefits case of some kind of an adjudication of an nlrb case, that when we review those adjudications, i do think it's important that courts be aware of the importance of those cases for the individuals affected by those cases and to make sure that the adjudications are complying with the principals of american justice andnd due procs that we expect in an adjudication when someone's life, liberty or property is on the line. and administrative adjudication is something i've written about in many of my cases to make sure that the proper kind of fact-finding is occurring even in the administrative adjudications. even in the administrative add adjudications. >> i have pages of summaries of your adjudications on those kinds of issues. the idea that you're not watching out for the little guys, people have to read the cases. i commend you for being very, very carefully attentive to making sure the rights of individuals in agency adds judicatijud -- adjudications are protected and honored. i want to talk to you about western states issues. senator

. >> that's the case, union case against walmart and the case came from the nlrb, and the question was whether walmart had engaged in unfair labor practices against a union in that case, and in that case we ruled for the union against walmart in that case on the ground that the factual record supported the conclusion that the company had engaged in unfair labor practices and, therefore, violated the rights of the union members. >> now to something that i believe i have discussed with every nominee to the supreme court probably for the last 15 years. it's not about a case or your approach to the law, and it's something that synthetic unity talk to you about yesterday. it isn't a very popular subject with some of the current and former justices. i think i make chief justice roberts uncomfortable when i raise the issue with them when i speak for a short time at the judicial conference and then there was a former, when justice souter was on the supreme court he made a famous quip about television cameras, that they would have to roll over his dead body. i can respect that view. i do think