wetherell: i understand the concern. i want to be careful because the issue about the legal authority throughsue percolating the courts. i do not think it would be up propria for me -- sen. kennedy: i am not telling you what the law will be. telling i'm at -- i'm asking you to tell me the legal basis. mr. wetherell: the question of if there is legal authority is the question that justice thomas spoke about in the travel ban cases. i think that issue is before us. i think what you are getting at, the issues surrounding us and some of the things that the courts will have to look at, is that beyond their authority to provide relief to parties not before the court. article three standing issue, if i understand the concern. beyonde court gets adjudicating the case, the concern can be that the court is acting more like congress, which is acting and affecting people not before it. those are the issues. sen. kennedy: can you tell me what the legal basis is? i would have to look at the brief. i preside over 2000 cases, and to giv

judge wetherell? >> senator, i think i will have to claim slight ignorance as judge barber did, that's not an issue that has come before me on the time i've been on the appellate court. my general recollection is consistent with him, it's a factor that can be considered as part of a larger cafeteria factors with the goal of promoting diversity in the student body. beyond that, i would have to look at the briefs and the arguments and do a little more research when the issue came before me. >> okay. fair enough. all right. let me ask you this and the role of legislative history. i think it's generally accepted supreme court practice now, precedent, that all justices have accepted. first thing you look at is a statute. and you ask is it ambiguous? and if it's not ambiguous, you don't go any further. right? y we agree on that? if it is ambiguous, you can go further. you can look at other things. if you have a statute in front of you that's ambiguous, in your judgment, that you're asked to construe, to wha

let's start with judge wetherell. what is the legal basis for that? you are going to be faced with it. >> i understand the concern you are expressing. i want to be very careful here. the issue about the legal authority for nationwide injunctions is an issue that is currently percolating through the courts. >> i'm not asking you to tell me what the law should be. i'm asking to tell me what the legal basis for his. >> i think that fundamental question of what the legal base is, is there authority for judges to enter nationwide injunctions is the question that justice thomas spoke about in the travel ban cases this past year. i think that fundamental issue is before us. i think what you are getting at is the issue surrounding it. some of the things the court have to look at is that beyond the courts authority to provide relief to parties that are not before the court? it is an article 3 standing issue as i understand the fundamental concern because once the court gets beyond adjudicating the case in the parties directly before it, the concern can be that