▶ 0:16:46Chair Grassley: Welcome, everyone. >> Mr. chairman, may I be recognized?
▶ 0:16:50Chair Grassley: It's very unusual but I wouldn't want to tell you no. >> Mr. chairman, the entire united states senate would like to congratulate you on your birthday which is today.
▶ 0:17:06Chair Grassley: Thank you. [applause]
▶ 0:17:12Chair Grassley: Thank you. Forget about it, forget about it. [applause] >> and fowlkes, you haven't lived until you see senator grassley's birthday cake with all the candles lit. [laughter] >> it looked like a prairie fire. So happy birthday, Mr. chairman.
▶ 0:17:41Chair Grassley: Thank you, senator kennedy. Now, maybe we can get down to work. I'd like to welcome everyone to today's hearing. Our first panel features rebecca table some -- taibleson, nominated to the U.S. court of appeals second circuit.
▶ 0:18:01Chair Grassley: On panel two we will hear from quite for a district court nominees, matthew orso and judge susan cartwright-rodriguez, the western district of north carolina, and david brogdon and lindsay and freeman, middle district north carolina.
▶ 0:18:24Chair Grassley: Second panel will also include sarah carter, nominated for the director of office national drug control policy area senator johnson will introduce nist abel -- miss Mrs. taibleson in a moment. Mrs. taibleson clerked for not one, but to city supreme court justices, justice scalia and then judge kavanaugh when he was on the D.C.
▶ 0:18:51Chair Grassley: Circuit judge she is no stranger to this committee. In 2018 she testified in defense of justice kavanaugh's nomination. Her first-hand experience working with judge kavanaugh was an important counterpoint to the embarrassment, the embarrassing partisan spectacle that some people on this committee orchestrated.
▶ 0:19:22Chair Grassley: I hope that my democratic holly street Mrs. taibleson with the fairness and decorum that they denied her mentor. Indeed, Mrs. taibleson is extremely well qualified to serve as certain judge. Her 15 year experience has and private practice in public service.
▶ 0:19:43Chair Grassley: He's been a federal prosecutor in the, chief in the east district of wisconsin for nearly a decade. She has prosecuted some of the most violent criminals and serious contract cartels. She's also a member of the attorney general's review committee on capital cases. During the first trump administration, she worked as an assistant to the solicitor general.
▶ 0:20:13Chair Grassley: In that capacity, she drafted numerous briefs before the supreme court. She participated in oral arguments before that court not once, but twice. Our district nominees in north carolina are also highly qualified. Their experiences represent a broad array of legal experience. Mr.
▶ 0:20:39Chair Grassley: Broad and miss friedman are federal prosecutors with help of the rule Mr. orso is an account with attorney in private practice and judge courtwright-rodriguez is a well-respected magistrate judge on the same court in which he's been nominated. We will hear more about backgrounds from our colleagues from north carolina and I'll forward to hearing from each event today.
▶ 0:21:09Chair Grassley: Turning to miss carter, she's been nominated to oversee national drug control policy addressing the scourge of drug abuse as an important issue for members on both sides of the aisle and will be taking steps to address it in this congress.
▶ 0:21:29Chair Grassley: I co-led the whole fentanyl act which was advanced through this committee earlier this year, signed into law by president trump this summer. I appreciate our committees collaboration to get that bill across the finish line.
▶ 0:21:51Chair Grassley: Carter's rep -- well-positioned to lead the fight to save american lives through commonsense drug control policy as investigative journalist, she developed a deep understanding of the drug crisis facing our country.
▶ 0:22:08Chair Grassley: She's observed firsthand the unlawful trafficking of controlled substances over the median and mexican borders, and her efforts highlighted the importance of border security to end the flow of drugs and illicit substances into the country. I look forward to hearing from her today as well.
▶ 0:22:34Chair Grassley: Before I turn over to senator durbin for his statement, I'd like to mention that we have a very long hearing today. We have six nominees, two panels and multiple introducers. I will ask everyone to keep their questions limited to the five minutes allotted to keep the hearing on schedule. Senator durbin?
▶ 0:22:54Senator Durbin: Mr. chairman, happy birthday.
▶ 0:22:57Chair Grassley: Thank you.
▶ 0:23:01Senator Durbin: At the outset and want to thank you for defending the long-standing prevnar -- bipartisan tradition. As chair of this committee, I honor the practice despite pressure to do away with loose lips from democratic side. As a result, many senate republicans were able to negotiate with the biden white house to fill vacancies in their states. Other republicans used and all open seats in the state as paragraph that down, too.
▶ 0:23:30Senator Durbin: I particularly liked that approach, I respect their decision. As a result, several nominees before us today have been nominated to fill some of those vacancies in red states. Blue slips were made a critical part of his body's advice and consent responsibility, even when they frustrate the party in power. Let me say word about the nominees today. Two panels. First panel, circuit court nominee of course by herself, and then a second panel consists of division nominees and others.
▶ 0:24:03Senator Durbin: President trump has sent nominees to us. Today we will hear from sarah carter-bailey, nominated to be director of the office national control policy. Also known as the drug czar. I can't think of a single issue I agree with the chairman on more serious topic within drug addiction in the united states and heavy price we pay. Not just individuals and families, as a society. Doing something that drugs is certainly nice face.
▶ 0:24:34Senator Durbin: The office of national drug policy is lead that effort, particularly because of the liaison law enforcement to make sure that $300 million in federal grants available last year will be given to law enforcement effectively on a local and state basis to reduce addiction. This is an important position that requires a professional who is an expert in combating the opioid epidemic.
▶ 0:25:03Senator Durbin: Sadly, miss carter is not that serious nominee. She's been a maga while in podcaster whom president trump has chosen for the role. Until she joined on dcp three months ago, she had never worked in government. She has never served in law enforcement. She has no expertise in public health nor in drug policy. She's been a loyal maga podcaster. Why is it important to bring this up?
▶ 0:25:32Senator Durbin: Because of two things from the trump administration which we ought to take to heart. The first was a statement made by the trump white house earlier this year about the hidta program that provides $300 million to law enforcement. Here is what the trump white house set about initially.
▶ 0:25:52Senator Durbin: For every dollar invested in the program, the american people get $68 in benefits, making an effective and efficient use of taxpayer money and an important tool of the nation's effort to stop drug traffickers and save american lives. That first statement by the white house. The second statement was a budget request. Guess what they did to the grants? They cut them by 34%. From $300 million $196 million. So I would have to say to Mrs.
▶ 0:26:25Senator Durbin: Bailey, whose side are you on? Law enforcement begs for more money to fight drug problems in our communities and I want to give it to them of the white house wants to cut it by 34%. What is your position going to be? We will find out. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 0:26:38Chair Grassley: At this point and looking into the record cap letters from lawn person organizations across the nation who fight each day to combat drug and human trafficking who enthusiastically support Mrs. carter's nomination.
▶ 0:26:58Chair Grassley: They stated "commitment to the truth and firsthand experiences embedded with our nation's military and law enforcement is proof that she has the determination to get the job done as well as an understanding for what men and women in uniform experience daily. This is precisely the balding leadership we need." without objection, because we entered into the record. Senator johnson. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. Chairman grassley, happy birthday.
▶ 0:27:29Chair Grassley: We all wish you many, many more. Ranking member durbin and members of the committee, I am pleased to introduce rebecca taibleson as nominated become the next judge on the U.S. court of appeals for the seventh district. She's highly qualified judgeship having graduated magna cum laude from yale college and then from yale law school in 2010. After graduation she clerked for then judge brett kavanaugh on the U.S.
▶ 0:27:58Chair Grassley: Court of appeals for the D.C. circuit judge and justice scalia on the supreme court. She then practiced civil litigation until 2016. In 2016 she joined the U.S. attorney's office from the eastern district of wisconsin where she continues to serve as assistant U.S. attorney and appellate chief. During the first trump administration, that also served while on detail from the U.S. attorney's office as an assistant solicitor general.
▶ 0:28:27Chair Grassley: In the solicitor general's office, she argued two cases before the supreme court on criminal issues and brief dozens more. She also defended the president's first amendment right to control and social media accounts, specifically his twitter account. As an assistant U.S.
▶ 0:28:43Chair Grassley: Attorney and appellate chief, rebecca briefed and argued criminal and civil appeals and prosecuted a broad range of crimes including murder, human drug trafficking, sexual child sex abuse, a fraud and robbery and embezzlement of public funds. When organizations were exporting the covid-19 pandemic to release prisoners, rebecca fought successfully to keep them in prison. Praise for rebecca's legal mind and commitment of the constitution is numerous and glowing.
▶ 0:29:16Chair Grassley: Her accomplishments are even more impressive than her top priority remains, devotion to her family. Her husband benjamin and her three children and to her faith. I'm proud to have recommended the president nominates rebecca to the seventh circuit to be introduced her to the committee as a nominee. I strongly encourage everyone to vote in favor of her confirmation. 90.
▶ 0:29:39Chair Grassley: Thank you, senator johnson. Senator budd?
▶ 0:29:44Senator Budd: Thank you, happy birthday. Rating,, thank you as well. Thank you senator tillis for his partnership on the judicial nomination committee today. It's my honor to introduce david bragdon and lindsay freeman who have been nominated to serve for the letter to north carolina. And matthew or so and susan rodriguez have been nominated to serve on the U.S. district court for the western district of carolina.
▶ 0:30:14Senator Budd: I'm grateful to president trump for nominating these exceptionally qualified visuals to serve the U.S. district judge is for the great state of north carolina. I have full confidence in each of the nominees and trust that they will faithfully apply the words of our constitution and the letter along without resorting to the wrongful practice of judicial activism. I'm equally confident they make decisions in an impartial manner, exercising the judicial humility and treating everyone in the courtroom equally with respect.
▶ 0:30:44Senator Budd: I like financing a moment to briefly introduce these nominees to the committee and present their qualifications to assume the bench. The dragon brittany serves as the chief of the appellate division of the U.S. attorney's office for eastern district of north carolina and previously served as U.S. -- assistant U.S. attorney in this office. He also served at the resident legal advisor for the philippines and the U.S. department of justice, where he helped to strengthen law enforcement tools. Never late, Mr.
▶ 0:31:08Senator Budd: Bragdon was also a law clerk to justice clarence comment on the supreme court and a circuit judge stephen williams on the supreme court appeals for the columbia circuit. Mr. bragdon graduated from the university of virginia school of loss, cum laude -- school oflaw, suma cum laude. Mrs.
▶ 0:31:33Senator Budd: Freeman previously served in senior roles in the department of justice, staff in the office of the associate attorney general in the office of legal policy. She was also a council of the law firm in los angeles and washington, D.C. she began her legal career as a law clerk to judge john rogers on the U.S. court of appeals for the sixth circuit.
▶ 0:31:59Senator Budd: She graduated magna cum laude from the university of pennsylvania, magna cum laude from harvard university. Matthew or so currently serves as partner of a law firm and was previously a partner in charlotte. Mr. orso began his career at the clerk of robert j conrad jr. In western north carolina.
▶ 0:32:28Senator Budd: He graduated negative loud from st. Louis university school of law where he served as editor-in-chief of the law review from the university of dayton where he was captain of the rugby team. Last but certainly not least, susan rodriguez serves of the U.S. magistrate judge of the western district of north carolina. Judge rodriguez was also previously a law partner at mcguire woods and charlotte. She served in policy roles at the white house counsel office in the U.S. department of homeland security.
▶ 0:32:59Senator Budd: She began her legal career as law clerk to district judge frank -- of the U.S. district court to the western district of north carolina. She graduated from george mason university, antonin scalia law school and graduated magna cum laude. Mr. chairman, I personally met with each of these nominees before the state today. I for directly from them about their passion for the rule of law and the constitution.
▶ 0:33:29Senator Budd: They are highly qualified to serve the people of north carolina and our great nation with station and with honor. After hearing their testimony and responses to questions today, I'm sure that the committee will agree that they are well-qualified and prepared for the responsibility of serving north carolina.
▶ 0:33:46Senator Budd: I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will find the same level of confidence in these nominees before the federal bench that I have, especially on this constitution day as we reaffirm our duty to uphold the principles of justice enshrined at the supreme law of the land. Thank you.
▶ 0:34:03Chair Grassley: Thank you, senator budd. You folks are excused if you want to go. Senator tillis.
▶ 0:34:10Senator Tillis: Thank you and congratulations on the 42nd anniversary of your 50th birthday. [laughter] I also want to thank my colleague for being here, he's a great partner in the state of north carolina, he makes us all proud.
▶ 0:34:27Senator Tillis: Chair grassley, I'd also like to take the opportunity to thank senator durbin, former chair durbin who honored the blue slip policy in the last congress which is why two of the nominees are before us today, so thank you, senator durbin.
▶ 0:34:42Senator Tillis: It's an institution over 100 years old and every bit as relevant today as it was 100 years ago when a senator from georgia sent a note on a blue slip of paper to a chairman of the committee saying that he disagreed with somebody who is going to be solely in his state and that began the process of the blue slip that I hope last another 100 years. Now, I want to congratulate the nominees and their families and kids in the audience.
▶ 0:35:14Senator Tillis: Senator kennedy is a very kind man and brought stationary to some of you, but there's more kids than we had stationary so we will make sure we get you some more before you leave today. But I want to welcome matt orso, susan rodriguez, david bragdon and lindsay freeman. All of these nominees are emily qualified and will make the state and our country proud.
▶ 0:35:39Senator Tillis: I want to thank senator budd again today for his great introductions I may duplicate, but will add some to what I think are the best credentials you could possibly imagine for a district court judge. There are currently only 10 active federal judges in north carolina, not counting those of senior status. Filling these vacancies is very important for our state.
▶ 0:36:04Senator Tillis: Senator budd and I set out to find the best possible judges to fill these spots and I cannot be more pleased with the nominees that we have before us today. I'd also like to thank president trump and the white house counsel office for their help with us on these nominations. Turning now to our outstanding nominees. Matthew orso is a graduate of the school of dayton and st. Louis school of law.
▶ 0:36:29Senator Tillis: Following law school, he clerked for judge robert conrad in the western district of north carolina. He is nominated to fill that seat today. I believe judge conrad is in attendance today and I'd like to welcome him and thank him for his service. Following his clerkship, Mr. orso went to private practice. He has earned a reputation as one of the best lawyers in north carolina and will make an excellent addition to the bench.
▶ 0:37:01Senator Tillis: In addition to judge conrad, Mr. orso is joined by his wife and five children, that I think what you had a problem with the cabinets, and I would like to welcome them all. Susan rodriguez is a graduate from senator college and the antonin scully's school of law at george mason. Between law school and college she served in the bush administration at the white house counsel's office. All in law school she clerk for a judges ct is nominated to fill today.
▶ 0:37:32Senator Tillis: The judges also here today as well and I'd like to welcome him and recognize him for his distinguished service. Judge rodriguez, was in private practice until she was appointed as a magistrate judge in the western district of north carolina where she currently serves with distinction. In addition, judge rodriguez is joined by her husband and children and parents today. Welcome to all of you.
▶ 0:38:07Senator Tillis: Mr. bragdon clerk in the D.C. circuit judge in law school for a court of appeals and then for justice clarence thomas on the united states supreme court. He's been with the U.S. attorney's office since 2007, serving as appellate chief since 2021. In 2017 to 2020, he served at the department of justice residential legal advisor to the philippines. He's also served as an adjunct faculty member at campbell university school of law.
▶ 0:38:41Senator Tillis: Mr. bragdon is joined today by his wife, two sons and his in-laws. I welcome them. Finally, lindsay freeman is a graduate of harvard university and the university of pennsylvania school of law. Following law school, she clerked for the sixth circuit court of appeals before joining private practice. During the first trump administration, she served at the department of justice including time as chief of staff and senior counsel. She currently serves as an assistant U.S.
▶ 0:39:10Senator Tillis: Attorney in the middle district for north carolina. She is joined by her husband and I'd like to welcome them. It's an honor to introduce four nominees with impeccable credentials and I look forward to their testimony and their appointment to the bench. Thank you, Mr. chair.
▶ 0:39:27Chair Grassley: Senator cruz was going to introduce sarah carter, but he's tied up in another committee meeting, so I'd like to read his statement introducing sarah carter. So I'm reading for senator cruz, what he would have said. It is my privilege to introduce my dear friend sarah carter. As president trump's nominee to serve as director of national drug control policy.
▶ 0:39:59Chair Grassley: The position is the so-called drug tsar of the united states charged with assessing and countering the ongoing crisis in which murderous substances peddled by murderous cartels have flooded our streets and our country. It is a responsibility she is eminently qualified to fulfill.
▶ 0:40:24Chair Grassley: After graduating from california state polytechnic university with a ba in journalism and communications, sarah began her distinguished career as a journalist. She currently serves as fox news contributor as well as senior investigative reporter and president of dark wire incorporated. Positioned that she has held since 2017.
▶ 0:40:54Chair Grassley: Her career spans more than two decades of journalism including the blaze, washington examiner, washington times, and the los angeles newsgroups. Sarah is one of the most tenacious investigative journalists tracking and reporting on issues at the core of the national security and law enforcement.
▶ 0:41:24Chair Grassley: She has traveled, monitored and reported on everything from afghanistan to the U.S. southern border. She exposed the deadly impact of fentanyl and opioids, uncovered terrorists and cartel operations, and shed light on the devastating reality of human trafficking.
▶ 0:41:47Chair Grassley: She has brought to the nation's attention the overlapping crisis of illicit drug cartels and human trafficking. Her focus on the fentanyl crisis and border security revealed secret tunnel systems, narcotics trafficking routes and even the involvement of the mexican federal officials in the drug trade.
▶ 0:42:15Chair Grassley: I've been to the U.S.-mexico border with sarah several times. She accompanied me and other senators on multiple delegations. Sarah and her team were on the front lines conveying footage of the humanitarian and drug crisis.
▶ 0:42:35Chair Grassley: In 2019, sarah received an award for nonprofit documentary not in vain, which examined the fentanyl crisis, cartel security and national security threats. In 2023 she was honored by cpac for her reporting on human trafficking in the western hemisphere.
▶ 0:43:04Chair Grassley: As president trump said when he nominated her, sarah will "lead the charge to protect our nation and save our children from the scourge of drugs. I strongly encourage my colleagues to support her nomination. Thank you. The end of senator cruz's statement in support of sarah carter. Now I'd like to have Mrs.
▶ 0:43:36Chair Grassley: Taibleson come to the table and I'd like to have you stand before you start out, because I'd like to issue this so. Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give before this committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? Thank you. Now as you sit down, you can give your opening statement.
▶ 0:44:04Chair Grassley: You have the privilege of introducing anybody you want to introduce who is here or isn't here in support of your nomination.
▶ 0:44:11Mrs. Taibleson: Thank you, chairman grassley. Rating never durbin, and to the committee for considering my nomination. And thank you to president trump for the great honor of that nomination. I'm also grateful to senator johnson for his generous introduction. I'll introduce some family who are here. My wonderful husband and three children in from wisconsin. I just have to say go brewers for my son.
▶ 0:44:40Mrs. Taibleson: Even today, especially today, the most important job I ever expect to have his being there mom. My parents michael and cynthia are here from pickens county, south carolina, a place you are familiar with, senator graham. I lack the time or the eloquence to properly thank them today. Both are lawyers, my father a law professor, and the apple did not fall far from the tree.
▶ 0:45:10Mrs. Taibleson: We moved here from canada when I was four. We were not fleeing persecution or poverty. My parents simply wanted to raise their children in the greatest country that has ever existed. This one. And I am profoundly grateful. My brother josh, a veteran, has come here all the way from hawaii, a state he fell in love with when he was stationed there as a marine. My three month old nephew and his mom are watching from maui.
▶ 0:45:43Mrs. Taibleson: I also have my husband's wonderful family here and great friends and colleagues. Thank you for coming. Today is constitution day. The 238th anniversary of its signing. That is the longest surviving written constitution of any country in the world. In my opinion, the federal judiciary is one of our constitution's finest creations.
▶ 0:46:14Mrs. Taibleson: I know that firsthand from the judges who have been my bosses and mentors, especially antonin scalia, brett kavanaugh and diane sykes. And from the work of appearing in the federal courts day in and day out representing this country and fighting crime in the eastern district of wisconsin. I know the seventh circuit particularly well.
▶ 0:46:41Mrs. Taibleson: It is a learned and collegial court and if I have the honor of being confirmed, I will spend the rest of my life living up to those values in the examples set by my judicial mentors and to the faith put in me by the president and this body. Thank you you, senators.
▶ 0:47:02Chair Grassley: Are you ready for questions now?
▶ 0:47:05Mrs. Taibleson: Yes, sir.
▶ 0:47:07Chair Grassley: Thank you very much, and complements dear family for working with you for your public service. You have the rare opportunity to clerk for not one, but two justices of the U.S. supreme court, scalia and then judge kavanaugh when he was on the D.C.
▶ 0:47:30Chair Grassley: Circuit judge what did those mentors teach you about the proper role of a judge and how did they inform your judicial philosophy?
▶ 0:47:39Mrs. Taibleson: So much, senator. From justice scalia I learned what I think we all learn from justice scalia which is how to interpret the text of our constitution and laws. He was a profoundly influential justice, perhaps the most influential of the century in which she served and his influence on me was very pronounced.
▶ 0:48:03Mrs. Taibleson: I wanted to clerk for him from the first scalia opinion I read as a student in law school because no one so persuasively made the case for judicial restraint, for textualism and originalism and clerking for him was the best possible training in those values. From justice kavanaugh I also learned so much.
▶ 0:48:25Mrs. Taibleson: I think the number one thing I learned, I would describe it as energetic public service, which is to say we in public service, we work just as hard as someone who is building a private client and getting paid by the hour. We take our obligation to the public profoundly seriously. That means employing a very careful process to decide each case, no matter how long it takes.
▶ 0:48:55Mrs. Taibleson: Reading each brief carefully, deeply researching the law, and then writing in a manner that is so careful because your opinions need to withstand the test of time and future testing and litigation.
▶ 0:49:11Chair Grassley: Judiciary interprets laws to ensure the guarantee of liberty guaranteed under the document one of the most sacred is the right to free exercise of religion. Justice kavanaugh recently said that the supreme court has "made some good progress on recognizing the constitutional protection of religious equality and religious liberty." what are
▶ 0:49:41Chair Grassley: Your views on religious liberty and the role of judges in protecting it?
▶ 0:49:46Mrs. Taibleson: Justice kavanaugh is right. In the last 12 or 13 years the supreme court has issued an opinion after opinion that has been strongly protective of religious liberty, and I would of course follow those faithfully as a lower court judge. I actually had the privilege of working on several of those matters while I was at the solicitor general's office.
▶ 0:50:07Mrs. Taibleson: I worked on and helped draft the brief in a case involving thomas more law center against a california law and the supreme court agreed with our religious protected views. I worked on espinoza against montana involving the blaine amendments and funding for religious schools. I worked on fulton v.
▶ 0:50:27Mrs. Taibleson: City of philadelphia involving catholic social services, work to placed foster children in both of those cases as well, the supreme court holding protected legislative which was consistent with the arguments that we made.
▶ 0:50:44Mrs. Taibleson: In addition, I am a proud and practicing jew raising three jewish children and I think as a jewish-american, you would have to be completely historically illiterate to be anything but profoundly grateful for this country's tradition of religious liberty. That tradition protects not just the religious among us, but also secular values.
▶ 0:51:12Mrs. Taibleson: If you think back to the sort of canonical freezing in west virginia against barnett, the case involving the pledge of allegiance saying something like if there's any fixed star in our constitutional constellation it is that no official can tell citizens what is orthodox in the areas of religion, politics or morals, and so that I think is an example of how the supreme court's protection of our religious freedoms really endears to the benefit of all americans.
▶ 0:51:40Chair Grassley: You appeared before this committee several years ago in defense of judge kavanaugh's nomination, his hearing was tainted with unfair political attacks on his character. By your testimony as a woman who worked closely with him provided critical insight into his competency and temperament. How did justice kavanaugh's commitment throughout the confirmation hearing and his jurisprudence influence youth?
▶ 0:52:10Mrs. Taibleson: The experience of watching and supporting justice kavanaugh's confirmation was a formative one. I remember thinking to myself many times that his commitment to public service, energetic public service must be very strong to go through all of that. I was very honored to appear before this committee in 2018.
▶ 0:52:34Mrs. Taibleson: I actually had with me the little one here, she was a newborn, so she came and she sat right outside the door with a babysitter while they testified and senator kennedy, I'm sure you don't remember, but at the airport later that day, our flight was seven hours delayed and I was there with a very fussy baby and senator kennedy ran into me and was extremely kind. So I remember that very well.
▶ 0:53:00Mrs. Taibleson: And I'm very honored to be here before you again ideally in less contentious times and circumstances.
▶ 0:53:07Chair Grassley: Thank you. Senator durbin.
▶ 0:53:11Senator Durbin: You're doing just great until you mentioned the brewers.
▶ 0:53:15Mrs. Taibleson: Sorry, hard disagree. [laughter]
▶ 0:53:22Senator Durbin: I won't hold that against you. Let me tell you, I'm wrapping up my senate career with one more year. It's been my great honor to serve on this committee virtually the whole time I've been in the senate, there have been some glorious, great moments and some not so glorious. I can recall that we had the first muslim american nominee for the circuit bench of the third circuit a few years ago under president biden.
▶ 0:53:53Senator Durbin: The questions that were asked of that nominee I thought were beneath the dignity of this committee. He was asked as a muslim if his family celebrated 9/11 in their home. He is from the new york area and protested that he thought it was an outrage that they would suggest that because he lost personal friends in 9/11. I thought that was a low point for the committee. And I'm sorry to say what happened to you today may be a new low point.
▶ 0:54:23Senator Durbin: We've received letters from conservatives, conservative political organizations criticizing you, your husband and your family. How do they criticize you? On the basis of your religion and your religious practice. I've never seen anything like it. American family association sends us a letter. Let me tell you some of things they criticize you for. You and your husband are affiliated with what they consider to be a politically liberal congregation.
▶ 0:54:53Senator Durbin: I can't pronounce it but it is emmanuel jerusalem and the milwaukee area. They go on to criticize it appears that the rabbi whom the taiblesons w taiblesons cose to perform their wedding currently serves a pro-lgbt congregation. They then say that you have -- you and your family have donated to the milwaukee jewish federation. I'm familiar with the jewish federation, it's a big deal in chicago as I'm sure it is in the walkie.
▶ 0:55:23Senator Durbin: They do remarkable, great work. They then talked about other things such as your husband and you donating to candidates of both political parties. It is beyond me to believe that an organization with this membership would raise these issues. They are ignoring the very basics of our constitution which you noted. In the bill of rights, we have freedom of religious belief or no religious belief, that's up to us.
▶ 0:55:53Senator Durbin: The government is not going to choose a preferred religion, their third provision which says no religious text shall ever be required as a qualification to any office of public trust under the united states. So whether it's the first liberty institute or the afa action group, both of which sent letters opposing your candidacy, conservative groups making that position, they are ignoring the obvious letter of the law and the constitution. I'd like to give you an opportunity to comment or react.
▶ 0:56:22Mrs. Taibleson: Senator, I'm very proud of my jewish faith. I was raised that way, my parents who are right there raising our children jewish and of course article six of the constitution says that there's no religious test for public office and that is one of our constitutions many protections for people of faith.
▶ 0:56:49Mrs. Taibleson: Regardless of those letters, I am really honored by the president's choice to nominate me, and he did so. I'm honored by that selection and grateful for it.
▶ 0:56:57Sen. Durbin: Let me ask you as a matter of record, your selection for this position involved the two U.S. senators from wisconsin, did it not?
▶ 0:57:07Mrs. Taibleson: I don't want to mislead you, I don't think I have senator baldwin's support. What it did involve was a tradition in wisconsin for any judicial nominee to proceed through this sort of nominating commission to which each of our senators appoints three people, and I did go through that nominating commission and they did send my name forward, and a very privileged to have senator johnson support, but I don't want to be misleading. To my knowledge I do not have senator baldwin support.
▶ 0:57:37Sen. Durbin: Could I ask you to comment in the short time that is remaining, the cabin on nomination was controversial on many different levels. One of the questions was what he would do as a member of the supreme court on the case of roe v. Wade. What was your understanding of his promise and what actually occurred?
▶ 0:57:56Mrs. Taibleson: I don't recall him making any specific promise about a future case like the one that did come up. My memory is that like every nominee, he recited the judicial canon that he can make prejudgment or promises of cases in the future. I recall that I think he described, as has every nominee, roe v.
▶ 0:58:21Mrs. Taibleson: Wade as a pressing of the supreme court, which of course it was, and then in the dobbs decision, the supreme court applied the established factors to determine what to do with that precedent of the supreme court.
▶ 0:58:34Sen. Durbin: What was your reaction to his vote on the dobbs decision?
▶ 0:58:38Mrs. Taibleson: Senator, as a judicial nominee sitting before you, I can give you a thumbs or a thumbs down on supreme court precedent. Dobbs held that ro was egregiously wrong on the david it was decided and had caused numerous problems in the law and in american society and dobbs determined that it was appropriate to overrule it.
▶ 0:58:59Sen. Durbin: Thank.
▶ 0:59:01Chair Grassley: Senator. [inaudible]
▶ 0:59:11Chair Grassley: -- doj employees are described Mrs. taibleson as an extraordinary lawyer, public servant, and they praised "her top-notch legal mind, her unwavering commitment to the rule of law, and her deep and abiding love of this country during her nearly decade-long service within the department? Without objection, that will be included.
▶ 0:59:44Chair Grassley: Senator kennedy, you are the next one.
▶ 0:59:46Senator Kennedy: Counselor, as you know, it's hard to pass a bill in the united states senate. Our founders intended that to be the case. Consequently, if a bill does pass, a lot of reports issued, a lot of debate, and all of it is written down.
▶ 1:00:15Senator Kennedy: Why has it become common practice and do you support it? Of ignoring that rich legislate of history when you interpret a statute?
▶ 1:00:26Mrs. Taibleson: Well senator, I think the first rule of statutory interpretation is that the text is what is paramount and that is because the text is what actually proceeded through presentment -- >> of course it's paramount, but why can't the text be supplemented? By looking at the history?
▶ 1:00:50Mrs. Taibleson: I think a legislative history can sometimes provide a tool to help interpret the text, and it's often in party briefs and I would of course consider it that way, but it's just important to keep in mind the subordinated role in that interpretation because the intention of any particular legislator does not have the force of law. The text does. The legislative history and the intentions of specific legislators should never take primacy over the text. >> it doesn't have to, does it?
▶ 1:01:20Mrs. Taibleson: Just gives you context.
▶ 1:01:22Mrs. Taibleson: I agree. >> when you interpret a statute or write a brief, and you think that the language is punny, aren't you tempted to go look at the history? Just to make sure that your interpretation is correct?
▶ 1:01:43Mrs. Taibleson: Mrs. taibleson: it depends I suppose on that particular statute and the nature of the history. >> don't you want to just go take a peek? You look at the language and you said this is clear as thunder on a summer night, but maybe al just take if you have a legislative history to make sure that I'm not out of left field, and the supreme court condemns that, does it not?
▶ 1:02:10Mrs. Taibleson: The supreme court is not formally condemn that in cases where legislative history or statutory history has provided -- >> sure they do. And I'm not saying they are wrong, don't misunderstand me. I'm just trying to understand your perspective. Originalism and textualism is accepted even by the left of center. And I've read opinion after opinion, lower courts as well where they said legislative history we can't rely on.
▶ 1:02:39Mrs. Taibleson: Legislative history cannot be relied upon to trump the language of a statute so in the language of a statute really is that clear, there's not that much that bears directly on the question before -- >> let me ask you something. Does the supreme court sanction looking to the federalist papers in interpreting the constitution?
▶ 1:03:03Mrs. Taibleson: Yes.
▶ 1:03:06Sen. Kennedy: Why?
▶ 1:03:08Mrs. Taibleson: The process of mending the constitution is different. The constitution was of course public we modified --
▶ 1:03:16Sen. Kennedy: No it's not. Look at the plain language, don't you?
▶ 1:03:20Mrs. Taibleson: Yes, but in looking at the plain language the question we ask is what was the original public meaning of that language? And in the case of the constitution, the original public meeting is elucidated by the debate surrounding its ratification in those debates are really captured in the federalist papers, the anti-federalist papers, ratification debates, constitutional convention, documents like that.
▶ 1:03:45Mrs. Taibleson: So those documents can be compared directly on the constitutional text in a way that is more legitimate than the statement of an individual legislator would be vis-à-vis a statute.
▶ 1:03:55Sen. Kennedy: Then when we interpret the united states constitution, and I agree with you, that is the case, I'm just asking you whether you think it ought to be the case, then when we interpret the U.S. constitution, why do we let lawyers do it? Why don't we just hire history professors?
▶ 1:04:14Mrs. Taibleson: A history that judges are looking to in interpreting the constitution and other statutes is primarily legal history. It's not something like a biography of george washington, it is instead things like statutes or debates about statutes, the federalist papers. Certainly I think law schools could and should do a better job teaching students how to read that legal history, but it is fundamentally legal history.
▶ 1:04:41Mrs. Taibleson: In the task the judges have been reading that legal history is to draw analogies between the legal history and modern times. And that in a logical reasoning is a thing fundamentally a task that judges are particular the skilled at.
▶ 1:04:54Sen. Kennedy: Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:04:59Chair Grassley: [inaudible] >> -- over my colleague here, but I will gladly do it. Thank you, you run a tight ship and we appreciate you, Mr. chairman. >> it is birthday. [laughter] >> and it is the constitution's birthday. >> and he was there.
▶ 1:05:22Chair Grassley: [laughter] >> you should just ask him about the federalist papers and the debates. >> thank you for being here and congratulations on your nomination because we know it can be difficult, sometimes the most difficult because my colleague kennedy here than anybody else, but certainly I know that you appreciate their support and we recognize them for being here today.
▶ 1:05:51Chair Grassley: I was particularly touched by your comments about constitution day and that the federal judiciary that is one of our country's greatest creations. Indeed, the structure of our government and the rights of its citizens that are set forth in the constitution I believe right now at this moment in time every american should be reminded of the beauty of this country and the documents that set forth how
▶ 1:06:23Chair Grassley: We will govern ourselves as a free people and the true purpose of government to protect its people and their rights. I always love to hear from nominees their value in that, and especially right now.
▶ 1:06:41Chair Grassley: We have this convergence of disorder around some of our states and cities in which politicians are undermining the rule of law based on encouraging people in office to just obliterate the separation of powers, meaning someone in the executive branch that has asked for the responsibility to enforce the law saying I don't
▶ 1:07:13Chair Grassley: Agree with those laws and therefore I will not do that, or even judges in some respect. And I say this with great sadness. I believe an independent judiciary is a cornerstone of securing the rights of a people and ensuring that grievances and conflicts have a place that people can take them an independent arbiters.
▶ 1:07:42Chair Grassley: I watch as district court judges around this country not only rule based on what they believe the law should be, but go on to write lengthy written opinions that personally attack a governor for someone in office, and I don't say that that makes me angry or sad just because it may be a republican, but because
▶ 1:08:13Chair Grassley: Of what it does to the integrity of the institution of the federal judiciary, the undermining of the public perception of its trustworthiness and independence, and I believe when you shake that too much, you shake the foundation of this nation. And so on constitution day I think it's important that we come back together and get back to basics on the true role of a judge.
▶ 1:08:45Chair Grassley: You are going to be asked to write written opinions. Sometimes you may offer them. I was hoping you could give us your opinion on how a judge might offer opinions that would restore or reinforce the public trust in the judiciary and it's true role and a judge's
▶ 1:09:18Chair Grassley: Understanding of its limited scope and the enormous trust of responsibility that we give judges.
▶ 1:09:24Mrs. Taibleson: The federal judiciary plays, as you suggested, a vital role in preserving our separation of powers and done right. The constitution assigns a very specific job to the federal judiciary, which is to interpret and apply the law and not to make or change the law. And judges who carry out that obligation in good faith I think increase public faith in the institutions of our government.
▶ 1:09:57Mrs. Taibleson: A few more specific interpretive principles flow from that general rule. Things like textualism and originalism help judges ensure that they are applying the law as written and not importing their own moral or policy preferences into cases. The elected branches are the ones were able to exercise and should exercise their moral and policy preferences when representing the people, but judges are not elected.
▶ 1:10:22Sen. Moody: What about these swipes that they like to take at elected officials in really superfluous language that is not needed in a legal opinion?
▶ 1:10:31Mrs. Taibleson: I'm very lucky to be nominated to extremely collegial court whose opinions are very disciplined and I cannot think of such a swipe in a recent seventh circuit opinion. I would commit to following that tradition of collegiality and civility. There is really no need or place for a judge to be taking personal swipes at anybody whether it is from the bench or in your written product.
▶ 1:11:01Sen. Moody: No more questions. >> thank you, congratulations on your nomination, thank you for being here. I want to go back to the question that senator durbin asked about your support for justice kavanaugh.
▶ 1:11:20Sen. Moody: You were not only supportive, you were energetically the so, appearing before this committee as a witness on cable television. I'm just curious. If you knew then what he did in reversing roe v. Wade, would you have supported him?
▶ 1:11:42Mrs. Taibleson: Yes, senator. What I said then and what I still think is true now is that then judge kavanaugh had amassed a considerable record of that demonstrated his qualifications to serve on the supreme court and I think his service on the supreme court is born out of that.
▶ 1:12:08Mrs. Taibleson: But he demonstrated in dobbs a total disregard for precedent and principal sarah decisive.
▶ 1:12:16Mrs. Taibleson: The supreme court established the factors to evaluate the ongoing presidential relevance of roe. Those factors include the nature of the air and the precedent, how bad the ever was or the quality of the reasoning, the reliance interests, the effect of the prior precedent has had on airee -- other areas of law.
▶ 1:12:37Sen. Moody: So you think dobbs was correctly decided?
▶ 1:12:41Mrs. Taibleson: The canons of ethics preclude me from giving a thumbs up or thumbs down to supreme court precedent because it suggests that I would apply that precedent according to my own thumbs or thumbs down, and I wouldn't. I would apply every precedent to the supreme court faithfully. >> let me ask you as a matter of precedent, do you think brown versus the board of education?
▶ 1:13:04Mrs. Taibleson: Yes I do, as many judicial nominees wiser than I had gone before me to explain. Brown is a monumental and foundational decision of this country and its core holding that separate but equal is a violation of the equal protection clause is correct. >> and how about lovingvs. Forgiving?
▶ 1:13:25Mrs. Taibleson: Yes, I agree that loving vs. Virginia is correct. >> o'byrne a fall -- kohberger felt v. Hodges?
▶ 1:13:36Mrs. Taibleson: The 14th amendment requires same-sex marriages to be recognized on the same terms as opposite sex marriages and I would faithfully apply that precedent as a lower court judge. >> let me make sure I understand. I'm answering the question yes or no?
▶ 1:13:54Mrs. Taibleson: I'm answering the question that I would faithfully apply as a load for judge and along with my fellow former nominees, I can give a thumbs-up or thumbs down. >> you said loving was correctly decided, brown was correctly decided, a burger felt you won't opine?
▶ 1:14:15Mrs. Taibleson: That's correct. Like previous additional nominees who have set before you, I'm down by the canons of judicial ethics and then following the recognized examples of acknowledging the sort of -- >> c1
▶ 1:14:30Sen. Blumenthal: The principal of oberg or feld is less valid to you than the principles in those other cases?
▶ 1:14:37Mrs. Taibleson: That's not what I'm saying, I'm saint brown and loving are monumental and solid decisions in this nation's history.
▶ 1:14:45Sen. Blumenthal: There are a lot of folks who would feel oberg it felt is a monumental decision too.
▶ 1:14:50Mrs. Taibleson: Like basically every prior nominee before me I'm not able to give a thumbs-up or thumbs down there.
▶ 1:14:59Sen. Blumenthal: I think we expect more of an appellate court judge in your position then just to say like every other nominee be o'er me I'm going to evade an answer to that question.
▶ 1:15:13Mrs. Taibleson: I will faithfully follow it and every supreme court precedent.
▶ 1:15:23Sen. Blumenthal: Griswold?
▶ 1:15:24Mrs. Taibleson: I will faithfully follow griswold and every supreme court precedent.
▶ 1:15:30Sen. Blumenthal: I'm disappointed in your answers.
▶ 1:15:33Senator Britt: Thank you, Mr. chair and happy birthday. You have an incredibly impressive career. To your children sitting behind you, guys, your mom is a boss, pretty incredible.
▶ 1:15:54Senator Britt: And so thank you so much for your willingness to do this at a time when I think our nation is grappling with what it means to be in the public eye and stepping up to serve so thank you for your willingness to do that. Clerking for judge kavanaugh and justice scalia, immensely impressive in addition to your courtroom experience.
▶ 1:16:20Senator Britt: I would like to know through that courtroom experience you have, is there a particular case you have worked on that you believe is the most formative in your career and how is that going to help inform your work on the bench?
▶ 1:16:33Mrs. Taibleson: I think the most formative case for me in terms of especially my seventh circuit practice was united states v. Page. It was about convicting people of conspiracy to traffic drugs. These are the most serious drug traffickers we prosecute.
▶ 1:16:57Mrs. Taibleson: We urged the seventh circuit to overturn decades of its own case law that had case-by-case gone awry and deviated from supreme court guidance about the meaning of conspiracy. We achieved that result successfully by doing very deep research into the seventh circuit case law and presenting our arguments forcefully, but respectfully when you are asking a court to overturn many of its cases.
▶ 1:17:26Mrs. Taibleson: We succeeded beyond my wildest expectations, garnering the vast majority of the court to adjust case law in the manner we asked it to do so.
▶ 1:17:36Sen. Britt: When you are looking at then judge kavanaugh or justice scalia and that experience, is there any case or moment where you were in discussion or dialogue with them, anything you feel like will be formative to how you conduct yourself on the bench?
▶ 1:17:59Mrs. Taibleson: I think the most important case was the obamacare case, it was a huge case and I was privileged to work with justice scalia on that.
▶ 1:18:12Sen. Britt: I know you are a member of the attorney general's review committee, I know the death penalty is far more common at the state level than the federal level, but as president trump has now issued the executive order allowing the use of the death penalty in criminal cases in federal court when authorized and appropriate under the law, can you explain how the use of capital punishment differs from federal court as opposed to the state court
▶ 1:18:44Sen. Britt: System and discuss your role on the attorney general's review committee and what that entails?
▶ 1:18:49Mrs. Taibleson: Each state has the authority to decide for its own self the penalties attached to its most serious crimes. Some states have the death penalty, some do not. In practice, as a result, there are far more executions in some states than others. The federal government has a uniform rule across the united states and there are a reasonably small number of federal crimes that are eligible for the death penalty upon conviction.
▶ 1:19:20Mrs. Taibleson: Within the department of justice, the decision of whether to seek the death penalty in a particular case is an extraordinarily weighty one that goes all the way up to leadership. In its path up to leadership, there is something called the review committee for capital cases, which is a set of doj attorneys to review the cases that are eligible for the death penalty and make a recommendation that goes to department leadership about whether to seek or not.
▶ 1:19:46Mrs. Taibleson: So it is a careful process that is really case specific, but it always keeps in mind the extreme weightiness of that work. I have led the appellate litigation team for two federal executions and that is among the weightiest and most serious work I have ever done. So I take that extremely seriously.
▶ 1:20:06Sen. Britt: Absolutely, I just want to say thank you for your willingness. Are these your parents here as well? You've got to be so proud. Her command of the issues, or knowledge, the way she conducts herself with last and in equity is amazing. When you see somebody goto to to with our colleagues up here it is amazing and I also wanted to say thank you for your commitment to senator moody of conducting yourself with collegiality and civility in the way you will coach things on the bench. >> thanks very much, Mr.
▶ 1:20:41Sen. Britt: Chairman. Tell me where the boundary is between first amendment protected speech and unlawful, prosecutable misconduct.
▶ 1:20:49Mrs. Taibleson: There are a few categories of speech that are exempted from first amendment protections and they are criminal. Examples are threats or fraudulent speech, things like libel and defamation can be subject to civil litigation. Fighting words, incitement. Those are the soda standard categories of speech that are exempted from first amendment protection and are subject to civil or criminal liability.
▶ 1:21:18Sen. Whitehouse: And that is pretty established set of boundaries, right?
▶ 1:21:24Mrs. Taibleson: Yes, senator. I was answering with respect to supreme court resident. It is not written in the text of the constitution itself.
▶ 1:21:34Sen. Whitehouse: But those boundaries are quite normal to ordinary judges?
▶ 1:21:38Mrs. Taibleson: The categories are recently well-established, there are sometimes questions about whether something fits into a category, whether it is conduct or speed. I think the categories I listed are pretty well-established in supreme court precedent.
▶ 1:21:54Sen. Whitehouse: Does it shift in any respect depending on which side of a public argument you are on?
▶ 1:22:02Mrs. Taibleson: Under supreme court precedent, viewpoint discrimination is basically almost never ok so to the extent you are talking about viewpoint based discrimination, treating different speech favorably or less favorably under the law based on a viewpoint, that is subject to the strictest scrutiny under supreme court cases.
▶ 1:22:24Sen. Whitehouse: The reason I ask is I think we are seeing in administration that wants to attack and perhaps even try to criminalize an burden protected speech it happens to disagree with because the protected speech is to disagree with and challenge the administration.
▶ 1:22:47Sen. Whitehouse: I think it's really important in that contest that courts q2 that well-established line. You agree that courts really need to stick to their guns on this question of the line between first amendment protected speech and unlawful conduct?
▶ 1:23:07Mrs. Taibleson: Every case has to be taken case-by-case with respect to the very specific speech in front of you and the facts and the law. Of course, the ultimate obligation of every federal judges to follow the law.
▶ 1:23:20Sen. Whitehouse: And there is no rule that gives the president a special privilege to move that boundary just because he's the senior executive official?
▶ 1:23:30Mrs. Taibleson: The president has the authority to set our enforcement priorities, as every president has done, including in criminal prosecutions. Within the scope of each criminal prosecution, the law will be applied to the facts of that particular case and in that process it is the law that governs.
▶ 1:23:48Sen. Whitehouse: And the boundary remains the boundary?
▶ 1:23:50Mrs. Taibleson: Yes, senator.
▶ 1:23:52Sen. Whitehouse: Yes. I want to flag one additional thing that I mention fairly often in these hearings because court credibility often comes up as an issue that I think we are all concerned about and I want to take this opportunity to point out that if you look at the record of what is going on at the supreme court and particularly you look at amicus
▶ 1:24:23Sen. Whitehouse: Practice in front of the supreme court, what I see regularly is anonymously funded, dark money funded right wing groups that file packets of amicus briefs 10, 12 at a time in a really case as many as 50, and the court does not oblige them yet to disclose whether or not those amicus briefs in warden aided, scripted, commonly funded,
▶ 1:24:55Sen. Whitehouse: Multiple ways for the same actual voice to penetrate the supreme court case with a seemingly independent but actually different piano keys on the same piano. And I think that is a failure of the court. I think it becomes telling at some point when whoever is behind those briefs always wins.
▶ 1:25:23Sen. Whitehouse: They don't always show up, they only show up when it matters to the interests of the front groups, but my experience is and we are trying to put some hard numbers to this, my experience is when those right wing dark money groups show up and they always win. I don't think that helps the credibility of the court and I think the chairman for allowing me to go 8 seconds over. >> thank, Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:25:59Sen. Whitehouse: Great to have you here, congratulations on your nomination. Let me pick up another question senator blumenthal was asking a moment ago about abortion and life issues. What standard should courts apply when reviewing state abortion laws?
▶ 1:26:14Mrs. Taibleson: What the court held in dobbs was that the constitution doesn't say anything about providing a right to abortion so dobbs returned the issue of abortion to the people and the representatives state-by-state and said he essentially this is not a question for federal judges because it doesn't say it in the constitution, it is a question for the people in the democratic process. That is the effective dobbs.
▶ 1:26:42Mrs. Taibleson: The state democratic process is now the process that has control of the issue.
▶ 1:26:45Sen. Hawley: What about federal legislation affecting abortion?
▶ 1:26:49Mrs. Taibleson: Federal legislation would be subject to the same scrutiny as other federal legislation, it has to fall within congress's enumerated powers first and foremost.
▶ 1:27:02Sen. Hawley: What is the precedent or lines of precedent that would govern any review of federal legislation related to abortion?
▶ 1:27:10Mrs. Taibleson: Well, a few lines of precedent might potentially be relevant. Whether it is legitimate commerce clause or spending clause legislation is the first thing that comes to mind depending on how the law is structured. If not, whether there is some other of formative hook in the constitution that provides congress with the power to pass that law.
▶ 1:27:34Sen. Hawley: You recognize dobbs as the controlling precedent when it comes to life questions, is that what you say?
▶ 1:27:41Mrs. Taibleson: From the supreme court, yes.
▶ 1:27:43Sen. Hawley: And the seventh circuit or anywhere else for that matter, yes?
▶ 1:27:47Mrs. Taibleson: Absolutely.
▶ 1:27:49Sen. Hawley: Dobbs would supersede anything else.
▶ 1:27:52Mrs. Taibleson: Absolutely. I would faithfully follow dobbs.
▶ 1:27:57Sen. Hawley: And he regarded it as controlling precedent and as settled law?
▶ 1:28:02Mrs. Taibleson: Yes.
▶ 1:28:03Sen. Hawley: Let me ask you this, how should courts weigh the rights of medical providers on conscience grounds?
▶ 1:28:11Mrs. Taibleson: The supreme court decision in hobby lobby reflected the fact that employers have important religious rights to resist the government requirements that they provide certain forms of health care to which they object.
▶ 1:28:24Sen. Hawley: What about doctors?
▶ 1:28:27Mrs. Taibleson: I'm sorry, senator, what about doctors?
▶ 1:28:30Sen. Hawley: What about medical providers who object to participating in abortion related procedures?
▶ 1:28:36Mrs. Taibleson: I think I should be somewhat circumspect because there is litigation pending around the country so the canons of ethics preclude me from prejudging these questions too much but I think the basic method of analysis would follow the supreme court approach in hobby lobby but extending into that context.
▶ 1:28:53Sen. Hawley: What about pro-life sidewalk counseling outside of clinics? Is that core first amendment speech?
▶ 1:28:59Mrs. Taibleson: Sidewalks are recognized as core public for a the rights to free speech are at their strongest.
▶ 1:29:06Sen. Hawley: It doesn't matter if it is an abortion clinic or something else you are saying, regardless, the fact that the sidewalk is a public forum should control the analysis.
▶ 1:29:17Mrs. Taibleson: Generally under supreme court precedent, content or viewpoint-based discrimination in the context of a traditional public forum is viewed with extreme skepticism.
▶ 1:29:28Sen. Hawley: Very good. Let me ask about free exercise questions. Should it have the same strength and weight as other rights like free speech?
▶ 1:29:37Mrs. Taibleson: Absolutely. I believe it is our very first clause in our bill of rights.
▶ 1:29:42Sen. Hawley: How should courts evaluate claims of religious liberty when they conflict with generally applicable laws?
▶ 1:29:48Mrs. Taibleson: The supreme court has spoken to that recently in cases like three of three creative and espinoza, fulton, and what the supreme court has established is that even generally applicable laws don't carry with them an exception to the first amendment's free exercise clause.
▶ 1:30:09Mrs. Taibleson: If the application of what looks like a generally applicable law, say a funding restriction, has the effect of discriminating against people for the religious practice, that can violate the first amendment.
▶ 1:30:20Sen. Hawley: Does the trinity lutheran case have any bearing?
▶ 1:30:24Mrs. Taibleson: Yes, the trinity lutheran case concerned funding for those playground grounds, we have all seen them with kids, made of recycled tires and there was a state program to fund playground grounds with recycled tires and a church playground applied for funding and it was denied on the grounds that we don't provide funding to church organizations.
▶ 1:30:50Mrs. Taibleson: The supreme court held in trinity lutheran that you can't do that, if you have a general funding program, you can't discriminate against some of your recipients because of their religious faith.
▶ 1:31:00Sen. Hawley: How does that interact with smith?
▶ 1:31:02Mrs. Taibleson: Smith held that general laws of neutral applicable in don't necessarily violate the free exercise clause and smith remains a precedent of the supreme court I would follow, but in the last 12 years or so, the supreme court has explained that smith doesn't mean a state can effectively exempt a religious entity from a state benefit.
▶ 1:31:27Sen. Hawley: Last question, Mr. chairman. I think you are Mr. chairman now, right? Very good. One further question on smith, in the trinity lutheran case in the hosanna table encase, they said smith is about physical acts coming out about other things. How do you understand that?
▶ 1:31:52Sen. Hawley: I'm not asking you to grade the court or go beyond -- you are a student at the law -- of the law. How would you as a judge who has to read these intersecting lines of cases, what does that mean? That distinguishing of smith, how does that cash out?
▶ 1:32:17Mrs. Taibleson: That's a tough question, I think the supreme court is struggling with smith and many of these cases. In fulham, they said smith did not apply because the city was granting exemptions to a policy left and right. There are certainly exceptions to smith that the court has recognized.
▶ 1:32:37Mrs. Taibleson: But happily there are enough of these cases that I think is a lower court judge you can generally find one that is roughly similar to the facts before you and that is true in the last 12 or 13 years where these cases have been in a formally protective of religious liberty. My method would be one of analogy.
▶ 1:32:56Sen. Hawley: Thank you very much, I've enjoyed your answers and I think very cogent. Thank you very much.
▶ 1:33:05Senator Cruz: Let me first of all say, nice job dancing with senator hawley and senator kennedy. They can be challenging questioners and you acquitted yourself ably for both of them. By the way, kennedy did show some mercy not quizzing you will know obscure latin maxims.
▶ 1:33:36Mrs. Taibleson: The thing speaks for itself. [laughter]
▶ 1:33:39Sen. Cruz: You begin your career clerking for two supreme court justices, brett kavanaugh and justice scalia. What did you learn about judging and approaching the law from clerking for both justices?
▶ 1:33:58Mrs. Taibleson: From justice scalia, I learned to be fearless in your intellectual commitments. When you have thought about something deeply and you have written about it and you have made an intellectual commitment to an area of law, you follow that commitment wherever it goes. But at the same time to maintain deep civility and collegiality with your colleagues, even those with whom you disagree. As justice scalia did.
▶ 1:34:27Mrs. Taibleson: I also learned from justice scalia that it is possible to balance a full life in the law with a very full life at home. He had that huge family and really great friends. He really lived a life fully and I hope to emulate that. From justice kavanaugh I learned that you can never be too careful. It is always worth the time to go back and read one more case, to reread your opinion one more time.
▶ 1:35:00Mrs. Taibleson: To make sure you picked everyone of your law clerks brains. We serve the public by writing opinions that have to last and have to work in different factual scenarios. From both justices, they are both learned in law but managed to maintain a persistent intellectual curiosity about the law.
▶ 1:35:28Mrs. Taibleson: They were always interested in intellectual debates about corners of the law that they hadn't yet explored. I think that curiosity and open-mindedness serves a federal judge well. It keeps you open and excited about your work.
▶ 1:35:41Sen. Cruz: You have a very impressive legal career. You managed to overcome the in norma's impediment of graduating from yale not once, but twice. [laughter] I will say your nomination has attracted quite a bit of interest. I had people reach out to me on this nomination more than any other judicial nomination in the second trump term.
▶ 1:36:08Sen. Cruz: Both from critics and from multiple conservatives who know you well and have vouched for you energetically. As senator durbin noted, 55 conservative groups signed a letter opposing your nomination. And they raised concerns that I think boiled down to a concern that you are secretly a closet liberal and that you would be an activist on the bench.
▶ 1:36:36Sen. Cruz: I want to give you an opportunity to respond to those concerns however you would like.
▶ 1:36:40Mrs. Taibleson: Thank you, senator. Let me say two things, first I was raised by a very conservative law professor sitting right there. I went to a jewish day school and it felt like we were the only conservatives at our jewish day school in the 1990's. If you were jewish and conservative in the 1990's, you had to really mean it and we did.
▶ 1:37:09Mrs. Taibleson: My parents raised us to be proud of those beliefs and proud of those differences. I think my service in the united states government has been fully consistent with those values. I've obviously been a prosecutor fighting violent crime, prosecuting human traffickers, meth traffickers, corrupt city employees, armed robbers, carjackers, I think that work is consistent with my values.
▶ 1:37:39Mrs. Taibleson: We turned our lives upside down to move to D.C. with two three-year-olds and an infant so I can serve in the solicitor general office in 2019 and in that job I did work I'm very proud of and that is consistent with my conservative values. The second thing I will address is I know that a lot of the concerns are about my husband.
▶ 1:38:05Mrs. Taibleson: And it is true that my husband and I don't agree about everything in politics or the law, but my husband and I do agree what it turns out are more important things in day-to-day life. We agree about devotion to our children, our religious faith, love of this country, devotion to public service, deep relationships in our local community and that is the stuff of day-to-day life.
▶ 1:38:36Mrs. Taibleson: I was raised in the best tradition of charlie kirk, to relish debate. Prove me wrong. We do have law and policy debates. Although I'm quite certain my husband is wrong on many matters of policy and law, I love him deeply and we have a wonderful family life.
▶ 1:39:00Sen. Cruz: If you are anything like my wife, you are quite certain your husband is wrong on every issue and you are probably right. That was a very impressive answer.
▶ 1:39:18Sen. Cruz: I find justice kavanaugh's nomination for this body was incredibly contentious and I think you showed a lot of courage standing up and defending your former boss and that showed a lot of character and I wonder if you would like to explain about putting your own credibility on the line to defend justice kavanaugh.
▶ 1:39:40Mrs. Taibleson: It wasn't hard because everything that was being said about justice kavanaugh was fundamentally inconsistent with the man who I knew very well. I've known him very well for 15 years now. I know he is a good man.
▶ 1:39:56Mrs. Taibleson: Those allegations were so fantastical to me that it was not hard to raise my hand about -- and tell the truth about the man I knew and I would do that 100 times out of 100. >> senator schmitt.
▶ 1:40:15Senator Schmitt: Thank you for being here, congratulations on the nomination and you are here on constitution day, quite an honor. I do want to ask you in that vein, the preamble to the constitution states we the people, the second amendment grants the right to keep and bear arms to the people, the 10th amendment sets aside rights for the people, section 2, article one says that people choose their members of the house. Who are the people?
▶ 1:40:44Mrs. Taibleson: Well, senator, this is obviously the subject of much litigation particularly under the second amendment so I need to proceed with a bit of caution. There are arguments out there that the meaning of the people would not necessarily exact the same by amendment by amendment and provision by provision and there might be contextual analysis to be done.
▶ 1:41:13Sen. Schmitt: It has been interpreted differently for public education versus the second amendment. How do you wrestle with that as it relates to the privilege and immunities clause that guarantees rights to citizens? Are illegal aliens part of the people?
▶ 1:41:34Mrs. Taibleson: You know, the privileges or immunities clause of the 14th amendment, it certainly sounds like it would do quite a lot but since the supreme court decision in the slaughterhouse cases, it has not had a ton of weight to pull in constitutional litigation and instead the supreme court has viewed the due process clause as the lens through which many substantive rights are recorded through the states and applied to the people.
▶ 1:42:13Mrs. Taibleson: The general parameters would be to look at the text, look at the history of its application. The history of the application of the second amendment might differ from the history of the application of the fourth amendment and understand the constitutional text in light of the court history.
▶ 1:42:34Sen. Schmitt: Going to ask you about a couple of other things. You have done a good job addressing the legal questions. What role does common sense play in your jurisprudence?
▶ 1:42:47Mrs. Taibleson: I'm from wisconsin. [laughter] I am braced common sense. For me it is fair to say I'm a list and originalist, but I do have some common sense guardrails in need.
▶ 1:43:10Mrs. Taibleson: When you get to the end of your work it is important to pick your head up and look around and make sure you have not lost and you have not forgotten what the world looks like.
▶ 1:43:31Mrs. Taibleson: I don't think any judges personal common sense should trump the law the body has enacted, it definitely should not but I think it is important for judges to lose the forest for the trees.
▶ 1:43:43Sen. Schmitt: During my time in the job I had before this as missouri attorney general I learned through some pretty contested litigation I think some of the important character traits that public officials should have her through this forging process you go through that matter.
▶ 1:44:07Sen. Schmitt: As a federal judge, you are going to be confronted with a lot of difficult cases that have a lot of consequences and the chattering classes will be talking a lot and do you still have a life outside of I hope, outside of your role on the bench? A guess what I'm getting at and I think this question is perhaps the most important western I can ask.
▶ 1:44:40Sen. Schmitt: Especially in the times in which we are living in of this hyper politically charged environment, threats of violence. Aside from your very commendable support for noun justice kavanaugh and his confirmation hearings, can you give me an example of a time where you stood up for your beliefs and your convictions and risked professional and personal backlash in making the right decision even though you knew
▶ 1:45:10Sen. Schmitt: There would be a lot of heat in the kitchen?
▶ 1:45:12Mrs. Taibleson: Yes, senator. I mentioned before I lead the appellate litigation team for two federal executions during the first trump administration and one of those executions was january 14, 2021, six days before the transition.
▶ 1:45:31Mrs. Taibleson: At that point, the issue of continuing lawful, federal executions became quite controversial in the department and large parts of the department about out -- bowed out but I did not and I did the work of not only the office, but also the divisions that had declined to participate. I don't in left the office for several days.
▶ 1:45:58Mrs. Taibleson: And I did so because a jury decades earlier had lawfully returned a verdict of death and the victims in that horrific case had been waiting for decades for justice but it was not easy personally and professionally.
▶ 1:46:17Sen. Schmitt: Thank you for your time. >> thank you for being here today. I did want to complement you. I think some of us know this, you did your opening statement including your introduction of all your family members in two minutes and 44 seconds. For those about to do introductions, you may want to keep that in mind.
▶ 1:46:41Sen. Schmitt: I'm quite satisfied with your background of work you have done and I remember you walking your halls during the kavanaugh hearings. I also want to tell your son, I'm a braves fan, a team that was called the brewers. The brewers have a place in my heart even if they don't for ranking member durbin's.
▶ 1:47:10Sen. Schmitt: You may now step aside and we will have the staff transition to the next panel.
▶ 1:47:20Mrs. Taibleson: Thank you very much.
▶ 1:48:13Mrs. Taibleson: I would like to administer the oath if you would please stand and raise your right hand. Do you swear the testimony you're about to give a be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? Thank you, you may be seated. We will allow introductions at this point, it is our normal process if you would like to introduce your family members, please feel to do so. Mr. brogdon, we will start with you. Make sure your microphone is on.
▶ 1:48:45Mrs. Taibleson: Red means go.
▶ 1:48:46Mr. Bragdon: Thank you, senator tillis. Thank you for your kind words. Thank you, chairman grassley and ranking member durbin for holding this hearing, thank you for president trump for the honor of nominating me and for the committee members for your work. Thank you again, senator tillis and senator budd for your kind remarks and your support of my nomination.
▶ 1:49:13Mr. Bragdon: I'm very grateful to all the friends and family that have supported me and prayed for me through this process. In particular I would like to thank my wife for her steadfast faith in 24 years of marriage, courage, and perseverance.
▶ 1:49:39Mr. Bragdon: Thank you to my children, I appreciate my family's willingness. I have wonderful in-laws who are here today and to have always supported me.
▶ 1:49:55Mr. Bragdon: My mother and brother diana and dan bragg dinner watching online and my father passed away in june but I've always appreciated how he and my mom have raised me and my brother for his role in developing my character. I'm grateful to justice thomas, for the chance to clerk with him and how influential that was in my life. I'm grateful to my friend who is here today in support of me.
▶ 1:50:37Mr. Bragdon: Finally, I think god for his grace and strength each day and I look forward to the committee's questions.
▶ 1:50:45Sen. Tillis: Thank you. Ms. freeman.
▶ 1:50:54Ms. Freeman: Thank you. It's an honor to appear before you. I would first like to think president trump this nomination. I'm grateful and humbled by this opportunity and I would like to thank you senator tillis and senator budd for your warm words through this process and support. I would like to thank god for his blessings and the support for us.
▶ 1:51:21Ms. Freeman: My husband drove up last night from greensboro to be here by my side. He's the most amazing man and he is an incredible role model to our two sons who at three and two are not here today, but in case they watch this later a want to say, mommy loves you very much. I would like to thank my parents who have shown me incredible support and my sister. I have several friends here with me today.
▶ 1:51:51Ms. Freeman: I've had many friends mentors and colleagues, too many to name to any degree, but I will simply say I'm humbled by their kindness, grace, and guidance that they have shown me through my career and I know they would not be here without them. I would like to say a word about judge john rogers. His humble and faithful application of the law and the respect he showed everyone in the courtroom inside and out continues to inspire me to this day.
▶ 1:52:22Ms. Freeman: Thank you to the committee and I look forward to your questions.
▶ 1:52:25Sen. Tillis: Thank you. Mr. orso. >> thank you, senator tillis, ranking members of the committee, thank you for having me here today. I'm grateful to be here first, I thank god without whom none of this would be possible, to president trump, thank you for your support in nominating me.
▶ 1:52:52Sen. Tillis: To senator tillis and senator budd, thank you for your kind words today, for your support through this process and for supporting my nomination. I have a few very important people here today, my wife jenny of 20 years, she is my best friend, she supported in my career endeavors every step of the way. She is a model of loving service and holiness to me and our six children.
▶ 1:53:18Sen. Tillis: Our oldest son is not here, he is studying in college. But he may be watching. My other five children are here. My mother and is watching online. My brother joe and his family and my brother jim are also probably watching. I'm dedicating this all to my father who I lost just a couple of years ago and I think he's probably watching too.
▶ 1:53:52Sen. Tillis: My wife's parents welcomed me into their family and have shown me nothing but love and support all these years and here in the room today also is my good friend and longtime mentor judge robert conrad who serves as the director of the administrative office of U.S. courts who took a chance on me many years ago hiring me as his law clerk and he hasn't stopped routing for me for 16 years. Judge cannon val is similar.
▶ 1:54:19Sen. Tillis: I look forward to joining judge bell on the bench if I'm fortunate enough to be confirmed. I also have a good friend here I think, jim whitaker, today and I value his friendship and support. Thank you and I look forward to your questions.
▶ 1:54:36Sen. Tillis: Thank you. Ms. rodriguez.
▶ 1:54:40Ms. Rodriguez: Let me begin by thanking president trump for this nomination and the opportunity to serve the western district of north carolina. I also want to thank chairman grassley. I didn't get tuition happy birthday in person. Ranking member durbin. Thank you for scheduling this hearing and thank you to the other members of the committee for considering my nomination.
▶ 1:55:12Ms. Rodriguez: My husband bert is a united states naval academy graduate, a talented runner and he honorably served our country. Next year will be 20 years of marriage since it is constitution day I'm very pleased to report to you that at least some of them through school and discussions can recite the preamble. I told her teachers as an excuse for missing school today that this will be a great lesson in learning a little bit about our government.
▶ 1:55:53Ms. Rodriguez: I grew up in rural kentucky. I was the first to go to college and my family. That is where I learned very strong work ethic. My brother mark made the 11 hour trek to D.C. by car and I'm grateful they are here today. My brother david and his wife I think I watching, they are enjoying the new grandbaby.
▶ 1:56:19Ms. Rodriguez: I want to introduce my father and mother-in-law, my niece avery and her parents christina and ryan, as well as our cousins who came from miami. I want to recognize a few of the judges that are here with us today.
▶ 1:56:51Ms. Rodriguez: He once gave me a book that changed my life. Judge kendell is not able to be here today. He had the trust and confidence in the young attorney to give me very significant matters upon which I built my career. There are many other judges watching from the western district and I'm very appreciative of all of them. I want to mention the U.S. magistrate judge from the eastern district of north carolina is also here with us and he is a good friend.
▶ 1:57:22Ms. Rodriguez: To not only me but others and of the panel. I want to recognize U.S. deputy marshal, weeks and his family. Senator tillis, I know you are aware of this, but deputy marshal weekes gave his life in the line of duty about 18 months ago, part of the court family. I definitely recognize him and his family. I want to recognize my law clerks who are watching. My former clerk nicole giffin. They are incredible people.
▶ 1:57:57Ms. Rodriguez: I also want to thank the good lord for being here. I will support and defend the contributions -- the constitution of the united states. I look forward to answering the committee's questions. Thank you.
▶ 1:58:21Sen. Tillis: Thank you. Ms. carter.
▶ 1:58:27Ms. Carter: Thank you, senator tillis. First, thank you to you, to ranking member durbin and distinguished members of the committee. I want to begin by remembering my dear friend charlie kirk whose life left a lasting mark on many. He was deeply inspired to encourage the younger generation.
▶ 1:58:56Ms. Carter: His tragic loss is that we must work together to unite to save american lives. I want to acknowledge my husband marty who is here today. He is a wounded warrior who knows the cost of fighting a nation's enemies firsthand. I want to thank our six children, sophia, annalise, justin, erica, I have the whole group, alexander behind me, and our six grandchildren who I love so much.
▶ 1:59:27Ms. Carter: Benjamin matthew, charlotte, gracie, sage, and baby gabe. They came from all across the country to be with me today. I'm also deeply grateful to the angel families here today. Despite enduring the greatest loss imaginable, you continue to fight.
▶ 1:59:56Ms. Carter: You are the moral conscience of this fight and your courage is an inspiration and to the law enforcement officials here and to the men and women in uniform you represent, you are the tip of the spear in the war I think president donald j. Trump, his leadership has been a fundal deck -- fundamental declaration of our national will.
▶ 2:00:29Ms. Carter: He has made it clear that thefro era of toleratingm assault has been over. I come before you as a witness to the war that has been waged against our country for year.
▶ 2:00:50Ms. Carter: For two decades, my work on the front lines wasn't just about telling stories, it was about mapping the enemy, I traveled deep into cartel territory because you cannot defeat an enemy you do not understand.
▶ 2:01:09Ms. Carter: My husband was nearly killed by terrorists funded by drug money to the cocaine laughs in guatemala and the cartel battlegrounds in mexico and I have seen these predatory criminal enterprises operate with impunity in our hemisphere. That impunity ends now.
▶ 2:01:29Ms. Carter: Let's be perfectly clear about the nature of this fight, this is not just a public health crisis, it is a chemical war being waged against the american people, our greatest resource, our citizens are being targeted and killed. They are not statistics. They are our children, our neighbors, our loved ones. This fight is personal to me.
▶ 2:02:01Ms. Carter: My father was a proud marine who fought in two wars to defend that promise. Their fight for freedom and safety is the same fight we face today and I carry their spirit with me in this mission. As director of the office of national drug control policy, my mission will be one of relentless offense. We will protect american lives by taking the fight to the enemy. We will hunt them in their safe havens. We will dismantle their labs. Sees their finances and assets.
▶ 2:02:33Ms. Carter: We will use every instrument of american power to break the backs of these organizations, religiously attacking the supply of these poisons will systematically reducing the demand for them here at home through robust prevention treatment and recovery support.
▶ 2:02:57Ms. Carter: That means mobilizing every asset, and listing educators, faith leaders, and law-enforcement in a national effort to prevent drug use before it starts. We will work to create a culture of resilience where staying drug-free is the norm. We must teach our children these substances are not recreation. They are poison deployed by an enemy. We will defend the next generation from the chemical assault. This mission is urgent.
▶ 2:03:27Ms. Carter: We are losing over 300 americans every day. We have lost more americans to elicit fentanyl in the past five years than all U.S. troops killed in combat since world war ii. We as a nation would never tolerate foreign actions that kill our people on this scale. We are under attack and we will respond accordingly. My life's journey has prepared me to lead this fight. I am committed to working with this committee, with law-enforcement.
▶ 2:03:59Ms. Carter: Let me end with this. The chemical poison being pushed into our country does not care if you are republican or democrat. The terrorist profiting from the staff do not care about our politics. This cannot be a partisan issue. It must be an american mission, one that requires all of us united to defend our children and the future of this nation, our objective is not mitigation. It is victory, senators. Thank you.
▶ 2:04:30Ms. Carter: I look forward to your questions.
▶ 2:04:34Chair Tillis: I had the opportunity to meet with a number of nominees in my office beforehand and I told them all to go and watch the game tape of senator kennedy. I also went to senator kennedy and told him he gets to open up in my place. Senator kennedy?
▶ 2:04:54Sen. Kennedy: Thank, Mr. chairman. Mr. -- I cannot see that far. Who wants to volunteer? [laughter] let's start in the middle and work. Mr. orso. I really cannot -- I guess I need to get new glasses.
▶ 2:05:26Sen. Kennedy: Let's imagine this situation. A small printing company, a manufacturer, that sort of thing, 20 employees, small operation, they take customer orders. They wear uniforms because the owner wants to promote his company with the company logo.
▶ 2:05:53Sen. Kennedy: An employee shows up one day in uniform but she is wearing a burqa and the owner says you cannot wear a burqa here and the employee says I can and the owner says you are fired. Tell me how you would analyze that case. What questions you need to know. Who would win. Who would lose them according to supreme court precedent.
▶ 2:06:20Mr. Orso: I would look first to title vii, the civil rights act of 1964.
▶ 2:06:28Sen. Kennedy: What does title vii say?
▶ 2:06:30Mr. Orso: A person cannot be discriminated against in employment on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, gender. Then I would apply the facts of the case.
▶ 2:06:43Sen. Kennedy: What we have to know?
▶ 2:06:45Mr. Orso: If the wearing of that burqa was indicative of any potential religious -- closely held religious belief and then if so would analyze it from there.
▶ 2:06:59Sen. Kennedy: What if the employer said my customers will not like it? Is that a justification?
▶ 2:07:08Mr. Orso: I do not believe that would be sufficient justification to discriminate against someone based on religious belief. You have to take into account whether the employer is providing any type of accommodation that allows for that person.
▶ 2:07:26Sen. Kennedy: What of the small business owner said it is dangerous? Employee might get the burqa caught in manufacturing apparatus?
▶ 2:07:38Mr. Orso: I think out have to look at case law if there's anything similar on that but my instinct is that in terms of protecting the safety of employees as a valid concern of an employer.
▶ 2:07:53Sen. Kennedy: Fair enough. David -- I cannot see. Mr. bracken, tell me about -- Mr. bragdon, tell me about supplemental jurisdiction. Supplemental jurisdiction -- I'm having trouble or member in that term because it does not come up in criminal practice much, but I believe it is --
▶ 2:08:27Sen. Kennedy: It will come up in federal district court court every other thursday.
▶ 2:08:30Mr. Bragdon: I will carefully research any issue to come before me.
▶ 2:08:34Sen. Kennedy: It used to be called pendent jurisdiction.
▶ 2:08:39Mr. Bragdon: It is tradition that builds on jurisdiction -- I'm thinking it builds on jurisdiction of another party who is already properly before the court. But I do not specifically remember, senator kennedy.
▶ 2:08:55Sen. Kennedy: Ok. Do you know? >> senator, I would say my understanding is that as well and I do not have much to add. I have not been working on that recently.
▶ 2:09:08Sen. Kennedy: Who knows the answer? >> judge rodriguez. I'm a sitting magistrate judge now. There was a recent supreme court case on this. Supplemental jurisdiction and with -- is when the court would have original jurisdiction over a federal question but there is a state question so that is where the court can exercise its discretion over supplemental jurisdiction.
▶ 2:09:35Sen. Kennedy: A lot of times where the comes up is of something gets kicked and there only state law claims, does the court exercised jurisdiction otherwise over those state law claims? A recent supreme court decision on this basically said the court could get divested of jurisdiction if a plaintiff dismissed everything, all the federal claims, so it goes back to a jurisdiction issue and that is what you would be normally looking at.
▶ 2:10:06Sen. Kennedy: Ok. Let me go back to Mr. orso. How do you amend the constitution?
▶ 2:10:19Mr. Orso: You would look to article five of the constitution and follow the instructions for two thirds of the legislature or of the states.
▶ 2:10:32Sen. Kennedy: Let me move to the gentleman to her right. What is the difference between preliminary and permanent injunction? And how you decide? >> a preliminary injunction -- let me start with permanent injunction would be a final judgment in a case that occurs after completion of all litigation.
▶ 2:10:57Sen. Kennedy: Let's start with preliminary. What you have to prove?
▶ 2:11:07Mr. Bragdon: You are looking at irreparable harm, likely to have success and ultimate case as a goes through court. You are looking at balancing equities of the parties so those are some of the factors the court considers in weather it would grant that and it is essentially -- the idea is can you keep things in place while the litigation is pending?
▶ 2:11:29Sen. Kennedy: What factors do you look at for permanent injunction?
▶ 2:11:33Mr. Bragdon: It would depend on relevant law or action being considered.
▶ 2:11:40Sen. Kennedy: But what factors do you look at?
▶ 2:11:43Mr. Bragdon: You -- for a permanent injunction, you --
▶ 2:11:54Sen. Kennedy: The same factors, don't you?
▶ 2:11:57Mr. Bragdon: A permanent injunction depends on underlying statute or relief that you are taking and can vary based on kind of case.
▶ 2:12:07Sen. Kennedy: You are asking, is the plaintiff likely to succeed on the merits? And permanent injunction, you are asking, has the party succeed in on merits?
▶ 2:12:21Mr. Bragdon: Correct. My point is with the merits ours going to vary based on the kind of case.
▶ 2:12:28Sen. Kennedy: Tell me about class actions. What are they and what are the elements you have to prove? >> I believe you are referring to rule 23.
▶ 2:12:41Sen. Kennedy: You are allowing one plaintive or a few plaintiffs to stand in for a class of a larger number of individuals to bring that class you have to meet the factors set out, the elements set out in rule 23, so looking at typicality, representation, commonality, but those are some of the factors.
▶ 2:13:01Sen. Kennedy: I did not realize I had gone this far over.
▶ 2:13:05Chair Tillis: This concludes the entrance exam. Thank you, senator kennedy.
▶ 2:13:10Sen. Kennedy: I really apologize.
▶ 2:13:12Chair Tillis: I appreciate you asking the questions. Senator durbin.
▶ 2:13:17Sen. Durbin: Is carter, -- Ms. carter, I hope we can agree the high agreements are valuable to fighting the drug crisis in america. Do we? Turn your microphone on, please.
▶ 2:13:32Ms. Carter: Absolutely. It is an important part of fighting.
▶ 2:13:38Sen. Durbin: Last year, high intensity drug trafficking areas, the 33 areas identified by the program seized 4.1 million pounds of fentanyl and other drugs and denied drug traffickers 17.7 billion dollars in illicit profits. Proof positive of what we agree on, how they work. >> absolutely.
▶ 2:14:04Sen. Durbin: Please explain why the program is subject to 34% cut by the trump budget from $300 million to $200 million. Have we won the war on narcotics and don't need this anymore?
▶ 2:14:20Ms. Carter: I support the president's budget. I do support our high intensity drug trafficking groups. I was actually recently in alaska. I made a trip to the further most part of the united states in an effort to meet with the director there and see the fights that we are continuing to fight against the drug cartels.
▶ 2:14:47Ms. Carter: I figured we have seen the supply pouring across the southern border.
▶ 2:14:53Sen. Durbin: I have to slow you down. We have limited time if we follow the rules of the committee and I would like you to answer my question. How would you justify a 34% cut in grants if we haven't won the war on drugs?
▶ 2:15:07Ms. Carter: The big, beautiful bill also supplements that funding. We continue to assess -- this administration continues to assess those grants and it is supported by the office of national drug control policy, which it falls under.
▶ 2:15:23Sen. Durbin: A 34% cut does not support.
▶ 2:15:28Ms. Carter: Right behind me I have the director and deputy director.
▶ 2:15:33Sen. Durbin: I'm glad they are here but that does not help cut the program. Let me go into mexican drug cartels because you said you have personal knowledge of those. Are you aware these drug cartels are heavily armed? Do you know their weapon of choice?
▶ 2:15:51Ms. Carter: They use assault rifles. They use grenades. They use quite an array of weapons. Sometimes they at resource even our own law enforcement.
▶ 2:16:03Sen. Durbin: And mexican police and military forces. One of the most common weapons they use is a 50 caliber rifle. I'm not an expert on firearms, but I understand that is a military style weapon that is so powerful it can penetrate a vehicle.
▶ 2:16:24Ms. Carter: These are lethal weapons, correct.
▶ 2:16:28Sen. Durbin: The mexican government has done an analysis of where these crime guns come from from drug cartels and find 70% come from the united states. Are you aware of that?
▶ 2:16:39Ms. Carter: Of course. We are assessing both sides of this horrific situation our country is facing.
▶ 2:16:46Sen. Durbin: If you are dealing with a drug crisis you characterize as a chemical war being waged against the american people, and 70% of the weapons are coming from the united states to these terrorist cartels, do you believe we have obligation to try to stop the flow of weapons?
▶ 2:17:07Ms. Carter: We are assessing both sides of this issue, working with partners in mexico and in the united states, as well as law enforcement, to assess this. And mitigate those threats.
▶ 2:17:18Sen. Durbin: What you suggest we do? You have to get beyond assessment. You have to do something to stop the flow of deadly weapons to the cartels.
▶ 2:17:27Ms. Carter: I believe shutting down the border has effectively stopped the flow going south and coming north.
▶ 2:17:35Sen. Durbin: We stopped the flow of weapons from the united states into mexico? Is that what we are to -- what you are testifying?
▶ 2:17:43Ms. Carter: By shutting down the border and working with our partners in mexico who are as response will for the crisis that we are facing, we have reduced flow going south as well as coming north.
▶ 2:17:54Sen. Durbin: I wanted to see that in writing. Can you produce it? I think it is important you do that. The drug crisis is serious. You want to take on the drug crisis for america, you do not have a background in this other than an interest in the subject. I would say to trust you with that response ability when we are cutting the budget of the agency by 34 percent gives a lot of us pause.
▶ 2:18:24Sen. Durbin: I am not sure why you were chosen. You are articulate, but that does not mean your expert enough to manage this job. Let's see what you produce for me. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 2:18:38Chair Tillis: I would like to enter into the record three letters from families against fentanyl, parent collective, and lost forces of fentanyl. These nonprofit representatives at families impacted by the drug crisis in our nation. These organizations support Ms. carter's nomination and believe that she is the hands on current data driven leader who will work to end the fentanyl poisoning crisis.
▶ 2:19:07Chair Tillis: Without objection, I would like to have this entered into the record. Senator hirono.
▶ 2:19:15Sen. Hirono: I asked three questions of all nominees before any committee on which I sit to ascertain fitness to serve, so I will ask the questions and we will start with Ms. freeman and go down the line. Since he became a legal eat alt -- adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?
▶ 2:19:41Ms. Freeman: No, senator. >> no, senator. >> no, senator.
▶ 2:19:48Judge Rodriguez: No, senator.
▶ 2:19:50Ms. Carter: No, senator.
▶ 2:19:53Sen. Hirono: Have you faced discipline or entered a settlement related to this kind of conduct?
▶ 2:19:57Ms. Freeman: I have not. >> I have not. >> no, senator.
▶ 2:20:03Judge Rodriguez: No, senator.
▶ 2:20:05Ms. Carter: No, senator.
▶ 2:20:07Sen. Hirono: Thank you. One of my concerns with many of president trump's nominees is the lack of qualifications and relevant experience for the positions to which they have been nominated and I want to note for the record that Ms.
▶ 2:20:23Sen. Hirono: Carter bailey, nominated to be director of the office of national drug control policy, until three months ago had never worked in this environment or space. Before three months ago, she had never even worked in government.
▶ 2:20:43Sen. Hirono: She has no background in drug policy, no experience in public health, so I have concerns as to the lack of relevant qualifications and experience of this nominee. Ivy question for Mr. orso. What is the supreme court case griswold v connecticut stand for?
▶ 2:21:07Mr. Orso: The supreme court and griswold upheld a constitutional right to contraception, I believe.
▶ 2:21:16Sen. Hirono: So as a district court judge you will follow that precedent? In cases that relate to contraception and use of contraception?
▶ 2:21:28Mr. Orso: Yes, senator hirono. I would follow all supreme court precedent a fortunate enough to be confirmed as district court judge.
▶ 2:21:40Sen. Hirono: Basically you would follow supreme court precedent in all cases until the supreme court decides otherwise, which the supreme court as you know has been overturning decades of precedent in many areas and this is possibly one of them going forward.
▶ 2:22:00Sen. Hirono: So I did want to also note, judge cartwright rodriguez, that since becoming a magistrate judge you have recited over at least two naturalization ceremonies. Can you share with the committee what those experiences meant to you?
▶ 2:22:20Judge Rodriguez: Yes. Those are very near and dear to my heart. You may have read my comments that I typically make naturalization ceremonies. I have my father-in-law and mother-in-law who both immigrated from cuba. Castro came to power and literally took everything from my mother-in-law's family and she came here to the united states and they are grateful.
▶ 2:22:46Judge Rodriguez: Because they naturalized, I'm lucky enough to be married to my husband today so those are near and dear to my heart.
▶ 2:22:55Sen. Hirono: You, to the united states has been referred to as the great melting pot where everyone brings their culture and history and we are all the more enriched because of that. I agree is a naturalized citizen as we have a regime that is against diversity, equity, and inclusion, which is reflective of every state of our country, I
▶ 2:23:25Sen. Hirono: Am glad to know that you consider the naturalization ceremonies where we are welcoming people from all over the world to be part of our great basically mix of culture and history in our country that enables our country to be strong and great. I commend you for that attitude because it is one I share.
▶ 2:23:46Chair Tillis: Thank you, senator hirono. Do you have any intention of asking any other questions? Ms. carter, I think we have senator moody coming. I have a couple questions for you.
▶ 2:24:09Chair Tillis: I have been down to the border multiple times and I am thrilled with the results of this administration in shutting down the border. I think it is a disservice to people who immigrate legally and it also has made our country less safe. In the time I have been down there, I have had numerous briefings with customs and border patrol and I don't know the statistic is right anymore. You made a comment about effectively shutting down the border.
▶ 2:24:38Chair Tillis: I agree we have done a good job with that, but these cartels to an amazing job getting around. I have heard the coyotes, the drug traffickers shouting to us, we are coming.
▶ 2:25:00Chair Tillis: They would take 40 or 50 persons trying to come into the country illegally, attract border patrol there, so they could send their poison or human traffic to another area. I think a lot of that play has been shut down.
▶ 2:25:26Chair Tillis: The president has done an extraordinary job of enforcing policies the biden administration did not. The concern I have is you still have the cartel flying ultralights over. We do not have the situational awareness that we should at the border and we also see a lot of the poison -- in my last briefing a year ago, according to border patrol, still the majority of illegal drugs that come through the country come through illegal entry points,
▶ 2:25:58Chair Tillis: Hidden in trucks and bodies. What are we going to do to combat that and get this congress to understand people, technology, and infrastructure at the legal ports of entry so we can increase commerce?
▶ 2:26:21Chair Tillis: Balance between maximizing the flow between two nations that have important economic and other ties but do it anyway that is upping the resources border patrol needs to get the job done and keep our country safe? Thank you for that question. It is important. It is such a complex question. We have nearly 2000 miles of border with mexico.
▶ 2:26:47Chair Tillis: Our law enforcement assesses the majority of narcotics continue to pour through our border and the cartels are very savvy. For decades they have been working to figure out ways to work around us, to find loopholes to bring that poison into our nation. Not only are we dealing with cartels but we are dealing with adversaries taking advantage of those loopholes as well.
▶ 2:27:11Chair Tillis: President trump did a phenomenal job coming in and shutting down that border. The cartels were operating with impunity and we saw that under the last administration. The flow of human trafficking, the orders of human trafficking -- horrors of human trafficking. I was at the border almost 20 47 situation. I can attest to what you saw across the rio grande.
▶ 2:27:38Chair Tillis: Even late at night, looking through my night vision camera, you could see the cartels moving across with 75, sometimes 100 people every hour on the hour.
▶ 2:27:49Chair Tillis: I want to be respectful of senator moody's time but one thing -- I look forward to speaking with you after confirmation to really listen to the voices of border patrol, who say we need walls in some places but what we need is a law enforcement driven strategy for securing the border not only from human crossings but all this poison coming across the border and that means that we have to get the mix
▶ 2:28:21Chair Tillis: Right between people, technology, and infrastructure. I do not want to spend a dime more on a wall if it is not going to make this country safer. The problem with a 30 foot wall is a 40 foot ladder. If we do not have situational awareness operational awareness on the ground all these good works are going to be for naught when the future administration comes that deemphasizes one of the most important things we need to do for homeland security.
▶ 2:28:51Chair Tillis: I appreciate you being here today. I am going to turn to senator moody.
▶ 2:28:55Sen. Moody: Thank you for all of our nominees for giving up so much of your time and your families for being here today. Thank you for supporting them. A life of public service is not easy, especially these days and often I find it is harder on our families then it is sometimes on us. Thank you to the families that are here with you. As florida pasta attorney general, I fought hard against the opioid and then synthetic opioid epidemic.
▶ 2:29:26Sen. Moody: It is something our country has never seen. We are losing more americans to the drug epidemic than any other cause of death. It is frightening when you put into perspective how compares to an we thought we were dealing with this crisis in the 1980's when nancy reagan first said just say no. We were losing about 3000 americans a year. 3000 americans a year. We now there was over 100,000 americans are your drug overdose.
▶ 2:29:56Sen. Moody: So from holding pharmaceutical companies, distributors, manufacturers accountable in court, we are working with law enforcement to step up interdiction efforts, making sure we are getting that message or our children, equipping our first responders with naloxone. I was very focused on this as attorney general.
▶ 2:30:19Sen. Moody: I found the message was not getting to the kids and we were losing unsuspected kids that had no reason to believe they were about to ingest a fatal dose of fentanyl, they were dying. The fastest growing age category for overdose on fentanyl is under 14.
▶ 2:30:42Sen. Moody: So I have been very vocal commending this administration for thinking outside the box on how we tackle our greatest challenges and that goes from where we are putting our current resources, shifting not only monetary resources but human resources two different agencies or responsibilities, and then the people he is appointing.
▶ 2:31:08Sen. Moody: As it pertains to the nation's drug czar, that has looked very differently or under different administrations. Some people have former governors, some have law enforcement. I think it is very unique that we have a mom of six -- >> I have six beautiful children. I think I left one of them out. Luke, I'm so sorry. There is parker, or has been.
▶ 2:31:40Sen. Moody: We have six children. Six grandchildren altogether. And nothing is more formidable, you are right, senator, then a mama bear.
▶ 2:31:48Sen. Moody: We were together recently speaking about the efforts of this administration to not only interdict, shutdown the border in which they have done, interdict this flooding into our country, killing americans, but also how do we get through to parents in terms of morning kids, and kids, anywhere from five to seven out of 10 pills contained a legal dose of fentanyl, the counterfeit pills.
▶ 2:32:21Sen. Moody: I was with the nominee in the sheriff in miami-dade county who is also a mom, dealing with these struggles, coming up with ideas of how as drug czar you can get the word out. I want to make sure everybody knows, to fulfill the responsibilities of this job, it has looked different depending on the administration and what they are trying to accomplish.
▶ 2:32:46Sen. Moody: But certainly you bring a very unique on the ground perspective not just personally although you should be given a trophy for six kids, having such an accomplished career, but professionally. What do you think is unique about your background, your current work that sets you apart from prior nominees? You bring a fresh perspective and zeal about the responsibilities of this position.
▶ 2:33:14Sen. Moody: >> I think you already mentioned one of them, senator moody, my family. You are right, I'm not a doctor, I'm not a general, not a lawyer. What I am is a more than two decades investigative journalist who was on the ground in the field witnessing firsthand what these cartels and what these terrorist organizations have not only done to our nation and to the rest of the world but to our
▶ 2:33:44Sen. Moody: Children. You mentioned something very important. You talk about the 1980's when we were losing 3000 -- I think the number I got come at one point it was 6300 when we thought it was really, 1980, that was a terrible sight of where our nation was heading for drug overdose. Now we are looking at over 100,000. I have angel family sitting behind me who will never see their children again.
▶ 2:34:18Sen. Moody: Because poison came across our border. And their children unknowingly took either a pill -- even I say now, as mike has said, he lost his son preston, but he said, one try, you die. Not one pill can kill anymore. It is you try, you die.
▶ 2:34:47Sen. Moody: One of my son-in-law's closest friends from high school lost his life in miami at a party, you know, doing drugs, not expecting that to contain fentanyl. Immediately lost his life. I don't want to see that happen ever again.
▶ 2:35:17Sen. Moody: I am committed with all of my heart and all of my soul to working for every single american, every single family. As I said in my opening statement, these drugs, these cartels, our adversaries, they don't care if we are republican or democrat, a member of the green party or no party at all.
▶ 2:35:42Sen. Moody: They are making hundreds of billions of dollars off of the death of americans, and off of the deaths of people all over the world. I have someone here as well, rosie, who works with the collegial foundation. I cannot tell you how many times rosie and I have been in mexico together, human trafficking victims that I have interviewed, that I have spoken with. These cartels are.
▶ 2:36:07Sen. Moody: Taking lives with impunity they were designation by the president as foreign terrorist organizations, sinaloa cartel, -- the ghost who tries to hide from all of us, will no longer be sleeping restfully anymore.
▶ 2:36:31Sen. Moody: All of these cartel leaders, all of these terrorist organizations, and even our adversaries are on call right now. And especially the cartel leaders.
▶ 2:36:44Chair Tillis: Senator booker.
▶ 2:36:49Sen. Booker: Thank you very much. I had a great exchange with the chairman earlier and we talked about the state of north carolina. I have done years of service with this man and he made it very clear to me, lay off my judges, booker. Let me say simply this to all of those who are nominated for positions in north carolina. I'm a jersey boy through and through but I am a son of a north carolinian.
▶ 2:37:17Sen. Booker: My dad grew up in hendersonville up in the mountains. North carolina was his pathway to progress. He went to north carolina central university. I know my dad is now in heaven, he died six days before I was elected into office, but he was north carolina through and through. Congratulations on your nomination. You are representing a great state. Especially seeing the faces behind you if your family, I know that you take this nomination seriously. Thank you, Ms.
▶ 2:37:46Sen. Booker: Carter, for the passion. Would love to explore an area where there has been tremendous bipartisan work, not just in the congress, but all over america, we see such wisdom from red states and blue states learning from mistakes in the 1990's that led to an explosion of incarceration but no reduction in drug use. It is something I have leaned on.
▶ 2:38:13Sen. Booker: Everybody from right on crying to the manhattan institute has been invaluable in my journey in helping me shape policy especially in my days as a mayor. I used to get choked by mitt romney -- joked by mitt romney, I have never drank, smoked, I'm a pretty boring guy, as my fiancé tells me, but I have some frustration but minor auto policy based on science. I want to focus there.
▶ 2:38:46Sen. Booker: On your podcast in 2023, Ms. carter, you talked about cannabis, and you said I don't have any problem if it is legalized and monitored. You supported the use of cannabis for medical purposes. We have bipartisan hearings with military personnel talking about the transformative impact it's had on their ptsd. I just believe we have a moment now we're 40 states have made cannabis legal for medical purposes.
▶ 2:39:12Sen. Booker: Unfortunately, federal law is lagging behind state law, behind popular opinion all across the political spectrum. In fact under federal law, cannabis is still a schedule one drug, the category reserved for the most dangerous drugs, some of which came in on the conversation you were talking about. They say cannabis has no medical value, that is what schedule one says. Cannabis is considered just as dangerous as heroin in the federal system.
▶ 2:39:42Sen. Booker: In 2002, president biden directed the secretary of health and human services to review how cannabis is scheduled and federal law. Health and human services recommended rescheduling cannabis at schedule three. I think that's a step in the right direction and would finally at least recognize that we would not only have benefits but would allow scientists to study the short and long-term health impacts, open up a door to more scientific study.
▶ 2:40:09Sen. Booker: I'm wondering, if confirmed, how would you advise the american president about the ongoing rescheduling process?
▶ 2:40:17Ms. Carter: Thank you so much for your comments, senator. You are right, I am very passionate, I can see that you are passionate as well. This is a bipartisan issue. I look forward to working with you as well as all the republicans here on the committee, other democrats. Thank you. I extend an invitation to speak with you at any time of your choosing. If confirmed as director, I will comply with all federal laws and fulfill all statutory responsibilities.
▶ 2:40:48Ms. Carter: However, we will continue to work extensively with research and data, we will continue to do that and explore all options. I have already met with secretary collins with the veterans administration. All of us are discussing these continued research data that we will be delivering and based on that research and data we can continue to assess I think that is vitally important.
▶ 2:41:13Sen. Booker: I know the federal law prohibits the office of national drug control policy from funding any study or contract relating to legalization included for medically use. It is important but that makes the scheduling of cannabis and drugs difficult. I'm hoping as we work together across the aisle on legislation that would allow the ondcp to study the impact that this might be something that you would support.
▶ 2:41:38Ms. Carter: Absolutely. We will continue to study the impacts of that.
▶ 2:41:42Sen. Booker: I will give some other questions for the record but one quick last question. We are seeing this overdose crisis, seeing communities as you were talking about tragically affected by fentanyl. I believe we need to make sure the people who use drugs or in recovery have access to naloxone which is a proven to reduce overdose deaths. I will put some questions on the record on that.
▶ 2:42:09Sen. Booker: I am very concerned, and I've seen such a bipartisan work in this area, bipartisan bill on this, that the ondcp issuing its drug control strategy of 2026, the top priority to reduce the number of fatal overdoses, scientists saying the top priority. And this is what it reads.
▶ 2:42:30Sen. Booker: "we will encourage state and local jurisdictions to increase the availability of drug test strips and naloxone to mitigate the impact of deadly drugs on communities across the country." I have seen study after study that shows test strips can save lives, even addicts when they have access to test strips, will test the drugs before taking them.
▶ 2:42:55Sen. Booker: I will put these questions on the record, but if confirmed, I hope you will ensure that ondcp increases the availability of fentanyl test strips and naloxone, that we can work together as we have bipartisan legislation here with you to get it passed and done right. The tragedy that we have right now for test strips causing people who are trying to save lives, put them in criminal jeopardy, is really bad. I know we don't have any time left.
▶ 2:43:24Sen. Booker: I look forward to the questions on the record. I want to say one more time, these are wrote hearings, often times the senators on both sides are so busy running two different hearings. I want the people up for nomination to know, and the families especially, that we take this seriously. Everybody sitting on that panel wants to serve their country and the best way possible. Most of you are giving up more lucrative positions to do what you are doing and you are not doing it alone. It's also a family sacrifice.
▶ 2:43:57Sen. Booker: There's a lot of talk about our device in congress, but I can say this for every senator, thank you for stepping forward to serve your nation and take you to every family represented here as well.
▶ 2:44:07Chair Tillis: Thank you, senator booker. Your points on cannabis I think are very well taken. In many respects, I think congress is not doing its job by recognizing that that bill has been wrong. Unless we get serious about regulatory regimens and other -- we have talked about the fentanyl crisis.
▶ 2:44:33Chair Tillis: We all know at some point in the race for potency, these products that are being purchased, technically illegally in 40 different states for medical purposes or several dozen for recreational purposes, congress need to step up and figure out how we can manage this, exploit its efficacy in areas that are helpful particularly for the treatment of persons with ptsd, a number of other studies out there, pain. But we have to step up.
▶ 2:45:03Chair Tillis: I appreciate you making those comments. In my remaining time, hopefully we can get something done. This will conclude our hearing today. I have the privilege of being able to vet the district nominees, so I didn't feel like I had to ask other questions after putting you through hours of discussion between my office and senator budd's. Ms. carter, congratulations on your nomination.
▶ 2:45:31Chair Tillis: This is a unique opportunity with four judges, a couple dozen kids, so I will ask the north carolina delegation to maybe stay behind so we can get a quick picture. I can figure out how to get these kids tablets that they may not have otherwise gotten. I want to especially recognize judge conrad, judge whitney, others in the audience. They are people that I know and admire and appreciate you being here.
▶ 2:45:57Chair Tillis: This meeting -- I will adjourn the meeting shortly. But britain questions for the record may be submitted no later than september 24 at 5:00 p.m. Thanks again to all the witnesses. Thanks to the witnesses, nominees. Congratulations to you and your families. This committee hearing is adjourned.