▶ 0:17:13Chair Grassley: Good afternoon, everybody. We welcome you to today's hearing. We have four district court nominees. Michael hendershot, northern district, ohio, arthur jones, southern district, texas, jeffrey kuntz, southern district, florida, john marck, southern district, texas.
▶ 0:17:39Chair Grassley: In a moment I will turn to our visitors to introduce the nominees, but first I would like to say a few words. Over the weekend, we witnessed another assassination attempt against president trump and members of his cabinet. This is the third attempt in two years, which is unprecedented in our nation's history. The latest attack occurred at the white house correspondents' dinner, a bipartisan event dedicated to freedom of speech and freedom of press.
▶ 0:18:10Chair Grassley: So this is not just an attack on the president but also the first amendment. I have repeatedly encouraged all americans to stop violent rhetoric that led to these attacks. We cannot allow this to become a norm in our country. We must solve our differences through discussion and debate, nonviolence. I want to echo president trump's statement from that evening.
▶ 0:18:37Chair Grassley: We all need to set aside differences and unify as americans. I appreciate the director commitment to transparency and for quickly briefly me and senator durbin about the shooting. I would also like to commend the brave law enforcement officers who acted swiftly to prevent the attack from escalating further. My prayers are with the secret service agent who was injured and his family.
▶ 0:19:06Chair Grassley: The political violence we witnessed on saturday night has many causes. One of them is the orchestrated and intentional fermentation of division among americans. So I was encouraged when acting attorney general todd blanche announced last week that a federal grand jury indicted the southern poverty law center.
▶ 0:19:31Chair Grassley: The indictment alleges the southern poverty law center has been funding extremist groups, paying more than $3 million to leaders of the ku klux klan and the national socialist movement, although the splc has long claimed that it is fighting against these groups. The allegations paint a very different picture.
▶ 0:19:54Chair Grassley: For example, the indictment alleges that the splc paid a person involved in the planning of the infamous unite in the right rally in charlottesville, virginia. Events like that that fanned the flames of division and hatred within our country.
▶ 0:20:17Chair Grassley: The hypocrisy of the southern poverty law center is truly astounding. It labels groups like focus on the family and moms for liberty as extremist hate groups but is now charged with apparently funneling money to actual hate groups like the ku klux klan.
▶ 0:20:41Chair Grassley: Given what has come to light, I am astonished that the biden administration shelved its investigation of the organization, and I applaud blanche's leadership and the justice department for their important work on this case. Director wray's fbi used an information source for anti-catholic enrichment memo.
▶ 0:21:07Chair Grassley: Director patel has put an end to the fbi use of the southern poverty law center as a source. We need to root out groups that are intentionally sowing hatred and division in america, which leads to political violence.
▶ 0:21:30Chair Grassley: Investigating groups like the southern poverty law ci southern poverty law c center ia good first step towards lowering the temperature in our nation and hopefully preventing incidents like this one that we witnessed saturday night. Turning to today's agenda, we have four highly qualified district court nominees. Mr. jones and Mr. marck are court prosecutors.
▶ 0:21:55Chair Grassley: Esther hendershot spent the past 15 years as ohio's chief deputy solicitor general. And judge kuntz has served as an appellate judge in florida for the last decade. They have diverse backgrounds, but they have all demonstrated a commitment to the rule of law and a steadfast devotion to prepare pre protecting americans.
▶ 0:22:22Chair Grassley: We will learn more of each of our nominees from our introducing senators, and I look forward to hearing from each of them. Senator durbin.
▶ 0:22:30Sen. Durbin: Thank you, chairman, and welcome back. Congratulations to the nominees. I thank the chairman for his accommodation in shifting the time of this hearing because of the conflict earlier today. I hope he did not cause great inconvenience to the families and friends of our nominees. At the outset, I want to join the chairman in addressing the shooting over the weekend at the white house correspondents' dinner.
▶ 0:22:57Sen. Durbin: As I have said many times before, there is no excuse for political violence from the right or the left. I am grateful to the secret service for protecting the attendees and the president and quickly apprehending the suspect. I am relieved the agent who was shot was protected by his bullet-proof vest. It appears -- and appears to be moving toward recovery.
▶ 0:23:22Sen. Durbin: The nominees before us are being considered for lifetime appointments to the federal bench. Judges are truly the bulwark for the rule of law which has never been more important as this administration has weaponized the justice department against targets, political targets. Last week, we learned the fbi investigated a new york times journalist. Why was this journalist investigated?
▶ 0:23:49Sen. Durbin: Because she reported the fbi director, kash patel, was using fbi resources to provide his girlfriend with security and transportation. The fbi agents went so far as to recommend an investigation into whether the reporter broke federal stocking laws by seeking to interview the director of the fbi's girlfriend. Yesterday, doj brought its second baseless indictment against former fbi director james comey.
▶ 0:24:20Sen. Durbin: I may not be a big fan of Mr. comey politically, but this is really unusual. This prosecution was personally ordered by the president of the united states, who it appears will never forget Mr. comey for overseeing the investigation as to whether there was any russian interference in the 2016 election. This is the second attempt of this administration to indict this man.
▶ 0:24:44Sen. Durbin: The president's obsession with the russian investigation has also led to the justice department's investigation of a so-called "grand conspiracy against him." this far-fetched maga theory claims deep state has been involved in a conspiracy against president trump that began with the intelligence assessment with russia, who they claim -- who it was claimed was interfering with the 2016 election and continued
▶ 0:25:16Sen. Durbin: Through special counsel jack smith's investigation. We spent meeting after meeting in this committee to talk about jack smith's investigation. Ironically, Mr. smith, who has agreed to appear before this committee months ago, had to testify under oath, has never been called by the republican majority in the senate.
▶ 0:25:39Sen. Durbin: Inconveniently for conspiracy advocates, senator marco rubio led a bipartisan intelligence committee investigation that found what he called "irrefutable evidence of russian meddling in the election. " another problem is the investigation of gen special counsel john durham, appointed to investigate the russian investigation.
▶ 0:26:03Sen. Durbin: Trump promised durham would uncover the crime of the century, but he spent four years and millions of dollars to no avail. No matter. Acting a acting attorney general todd blanche is forging ahead in a desperate attempt to placate the president. The first step was venue shopping. Justice department opened investigation in what investigation in w fort pierce, florida. Why fort pierce, florida?
▶ 0:26:32Sen. Durbin: Because there is a federal judge sitting in the courthouse, so she has been known to rubberstamp the justice department's investigative steps. Next, the justice department sidelined career prosecutors and installed loyalists who are willing to pursue this baseless investigation. Earlier this month, a maga loyalist appointed as counsel to the attorney general to help lead the "grand conspiracy" investigation.
▶ 0:27:03Sen. Durbin: He was appointed after the senior career prosecutor in charge of the investigation was abruptly removed. He previously claimed the russian investigation was a plot to frame president trump. He was also part of the legal team led by rudy giuliani that aimed to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
▶ 0:27:27Sen. Durbin: Last week acting attorney general blanche met with him in south florida to discuss the case and posted on social media "welcome to the fight, joe." this administration's lawless conduct makes clear it has never been more important for jesters who -- judges who are dedicated to the law without fear or favor. Will these nominees be independent in their thinking or rubberstamp? Will they defend the rule of law?
▶ 0:27:59Sen. Durbin: Will questions be asked to get to the bottom of those questions? I yield.
▶ 0:28:03Chair Grassley: We will now turn to the introductions of the nominees. We have introductions by senator husted followed by colleagues on the committee. Because of scheduling conflicts, senator moreno asked me to enter his opening introduction for Mr. hendershot into the record which we will do now without objection. Senator cruz asked me to do the same for his opening introductions of Mr. jones and Mr. marck, and I will likewise do that without objection.
▶ 0:28:32Chair Grassley: So, senator husted, thank you for taking the time to join us today. You may proceed.
▶ 0:28:37Sen. Husted: Thank you, Mr. chairman. It is my honor to welcome fellow island Mr. hendershot for his nomination to be U.S. district judge for the northern district of ohio. Mr.
▶ 0:28:50Sen. Husted: Hendershot earned degrees from ohio wesleyan university and the university of virginia, where he received his jd, before building a distinguished legal career in both public-service and private practice.
▶ 0:29:09Sen. Husted: He now serves as the chief deputy solicitor general in the office of the ohio attorney general, where he has defended ohio's laws and significant cases and has mentored future attorneys as a law professor at the ohio state university. Throughout my time working in public service in ohio, I have had the pleasure of working with michael hendershot.
▶ 0:29:36Sen. Husted: He has built a hard-earned and well-deserved reputation as a brilliant legal thinker, writer, and oral advocate. He is respected and admired by his clients, the courts in which he has argued cases, and even opposing counsel. Both when I served as ohio secretary of state -- when I served as ohio secretary of state, my mission was to make it easy to vote and hard to cheat.
▶ 0:30:04Sen. Husted: The goal continued during my time in the senate and during my time as ohio chief elections officer. Michael hendershot was an invaluable partner in our fight for common sense election security policies. He argued several cases defending ohio's election laws, ensuring that it lived up to the standard of making it indeed easy to vote and hard to cheat.
▶ 0:30:30Sen. Husted: He was on the front lines of this battle during pivotal moment, defending ohio's voter role maintenance policies when they were challenged all the way to the U.S. supreme court in husted versus phillipe randolph, a case that set a national standard after ohio won in the supreme court.
▶ 0:30:53Sen. Husted: I would like to thank michael hendershot for his years of public service, to the people of ohio, and for being a great partner in our endeavors to make our elections secure. I am certain indeed that michael hendershot will once again serve the people of ohio with honor and distinction in his new role as U.S. district judge for the northern district of ohio should my colleagues confirm him.
▶ 0:31:20Sen. Husted: A confirmation I strongly support. Mr. hendershot, thank you for being here.
▶ 0:31:27Sen. Cornyn: Thank you, senator husted. Now I will turn to our colleague on the committee, senator moody, for her introduction.
▶ 0:31:35Sen. Moody: Thank you, Mr. chairman. It is great to be here this afternoon. To all the nominees that are here, let me start by thanking you and your families for appearing before this committee, for offering yourselves up for service, not . It is not just a person enters the service but the families that surround them that often take the criticism that comes with that so thank you for being willing to serve your country.
▶ 0:32:04Sen. Moody: I want to underscore that nomination by the president of the united states to receive a lifetime appointment to the bench is more than just an honor. I can only imagine how hard you all worked from law school on to get to this point in your careers. And I can only imagine the pride your loved ones are feeling right now and what they felt when they learned you would be here sitting today to be voted out of committee and voted on by the senate as a nominee for the president of the united states.
▶ 0:32:35Sen. Moody: Certainly an honor. The country is going to be better off for your service. And it is a high bar. The federal bench is certainly one that many worked their entire lives to become a part of. It is a great honor.
▶ 0:32:49Sen. Moody: And with that position will come intense responsibility and integrity to maintain the highest standard of care in that position and understand that along with that will come scrutiny because the people have to have a place where they can go and take grievances and conflicts and discord and know that it will be heard by an independent, fair, impartial jurist.
▶ 0:33:17Sen. Moody: And that is a heavy responsibility, especially in this day and age, one that we ask you to take on. To know that we are all grateful for that, and I am especially proud to see a floridian with us today that has been nominated, jeffrey kuntz. Chief judge kuntz is an experienced lawyer and jurist who has built a reputation for excellence, integrity, and deep respect for the rule of law. He received his ba from boston college in 2003 and of college in 2003 and obtained his jd in 2006.
▶ 0:33:52Sen. Moody: After law school, he entered private practice where he focused on federal appellate litigation. And during that time, he briefed and argued cases in florida appellate courts, multiple federal circuit courts, and even the united states supreme court. In 2016, my colleague, the senior senator from the state of florida with less hair, senator scott, appointed judge kuntz to serve on florida's fourth district court of appeal.
▶ 0:34:20Sen. Moody: And at that time, I will note that judge kuntz was the youngest person ever appointed to the position. And as someone who was the youngest judge in florida at the time I became a judge, I understand the work ethic and the commitment that is required to not only meet expectations but exceed those expectations. And I think you did just that, sir.
▶ 0:34:47Sen. Moody: Recognized by your colleagues later for your leadership and commitment to the court by your election to serve as chief judge in florida's fourth district court of appeal, a role in which you still serve today. That is quite an honor to be elected by her colleagues. Chief judge kuntz's experience both as an advocate and judge has prepared him well for service on the federal bench. I am so proud as florida's newest united states senator introduced him today as a nominee to serve as a united states district judge for the southern district of florida.
▶ 0:35:18Sen. Moody: Congratulations, sir, to you and your family. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 0:35:23Sen. Cornyn: Thank you, senator moody. I am honored to introduce Mr. arthur rob jones and Mr. john marck. The lone star state is proud to produce some of the finest attorneys and judges in the nation so I am glad to be able to sing the praises of two more of these public servants.
▶ 0:35:53Sen. Cornyn: Rob jones received his ba from indiana university and his jd from georgetown. He served his country and was active duty in the U.S. air force until 2002 when he transitioned to the U.S. air force reserves. During this time, he served as a circuit trial counsel from 2002 to 2004.
▶ 0:36:12Sen. Cornyn: And from 2004 to 2023 as an assistant staff judge advocate at joint base andrews on your san antonio lackland and retired at the rate of lt. Col.. He served as U.S. attorney in texas beginning in 2002, first in the laredo division and later in the houston division.
▶ 0:36:38Sen. Cornyn: In 2021, he was promoted to deputy criminal chief and in 2024, he was promoted to his current role as executive assistant, U.S. attorney -- executive assistant U.S. attorney. Not to be outdone, john marck received his ba from brooklyn college. Part of the city of the university of new york, and his jd from the st. John's university school of law.
▶ 0:37:04Sen. Cornyn: He served as a prosecutor in new york city, first as a special district district attorney in brooklyn and later as an assistant district attorney in the bronx. In 2021, he experienced what I would imagine was quite a culture change and became an assistant united states attorney in the southern district of texas. And in 2024, he joined the national security of public corruption section and was later voted to associate deputy criminal chief.
▶ 0:37:31Sen. Cornyn: Mark served -- marck served as assistant U.S. attorney in 2010 if I, overseeing three divisions, and since march 2026, he has served as the acting U.S. attorney for the southern district of texas. With such fine credentials, it is no surprise president trump has selected both of these men to serve as U.S. district judges, and I am honored to say a few words in support of their nominations here today.
▶ 0:38:01Sen. Cornyn: So to both of you, rob and john, congratulations on your nominations. I look forward to supporting both of you here in the committee and on the senate floor. Let me ask all of the nominees please to step forward, and I will administer the oaths. So don't sit down yet. Raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? Thank you.
▶ 0:38:33Sen. Cornyn: Each of the witnesses answered in the affirmative. And as usually happens, the senate schedules multiple things to occur at exactly the same time. So there is a vote going on. The chairman is voting out and I and others will be peeling off periodically to go do the same and attend to other business.
▶ 0:38:59Sen. Cornyn: But it is our normal process if you desire to introduce people that are here with you, including your family, and then for you to give an opening statement. So we will start on the left with Mr. hendershot and then move down the line. Mr. hendershot, the floor is yours.
▶ 0:39:16Mr. Hendershot: Thank you, chair grassley, ranking member durbin, acting chair caornyn. I just want to spend a few moments thinking those that are the reason I am in this chair. Really, there are hundreds of people who should be thanked for me sitting here today. It begins of course with the president. Thank you, president trump, for this nomination. It is truly the honor of a lifetime.
▶ 0:39:45Mr. Hendershot: Thank you for the confidence the nomination shows in the judge I will be if fortune enough to be confirmed. Thank you to senator moreno and houston for their support. My parents could not be here today. Preplanned cataract surgery got in the way of that, but my brother andy -- but they are with my brother andy back in ohio watching on television.
▶ 0:40:11Mr. Hendershot: There is a lot I can say to my parents, but when I was born with a birth defect and the doctors handed me over to my parents, the doctors told him to expect learning disabilities, speech disabilities, but they did not accept that, in their fight for me has made all the difference why I am sitting here today. Other personal things, in the room with me today, my wife, three kids, mother-in-law. A special shout out to gwen, who was with my daughter with special needs.
▶ 0:40:39Mr. Hendershot: I am not sure her attention span is up to the task for the entirety of this hearing. Also, to my wife, the best partner one could hope for. All the many challenges life has thrown at you and us, you have been tougher than all of them. Incredibly proud to be your husband. Professional thanks to judge jerry smith, who hired me to be a law clerk as my first job out of law school.
▶ 0:41:01Mr. Hendershot: I learned from him what it is to have passion for the rule of law every day, what he continues to do at age 80. And who hired me as a law clerk in ohio, probably a low ebb of my life. I lost my first wife to an unexpected d death and was not sure I wanted to continue practicing law but is responsible for me being here today.
▶ 0:41:28Mr. Hendershot: Finally, to the governor, the attorney general who hired me to continue to spike the flame of serving the public in a public role. They have both been excellent public servants for the people of ohio and I look to carry on their tradition in a different capacity. Thank you to the committee. I will pass the baton to my left and look forward to the questions and discussion.
▶ 0:41:53Sen. Cornyn: Mr. jones.
▶ 0:41:54Mr. Jones: Thank you, senator cornyn. Good afternoon, chairman grassley. Good afternoon, chairman grassley. >> Mr. chairman, that is the unfortunate reality of politics today. We are always trying to sabotage a good nominee. I apologize thomas I apologize th, sir.
▶ 0:42:20Sen. Cornyn: We will not blame you, senator booker.
▶ 0:42:24Mr. Jones: Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak with you today about the nomination. I would first like to thank president trump for nominating me to this very important position. I am extreme grateful for and humbled by the faith he has placed in me to serve as a district judge in the southern district of texas. This nomination is the greatest honor of my life.
▶ 0:42:46Mr. Jones: I would also like to thank both senator cornyn for his generous introduction and senator cruz, who I believe contributed to it as well. I am also grateful to both of them for recommending the president nominate me to the federal bench. Nobody ever gets to this point in their life and career on his or her own, and I am no exception. I would like to thank all of my family and friends for their love and support throughout my life and legal career.
▶ 0:43:16Mr. Jones: I could not have gotten here without them. I would specifically like to thank my wife, who has traveled here today, for all her love, dedication, and devotion over the last 25 plus years. I am also grateful to my mother, my father, and my sister, and her family for everything they have done to make me who I am today.
▶ 0:43:40Mr. Jones: My mother has unfortunately had some recent health troubles and is unable to attend this hearing, but I am sure she is proudly watching at home in wisconsin with my father and sister. I would also like to thank my friends who traveled to this hearing as well as those supporting me back home in texas. As you know, my entire legal career has been in public service. It has been a calling for me and remains so.
▶ 0:44:03Mr. Jones: I look forward to entering the questions you may have for me, and my hope is after I do so you will vote to confirm me and I can continue to serve the people of the united states in the southern district of texas as the southern judge.
▶ 0:44:14Sen. Cornyn: Kuntz -- Mr. kuntz.
▶ 0:44:18Mr. Kuntz: Thank you. I would like to thank president trump for entrusting me with the privilege to be nominated to the southern district of florida district where I spent much of my career as an attorney. I would also like to think my two home state senators, senator moody and senator scott. I appreciate your support for this position, senator moody's introduction, and especially appreciate the trust senator scott placed in me 10 years ago when he appointed me as the youngest intermediate appellate judge in court history.
▶ 0:44:49Mr. Kuntz: I would not be here where I am without my family. First, my wife who hopes raise our two boys who are here today. I would not be sitting here without her support and I could not be more proud of the young men our children are becoming. The next, my parents who are here and raised me to be who I am today. Additionally, my in-laws, sister-in-law, brothers-in-law, nieces, nephews, many of whom are here today, and some at home watching remotely.
▶ 0:45:16Mr. Kuntz: I unfortunate for the attorneys in every step of life that have supported me and are also watching from home. Finally come I want to thank my colleagues in the fourth district court of appeal for their support the last nearly 10 years. I am privileged to serve with them. Thank you all very much, and I look forward to your questions.
▶ 0:45:34Sen. Cornyn: Mr. marck.
▶ 0:45:36Mr. Marck: Thank you. Chairman grassley, raking member durbin, and numbers of the committee, thank you for the privilege of appearing before you today. To start, I wish to thank president trump. His nomination is one of the greatest honors of my life, and I am deeply grateful for his trust and confidence in me. I also want to extend my sincere thanks to senators cornyn and cruz. Their support throughout this process has meant more than I can express. There are people with me today with whom I would not be sitting in this room.
▶ 0:46:07Mr. Marck: My wife britney, my partner of more than a decade has been standing beside me through long hours, hard cases, and every sacrifice that comes with the life of public service. I owe her everything. To my mother and the rest of my family and friends who made the trip to D.C. to be here today thank you. I could not have gotten here without each one of you. And finally to my father, who just passed away eight weeks ago. He did not make it to this day, but I know with certainty he is here with us.
▶ 0:46:35Mr. Marck: Thank you all again, and I welcome the questions.
▶ 0:46:38Sen. Cornyn: I noticed Mr. marck you had one dissenting point of view who was removed by the room. Was that by your mother?
▶ 0:46:51Mr. Marck: No, that was by my aunt. He may be back.
▶ 0:46:55Sen. Cornyn: We are that all of you can bring your friends and family members with you to join us on this day. This is an extra in every honor being bestowed on all of you -- an extraordinary honor being bestowed on all of you. There is a lesson I learned early in my senate career, and that is when there is not a lot of people on this side of the dais, that is good news. That means it is not to clearly -- whatever the subject matter is is not particularly controversial. So I wish you all the best.
▶ 0:47:27Sen. Cornyn: I really -- senator grassley will be back here shortly after voting, and I will go do the same. Let me just ask Mr. hendershot and Mr. jones, Mr. kuntz, Mr. marck, justice alito talked about the importance of an independent shear rate and something that made the united states unique pointing out that many countries including the former soviet union had a parchment constitution but when it came to actually implementing
▶ 0:48:00Sen. Cornyn: The highfalutin rhetoric in that constitution, they failed the test because they did not have an independent judiciary. In this front political environment, we need an independent judiciary, people who will call balls and strikes that regard who wins and who loses and will faithfully enforce the law as written. Mr. hendershot, can you offer some of your thoughts about the importance of an independent judiciary?
▶ 0:48:27Sen. Cornyn: After all, you are going to have life tenure so you don't have to run for election. You don't have to raise any money. You don't even have to make anybody happy. But your thoughts about the role with the independent judiciary.
▶ 0:48:43Mr. Hendershot: Thank you, senator, for the chance to address that. I would say first I had the privilege of working for two judges, so I got to witness firsthand in each of those two years what it looks like to approach the law with humility, to approach the law with respect. I think both of those are important ingredients in treating the judiciary's independent branch under article three.
▶ 0:49:08Mr. Hendershot: What I would say also is in terms of acting as independent judiciary, I think that requires judicial courage. One thing I would point to is the last 15 years of my career I have been defending whatever the policies of ohio maybe for the legislature, governor, universities, so forth. It has not always make me popular.
▶ 0:49:32Mr. Hendershot: As you heard, about voter integrity laws or those of capital punishment, they have cost me social and professional relationships by defending those things. That kind of coverage I commit to bringing to the bench because I think it is an important aspect of judging as your remarks indicate, senator.
▶ 0:49:47Sen. Cornyn: Mr. jones.
▶ 0:49:50Mr. Jones: Senator, I echo a lot of the remarks of the nominee to my right. And I also believe that the independence of the judiciary is vital to our country. And I would be -- I would look at any case where I would be -- were lucky enough to be confirmed solely on the facts and the law and would follow those and would not have any regard for anything other than that in my courtroom.
▶ 0:50:21Mr. Jones: And in my career, long career as a prosecutor, I have often had to make some difficult decisions regarding facts that would come in on whether to prosecute someone, not prosecute someone. And sometimes those decisions were not always popular, but I always tried to do the right thing, but I thought was right based on the facts and the law. And I believe I would do the exact same thing as a judge where I lucky enough to be confirmed.
▶ 0:50:48Sen. Cornyn: Judge kuntz.
▶ 0:50:50Mr. Kuntz: Thank you, senator. I as I judge the last 10 years come I have the privilege to see the importance of an independent judiciary. I have judged is I have judged each case without regard for who they work and I followed the law in each case.
▶ 0:51:08Sen. Cornyn: And Mr. marck.
▶ 0:51:10Mr. Marck: Thank you, senator. I echo the sentiments of my co-nominees. Being a career prosecutor, I had the opportunity to be in a lot of courtrooms. Varying degrees throughout my tenure. And I can tell you that an independent judiciary is critical to our country. It is critical to our rule of law, and I would do my utmost if I am so lucky to be confirmed to make sure that I follow the rule of law accordingly.
▶ 0:51:37Sen. Cornyn: Thank you. Mr. chairman, I will turn the gavel back over to you.
▶ 0:51:42Chair Grassley: Thank you, Mr. chairman. Mr. jones, I see that you joined the organization gun owners of america in 2025. Is that correct?
▶ 0:51:53Mr. Jones: Yes, senator, that is correct.
▶ 0:51:57Sen. Durbin: My staff has learned that gun owners of america has criticized the national rifle association as being to moderate. Claiming that it is the only no compromise gun lobby. It has taken extreme positions on firearm safety. For example, the group you joined for the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives to be abolished.
▶ 0:52:24Sen. Durbin: And as former -- its former executive director claimed all gun laws are unconstitutional. Why did you join gun owners of america?
▶ 0:52:34Mr. Jones: Mr. ranking member durbin, I simply joined that organization with nothing other than the lowest level membership are good I am a long time firearms owner. It is nothing more than I saw them as a general advocacy group. I can assure the court.
▶ 0:52:59Mr. Jones: However, I can assure the committee, however, that while I am aware they often engage or occasionally engage with litigation on matters. If I were so lucky to be confirmed, I would resign my membership in that organization because I believe I would be required to do so.
▶ 0:53:16Sen. Durbin: Do you share the gun owners of america view that the second amendment renders all gun laws unconstitutional?
▶ 0:53:25Mr. Jones: Senator, respectfully, I think if I were to enter that question, it could involve both a political question and something that can come before me.
▶ 0:53:35Sen. Durbin: Here is where we start, Mr. jones. You voluntarily joined this organization with radical views. And now that is part of your biography before this committee. If you want to make it clear that you now have changed your views or explain why you joined the organization, here is your chance. But to duck it and say I don't have to comment on this is to leave us with a conclusion you agree with them.
▶ 0:54:00Mr. Jones: Senator durbin, I don't believe I am ducking it. I don't believe first of all with the characterization of it being radical. But I would say that I don't believe as a nominee, if I were to be confirmed, cases that could come before me on the bench could involve issues involving the second amendment.
▶ 0:54:21Mr. Jones: I don't think it would be appropriate for me in this hearing to comment on my view of the second abutment and what I believe it entails second amendment and what I believe it entails. I think that would be inappropriate as a judicial nominee.
▶ 0:54:34Sen. Durbin: So you say that their position that all gun laws are unconstitutional is not radical?
▶ 0:54:40Mr. Jones: Again, senator, I would say it would be improper for me to opine on something like that since matters could come before me. But I would say that for most organizations, if someone joins one that does not necessarily mean they agree with everything someone in the organization may say later on or at some point.
▶ 0:55:00Sen. Durbin: Mr. hendershot, if you are confirmed to the district court and issue a decision, with the parties before you be required to comply with your decisions and any orders you may orders you m and the district court may issue?
▶ 0:55:17Mr. Hendershot: Senator, that would be my petition considering a stay or appeal. That would be my expectation.
▶ 0:55:25Sen. Durbin: Once that process is exhausted, appeals or whatever, do you expect the parties to follow the orders of the court?
▶ 0:55:32Mr. Hendershot: I would expect that, senator.
▶ 0:55:36Sen. Durbin: I ask because between 2021 and 2023, you defended ohio's legislative and congressional maps in court. The ohio supreme court ruled five times the state legislative maps violated the state constitution and also struck down the state's congressional map twice. If you are confirmed to the district court, will you condone or permit that kind of repeated resistance to court orders that the ohio redistricting commission engaged in?
▶ 0:56:05Mr. Hendershot: Well, senator, as my colleague mentioned, I think the judicial canon applies to us as nominees. I think to engage with a hypothetical about, for example, a map or something like that would be inside the space. I am happy to talk about my role.
▶ 0:56:25Sen. Durbin: So you believe it is arguable as to whether or not a party is bound by a court order?
▶ 0:56:30Mr. Hendershot: No, senator. I don't think that is what I'm saying. My understanding of the canon is to not prejudge a case other than talking about issues at a high level of generality. Otherwise, I could prejudge a case that me be pending.
▶ 0:56:49Sen. Durbin: This is the opposite. You were not prejudging. You were represent a client who was resisting a court order -- representing a client who was resisting a court order. The supreme court of the state ruled five times that the maps violated the state constitution. Are you saying to me that as judge you would expect a lawful order to be followed? Is that correct?
▶ 0:57:15Mr. Hendershot: Yes, senator. I do expect lawful orders to be followed. I am distinction between the hypothetical that I took you to be asking about and my role to represent certain members of the ohio redistricting commission. I will note that there were seven members of that separately represented as that litigation went on. There was even further separation of the representation , including that I ended up not representing members for the entire time of the litigation you described.
▶ 0:57:43Sen. Durbin: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 0:57:46Chair Grassley: Senator kennedy.
▶ 0:57:47Sen. Kennedy: Thank you, Mr. chairman. Mr. hendershot, when does the president have to get permission of the united states congress to use military force?
▶ 0:58:03Mr. Hendershot: Senator kennedy, as I was discussing with ranking member durbin, I do want to be careful about hypotheticals.
▶ 0:58:13Sen. Kennedy: It is not a hypothetical. I am asking what the constitution says. When does the president of the united states have to get permission from congress to use military force?
▶ 0:58:24Mr. Hendershot: Generally, senator, my understanding is the division between article one and article to distinguish between the war powers which are under article one and require congressional consent. Again, talking in generalities. Whereas other use of force, if I understand your question, are things likely committed under article two to the president as commander-in-chief powers.
▶ 0:58:51Sen. Kennedy: I have no idea what you just said, Mr. hendershot. Let's try it again. Tell me when the president has to go to congress to get permission to use military force.
▶ 0:58:57Mr. Hendershot: Senator, because of the text of the constitution, article one talks about declarations of war. Those would be circumstances where the president would in a general sense. An use of force is not war under the commander-in-chief power, those are under article two without the consultation of congress.
▶ 0:59:20Sen. Kennedy: Ok. I'm sorry. I don't mean to be read. I just don't understand what you said. Mr. jones.
▶ 0:59:50Sen. Kennedy: Let's suppose the mayor of a city -- strike that. Let's suppose the mayor of a city goes to his or her city council and gets a rule freezing rents. Are you with me?
▶ 1:00:12Mr. Jones: Yes.
▶ 1:00:14Sen. Kennedy: Freezing all rents .
▶ 1:00:16Mr. Jones: Yes.
▶ 1:00:17Sen. Kennedy: Forever and a day. Let's make it even more interesting. Reducing rents by 20% because housing is a problem. Right? Cost of housing.
▶ 1:00:33Sen. Kennedy: Let's suppose to try to help people with housing costs the city, mayor, and council uses its power under the state constitution is lowering all rents by 20%.
▶ 1:00:52Sen. Kennedy: And as a result, because the cost of insurance, electricity, and that sort of thing, about half of the landlords in the city just say we will have to default on our mortgage. Constitutionally, can the city do that?
▶ 1:01:10Mr. Jones: Well, senator, I think it could depend. I think the city could have some ability to freeze rents. But I think you would have to look at the --
▶ 1:01:21Sen. Kennedy: Why?
▶ 1:01:27Sen. Kennedy: Why is that a taking?
▶ 1:01:29Mr. Jones: It certainly could be a taking.
▶ 1:01:30Sen. Kennedy: When does that become a taking? At what point?
▶ 1:01:34Mr. Jones: I think you would have to look at the impact, the financial impact.
▶ 1:01:38Sen. Kennedy: Ok. Let's suppose -- that is fair. Let's suppose 40% of the landlords would default on their mortgage. Have you reached the point of a taking or not? And how do you determine when you have reached the point of a taking?
▶ 1:01:55Mr. Jones: Again, I think it could depend, but they would have to be showing what the financial impact was.
▶ 1:02:02Sen. Kennedy: Yes, sir. I'm sorry, I don't mean to be rude. We just have so little time. I understand you have to have a showing. Tell me what the rule is.
▶ 1:02:11Mr. Jones: I think the rule is if you are taking property -- the government I should say taking property for a legitimate government purpose, I think you can only do that by compensating the owner of the property.
▶ 1:02:24Sen. Kennedy: Any freeze on rent is an act of imminent domain?
▶ 1:02:30Mr. Jones: Not necessarily, senator. I think in your hypothetical, at least as I understood it, you were talking about a financial impact. Not just freezing at the moment, but going on down the road.
▶ 1:02:42Sen. Kennedy: In the hypothetical I gave you, who is going to win if the landlord -- the city or the landlords?
▶ 1:02:50Mr. Jones: I think it would again depend.
▶ 1:02:52Sen. Kennedy: You are not going to give me the answer, are you?
▶ 1:02:55Mr. Jones: I think it could depend. I know it is a very lawyerly answer.
▶ 1:02:59Sen. Kennedy: Yes, it is. Let me ask you a question in the few minutes that I have. Tell me under what circumstances the state legislature can draft a statute that makes a distinction that classifies people on the basis of race.
▶ 1:03:27Mr. Kuntz: Senator, chair grassley, may I answer?
▶ 1:03:31Chair Grassley: Yes.
▶ 1:03:32Mr. Kuntz: Thank you, senator. I think the circumstances would depend on the specifics.
▶ 1:03:39Sen. Kennedy: Just give me some examples.
▶ 1:03:43Mr. Kuntz: Senator, on the basis, I mean, I don't think the united states up in court has held there should be efficient.
▶ 1:03:55Sen. Kennedy: No, you have to have a compelling reason.
▶ 1:03:57Mr. Kuntz: That is true, senator.
▶ 1:03:59Sen. Kennedy: So tell me what would be a compelling reason.
▶ 1:04:02Mr. Kuntz: Senator, as we sit here today, I cannot give you a compelling reason.
▶ 1:04:06Sen. Kennedy: Ok, I appreciate your honesty. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:04:11Sen. Coons: To each of you and your families, congratulations, and thank you for continuing to serve the public. Mr. marck, tell me about the 22nd amendment. What does it provide?
▶ 1:04:27Mr. Marck: The 22nd amendment, senator -- my career has mostly been in criminal prosecution. I have not had an opportunity to use that one specifically.
▶ 1:04:38Sen. Coons: Anyone able to help him on the 22nd amendment to the united states constitution? >> senator, I believe it is the abutment that deals with a two-term limit.
▶ 1:04:52Sen. Coons: Correct. It states no person should be able to run for president worthen twice. Mr. marck, is the president eligible to run in 2028. ?
▶ 1:05:06Mr. Marck: Senator, without considering all the facts, considering the situation, this to be strikes as more of a hypothetical.
▶ 1:05:13Sen. Coons: Is not a hypothetical. Has president trump been elected twice?
▶ 1:05:18Mr. Marck: President trump has been certified as president of the united states twice.
▶ 1:05:23Sen. Coons: Is he eligible to run a third term under our constitution?
▶ 1:05:25Mr. Marck: I would have to review.
▶ 1:05:27Sen. Coons: All I need to tell you is the link which the constitutional amendment makes it clear he is not eligible to run for a third term. Anybody else brave enough to say the constitution of the united states prevents president trump from seeking a third term? Anybody willing to apply the constitution by its plain language in the 22nd amendment? Nobody. All right. Let's move on. Mr. kuntz, what is race judy kotter? How does it apply?
▶ 1:05:58Mr. Kuntz: It is a judicial doctrine that prevents a judge in one case it applies to you cannot go to a court after final judgment in one case and have it litigate the same thing again.
▶ 1:06:13Sen. Coons: How is that distinct from what precludes litigating the same things?
▶ 1:06:19Mr. Kuntz: One involves the same party, the other involves the same things.
▶ 1:06:24Sen. Coons: What is a requirement for these two documents to apply?
▶ 1:06:29Mr. Kuntz: Notice, opportunity to be heard, final judgment of a court of confident jurisdiction.
▶ 1:06:35Sen. Coons: Anyone disagree? If I might, Mr. kuntz -- is it pronounced the same way mine is?
▶ 1:06:44Mr. Kuntz: Yes, it is. Yes, senator.
▶ 1:06:48Sen. Coons: My family's name was spelled that way when we came to the country. The president was suing appe the pulitzer prize board fr defamation. When were you on that case?
▶ 1:07:03Mr. Kuntz: I first learned of that case in approximately january 2025.
▶ 1:07:07Sen. Coons: Not when the briefs have been filed?
▶ 1:07:10Mr. Kuntz: No, senator. The way in which an hour court, we are not assigned cases once the cases are filed. The court randomly assigned it to the judges.
▶ 1:07:19Sen. Coons: When did you first speak to senator scott's office about your interest in a district court seat in the southern district of florida?
▶ 1:07:25Mr. Kuntz: I mean, I have had many conversations in senator scott's office. One I believe was in november of 2024. I don't know the date, but it is in my senate judiciary questionnaire.
▶ 1:07:38Sen. Coons: When did you release the opinion ruling in favor of president trump?
▶ 1:07:43Mr. Kuntz: I learned of the case in january 2025 and I believe it was released february 12, 2025.
▶ 1:07:50Sen. Coons: That is correct. So you should end opinion where one of the litigants before you was the president and in favor of the president while you were in active conversation with the senator's office about seeking a federal judicial appointment. Is that correct?
▶ 1:08:05Mr. Kuntz: For a position I did not affect.
▶ 1:08:07Sen. Coons: How did you end up in front of me today?
▶ 1:08:11Mr. Kuntz: Different position, senator.
▶ 1:08:12Sen. Coons: Did you consider recusing yourself from that particular decision?
▶ 1:08:15Mr. Kuntz: No. And did not call for me to recuse myself. I do not have an interest in the litigation. None of the bases called for recusal in the floor the supreme court. We are not to recuse unless one of the basis exists.
▶ 1:08:32Sen. Coons: Does the florida cannons not require you to recuse if one of the parties before you has an interest that could be reasonably concluded by any common citizen to cloud your judgment on that?
▶ 1:08:45Mr. Kuntz: Senator, I disagree with that characterization. I have not heard from the white house until after the opinion was final.
▶ 1:08:52Sen. Coons: When did you interview with the white house counsel's office?
▶ 1:08:56Mr. Kuntz: At the end of february 2025. I don't know the date but I believe it is in my senate judiciary questionnaire.
▶ 1:09:02Sen. Coons: Thank you for your testimony on that matter. Mr. hendershot, if you would take a minute and talk me through how they already from from each other.
▶ 1:09:12Mr. Hendershot: Senator, I am not sure I can improve much on judge kuntz. I think often judicata is used as a catchall term but the difference between claims that may not have been brought but could have been brought potentially, it is more of a thing decided as the latin would suggest.
▶ 1:09:32Sen. Coons: Thank you. Do you agree judges should not be influenced by external pressure to rule in any particular way?
▶ 1:09:40Mr. Hendershot: Yes, senator, I do.
▶ 1:09:42Sen. Coons: President stated much of this year at a public event "we have rogue judges that are criminals. They are criminals what they do to our country, the decisions they hand down and hurt our country." is it possible for a judge's decision to be correct as a matter of fact and law even if it differs from the president's desired outcome?
▶ 1:10:01Mr. Hendershot: Senator, I want to tread carefully because of the canon five in terms of commenting on political matters, but in the abstract, yes. Decisions can be correct and any citizen can criticize what a judge has done. That is their right to speak.
▶ 1:10:18Sen. Coons: Thank you. Thank you all for your testimony.
▶ 1:10:22Chair Grassley: Mr. hendershot, you have had 15 years in the solicitor general's office in you are very important state and have handled a lot of cases and appeals in that case. How has your extended tenure in that office prepared you for the federal bench?
▶ 1:10:40Mr. Hendershot: Thank you for the chance to elaborate on that, senator. I would say one way that I may be talked about a bit earlier was working for and with excellent lawyers and excellent leaders like now the governor and the attorney general, seeing their humility in approaching difficult questions and commitment to the rule of law.
▶ 1:11:02Mr. Hendershot: I think at a more concrete level come over those 15 years I have litigated many of the kinds of issues that come for interest to court, whether it is the antidiscrimination statutes, section 1983 litigation, habeas litigation, all manner of state and federal constitutional issues, jurisdictional questions, and I will not go onto bore the room with the extended list but it gives me a running start in terms of the broad base of things that come before a district court.
▶ 1:11:30Chair Grassley: Mr. jones, you have been involved in military prosecutions and cases and also as an assistant attorney. Tell me what drives your commitment to serve both military and civilian service and now on the federal bench.
▶ 1:11:47Mr. Jones: Thank you, chairman grassley. Well, and has generally been a commitment to justice and to serving the people of the united states. I have found that both right out of law school when I joined the united states air force jag court, it gave me a tremendous opportunity to do that to serve my country as well as use what I think it's probably my best skill set as an attorney to do that in the courtroom both on
▶ 1:12:23Mr. Jones: The prosecution and the defense side, defending the active duty service members and also once I transitioned from the air force over to the united states attorney's office, it was the same thing. I was at a point in my career where I had tried a decent number of cases in the military, and I was probably going to be moving into more of a management role, but I wanted to continue to serve the people and the country but also using the best skills I thought I had to do
▶ 1:12:53Mr. Jones: That. I thought that was to stay in the courtroom. And that was an opportunity the southern district of texas gave me first in laredo on the border with mexico where I learned a lot of the issues that are vital to protecting not only the people of this other district of texas but the entire united states and spent over eight years there before moving up to houston and eventually moving into management there in the houston office. Seeing the bigger picture, but also still trying cases.
▶ 1:13:25Mr. Jones: And I think all of that commitment to public service and to using the skills that I believe I did possess to the best effect to help and serve the people of the united states. I would hope to be able to do that and use those same skills and dedication on the federal bench if confirmed.
▶ 1:13:41Chair Grassley: Judge kuntz, I know you have had several hundred cases or maybe thousands of cases. I don't know. A lot of opinions that you had to do. I would like to know what you learned as a state judge that will help you on the federal bench.
▶ 1:13:58Mr. Kuntz: Thank you, chair grassley. It is in fact thousands of cases I have been fortunate enough to preside over on the fourth district court of appeal. The court, we handle all types of cases in the state of florida in our district other than the death penalty. They go to us have been fortunate to handle different types of cases, different types of issues, working with colleagues, very exceptional callings that have helped teach me.
▶ 1:14:25Mr. Kuntz: And I think I would bring all of that, especially the scope of the practice areas that are put before us if I am fortunate enough to be confirmed.
▶ 1:14:32Chair Grassley: Mr. marck, I am a person that has a great interest in victims' rights. In your view, what role does a judge play in protecting victims' rights, and what have you learned as a prosecutor that has helped to prepare two full filling the role of protecting victims' right?
▶ 1:14:55Mr. Marck: As a prosecutor you interact with victims a lot and give them the opportunity to tell their story. You work with them throughout the process. It gave me a deeper appreciation for what a lot of people experience coming into the criminal justice system. As I judge I would do my absolute best to give everyone who appears in the courtroom a fair opportunity, whether as a witness or defendant to apply the rule of law as it should be. Thank you.
▶ 1:15:26Sen. Blumenthal: Thank you, Mr. chairman. Welcome to the witnesses. Thank you for your willingness to serve. Let me begin with -- with Mr. hendershot. Who won the 2020 election?
▶ 1:15:57Mr. Hendershot: Senator, I want to be mindful -- I know this question has come up many times in these hearings and has become an issue of significant political dispute and debate. With that, I would say that president biden was certified the winner of the 2020 election.
▶ 1:16:18Sen. Blumenthal: He won the election, is that your response?
▶ 1:16:23Mr. Hendershot: He was certified the winner.
▶ 1:16:25Sen. Blumenthal: You are unwilling to say he won the election. How about you, Mr. roberts? I'm sorry, Mr. jones.
▶ 1:16:36Mr. Jones: I apologize, senator. I have the same answer as my colleague.
▶ 1:16:42Sen. Blumenthal: Same answer? Mr. kuntz, how about you?
▶ 1:16:48Mr. Kuntz: I have the same answer.
▶ 1:16:50Sen. Blumenthal: Unwilling to say that joe biden won the election, correct?
▶ 1:16:56Mr. Kuntz: As Mr. hendershot said, it has become a matter of political concern.
▶ 1:17:02Sen. Blumenthal: It is a matter of political concern but also an issue of fact.
▶ 1:17:07Mr. Kuntz: Joe biden was in fact to certified the winner of the 2020 election.
▶ 1:17:14Sen. Blumenthal: Mr. marck?
▶ 1:17:17Mr. Marck: Same answer.
▶ 1:17:19Sen. Blumenthal: I am amazed and really appalled that nominees for a lifetime appointment to the federal bench are unwilling to respond on an issue of fact.
▶ 1:17:40Sen. Blumenthal: I am not going to try to get an answer out of you because clearly you have been rehearsed to provide a stock answer, which I think really reflects not only on your honesty, but really on your fitness to be a federal judge, because you are supposed to be independent. And to arrive at the truth based on the evidence before you.
▶ 1:18:08Sen. Blumenthal: I think it is pretty irrefutable that joe biden won the election but you are unwilling to use that word because you are afraid. You are afraid. Of what? President trump? That is exactly what we do not need on the federal bench today.
▶ 1:18:36Sen. Blumenthal: We need jurors who are fearless and strong. Not weak and pathetic. I can't tell you how disappointed I am.
▶ 1:18:59Sen. Blumenthal: We can disagree on issues of law , we can disagree on issues of fact, but for you to simply avoid a factual and responsive answer I think is a disrespect to this committee as well to us. Let me try another question. Was the capitol attacked on january 6, Mr. hendershot?
▶ 1:19:28Mr. Hendershot: The same kind of question has come up many times in these hearings. That is a matter of significant political controversy.
▶ 1:19:41Sen. Blumenthal: It is a matter of what?
▶ 1:19:43Mr. Hendershot: It is a matter of political controversy.
▶ 1:19:49Sen. Blumenthal: It is a matter of controversy that the capitol of the united states was attacked? Have you seen the videos?
▶ 1:19:58Mr. Hendershot: I have not seen many of the videos.
▶ 1:20:01Sen. Blumenthal: How do you answer, Mr. jones?
▶ 1:20:05Mr. Jones: I believe it is a matter of significant political controversy and there is a possibility for litigation still. I do not believe I'm allowed to comment.
▶ 1:20:17Sen. Blumenthal: I am is troubled by that response as I am by Mr. hendershot's. There is a zero chance it will be before your courts, if there is any litigation. Mr. kuntz? Do you answer the same?
▶ 1:20:36Mr. Kuntz: I was asking the chair if I could answer. >> [indiscernible]
▶ 1:20:48Sen. Blumenthal: I just want to finish with our last witness. Mr. kuntz, go ahead. I think you will avoid the answer, too.
▶ 1:20:57Mr. Kuntz: I agree with my colleagues. There was a breach and I will leave it at that.
▶ 1:21:11Sen. Kennedy: I did not get to ask a question. This is something that is always interesting to me.
▶ 1:21:26Sen. Kennedy: The purpose of the first amendment in part is so people with power cannot be used to force an individual, or a minority -- not a racial minority but a minority -- from expressing themselves. Is that fair? >> yes, senator.
▶ 1:21:54Sen. Kennedy: Here's my question -- in today's world, who do you think has more power -- the state of louisiana, or google?
▶ 1:22:10Mr. Marck: It would depend on the definition of power.
▶ 1:22:14Sen. Kennedy: I would bet google. Does it make any sense to you that the state of louisiana, that people are protected against the state of louisiana -- they should be, about disagreeing -- on the basis of the first amendment but google can do whatever the heck it wants to.
▶ 1:22:39Mr. Marck: Is a private enterprise, people are not afforded the same protections from the first amendment.
▶ 1:22:46Sen. Kennedy: But in today's world, there is a distinction between government and private actors, does it make any sense anymore? Shouldn't the distinction be -- this is really a question between government and private entities, depending on how much power they have?
▶ 1:23:14Mr. Marck: To get down to the root of the question, yes, I think as companies become larger, more powerful and more spread there is the opportunity for them to exercise more impression and control over an opponent. Whether or not the legislature should act and potentially rule, that would be something outside the confines --
▶ 1:23:37Sen. Kennedy: I'm not sure we could act. If we tried to say google has as much power as the federal government -- I do not mean to just pick on google -- let's substitute artificial intelligence, which is in its infancy but it is clear it will be powerful.
▶ 1:24:01Sen. Kennedy: I think artificial intelligence has great potential to make our lives better, if it does not kill us first. But it will be powerful. Why shouldn't we have a first amendment that protects people, people's rights vis-à-vis the owners of artificial intelligence?
▶ 1:24:22Mr. Marck: To take it back to the constitutional in general, particularly the first amendment, it does bind governments.
▶ 1:24:31Sen. Kennedy: I know. I'm asking you, should it? If I'm going to pass a statute that says, google is more powerful than just about any state, and most countries, google is going to quickly file suit and stay under the constitution you cannot regulate me like that.
▶ 1:24:51Mr. Marck: As an originalist, I do not think that would have been the founders' intent to apply it to that. There might be other avenues, the commerce clause to incorporate different types of regulation but I do not think that would be the way it should be.
▶ 1:25:14Sen. Kennedy: I get the originalist arguments in the textural list argument. This is really not a suggestion, it is a question. If this one of those situations where the founders never contemplated we would have artificial intelligence or google?
▶ 1:25:36Sen. Kennedy: Are we making a mistake being enslaved to originalism and worshiping at the altar of originalism as we look at the world as it is, not at the time of the founders?
▶ 1:25:49Mr. Marck: I do not believe so. I am confident they did not contemplate ai or google, there were large companies back then, there were conglomerates, large, powerful industries.
▶ 1:26:03Sen. Kennedy: Ok. I could go on but I think chairman grassley will probably move my office to richmond if I keep going. Thank you, gentlemen.
▶ 1:26:21Chair Grassley: You will receive a lot of written questions, as you know. The record will be submitted until those questions can be submitted until may 6 at 5:00 p.m. Meeting, adjourned. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap.org]