'Matter of Interpreting'

" Join mark always sort of are welcoming you and your family here are. Compliment the president for. Nominating. And Hispanic woman. I think it was wrong for America waited until. 1967. To have. An African American justice Thurgood Marshall on the court. Waited too long until 1980 want to have. First woman justice Sandra Day O'Connor. I think it as a diverse nation diversity is very very important. You bring excellent credentials. Academically professionally. Your service on the court. But city. Constitution requires -- process for this committee and then the full senate. To considering detail your qualifications. Under. Our consent function. Most of the questions which will be asked to view in the course of these -- as well. Involved decided case shoes. I intend ask about decided cases -- also. About cases that the Supreme Court decided. Not to. And on the rejection of cases for the decision it's. A big problem. The court I would suggest past time for more cases. Chief Justice Roberts noted. In his confirmation hearing -- The decision more cases would be very helpful. If you can perhaps the -- of Supreme Court in 1886. Which currently. In 1986. There were thirteen 196. Cases on the docket. 451. -- Century later. There were only 161. Signed opinions. 2007. There were only 67. -- I start all the cases which are not so I do although like that store in many Medicare issues could store. With a sharp split -- one Court of Appeals. In one section of the country goes one way. Another Court of Appeals goes the other way. The rest of -- don't know which way. The precedents are Supreme Court decides not to decide. Take the case of the terrorist surveillance program. Which was President Bush's. Secret warrantless wire two. And contrasted with congressional authority. Exercised under article one time only foreign intelligence. Surveillance that. Providing the exclusive way to have. Partner. Perhaps the sharpest conflicts in the history of this great country. On page article one powers of congress and article two powers of the president as commander in shape. Lee. Federal district court didn't report says the terror surveillance program. Was unconstitutional. There's such circuit. Decided to one that's. Plaintiffs did not have standing. Our -- me dissenting opinion was much stronger. Majority. Opinion. Standing as we will -- is a very flexible operating independently. At least as I've stated used frequently. On the court to avoid cited the case. And the Supreme Court of the United States. Church roar. Childhood not to hear -- didn't even decide whether and a lack of -- it was justifiable friendships. This elsewhere too great confusion -- And -- as current does this morning's newspapers. Reporting about other secret programs. Which apparently the president had an operation. Had. The Supreme Court of the United States taken -- the terror surveillance program. The court could rule on whether it was appropriate. For me. President not to notify the chairman of the Judiciary Committee about the program. We now have a law which has all members of the Intelligence Committees are to be notified well look president didn't follow law. -- have a right to do so under. Article two powers well we don't. Or within the past two weeks Supreme Court. Am -- hearing cases involve. Claims by families of victims -- eleven. Against. Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia and commissions. And for princes of Saudi Arabia. Congress decided what sovereign immunity watch. In the legislation in 1976. And had exclusions for porch. But the Supreme Court to hire an opportunity. For those families who have suffered grievously. From happening. From having their day in court. And one of the questions were. Opportunity arises will be to ask you what would be distributors. Two you will employ. In deciding what cases the Supreme Court I would -- There is currently a major matter. -- issue. Although voting rights act. Apparently. Conflict has been present for many years. Between the authority of congress to decide. What is the factual basis for legislation. Chandra which justice Harlan decided in the works case was a rational basis. The Supreme Court more recently. Has adopted a standard. Couldn't Bruins play improved on some proportionality. Standard which Justice Scalia is there is a flat -- test which invites. Judicial lawmaking. -- her a lot of men in this hearing about the judge's responsibility. To interpret the laws statutes. And and ought to Michael. And during the confirmation hearing Chief Justice Robert G Kevin pretty plain terms. This court -- allow congress to decide what the factual basis news. And for the court to do otherwise. Is to engage in judicial legislation. The voting rights case was decided on our programs. -- that's certainly what she if you read the record. -- court is about ready to upset the voting rights case just like it is in terror -- Alabama all of the Americans with disabilities act. Not with -- and a vast record. Establishing the patient so. I would like to know what you're -- who will be if if confirmed. The rational basis which had been the traditional standard war. Could -- some proportionality. If you tell -- improvements of proportionality that all I ask you what means. The issue slips and slides around so much that it's impossible to tell what a constitutional standard news. And we senators would like to know what standards are. So we know what to do when we undertake legislation. -- decision -- district and Circuit Court. In the case captioned. Entergy Corp. versus river people. Incorporated. Involving the Environmental Protection Agency and clean water act. As a special prominence now that we are debating climate control global warming. And me. Second circuit opinion. You were in the majority. Deciding -- it was the best technology. Supreme Court reversed five before saying didn't turn on a cost benefit. Analysis. It I think is worthy of exploration although. What you Hampshire obviously -- you never viewer discretion. As to whether almost five before shipment targets saying. Who's really right to fire ever before as a matter of interpreting the constitution of -- during the stretch you. Having a different view I'd be interested to know if you terror respond when the time comes as to whether you agree with the idea. What have in the minority and perhaps an abortion strongly jurors in the conference room where. Produce a different result could have a real impact on what we're legislating now on captain currently. With if you -- and so I have -- I'd like to preview some questions on televising -- war. I don't know why they're so much interest here today. Have encountered this many cameras since Justice Alito was sitting where were you -- and you've had experience in the district court. With television. -- replacing Justice Souter is said that. This TV cameras were to come to a court to have to roll over his dead body. If you're confirm they won't have to roll over his head off. 52. The court decides all the cutting edge questions today. Sentences televise the house is televised. Lot of people are fascinated by this terrorist. I'd like to see the portrayal of -- Yes there. Thank you very much. Just sort of murder thank you picture. And."