Transcripts For CSPAN Senate Judiciary Committee Takes Up Judicial Nominations 20170925

The judge to serve ofthe 10th Circuit Court appeals. If confirmed, she would fill the seat vacated by Supreme Court justice neil gorsuch. This is 2. 5 hours. Good morning and welcome everyone, especially the nominees and the families to todays nominations caring for today with her from two panels. On the first and we went from judge eid of colorado, Supreme Court, nominated to the Circuit Court judge on the tenth Circuit Court. Dedicate the pronunciation wrong . [laughing] on the second panel we will hear from for nominees to District Court. Senator coons, do you have any opening remarks today . Thank you, senator tillis for the opportunity to serve alongside as the Ranking Member in todays confirmation hearings. Id like to welcome each of the nominees, their families and friends to the senate and congratulate you on your nominations and i look forward to opposing questions to you. The positions to which you been nominated are important in the federal judiciary is aldo is a bedrock of our constitutional democracy. Judges do the hard work of resolving disputes between real people, cases the term whether criminal trials and sentences are fair but ensure most treasured rights and freedoms are protected. Given the weightings of the responsibility of life continue the comes with the judicial appointment, these rings are critical opportunity for the American People dont about a nominees record and with that nominee respond to questions to get for that i regret the specific timing of todays hearing, a day when many colleagues particularly someone might set the aisle could not be here. Yesterday the senate finished its legislative business so that senators could travel to spend the recess with the families and some are today celebrating rosh hashanah, the jewish new year. I understand some of my call xrays concerned with the chairman about being unable to attend in light of the Senate Schedule and this religious holiday and asked during the postponed. Hearings like todays arche tool for evaluating nominees for judgeships, figuring out the sentence responsibly on the constitution to provide advice and consent. Thats what its extraordinary for nominations are to be held when the sin is not otherwise n session, take over the objections of several minority members. It did not happen previously and is not business as usual. Today we will consider a nominee to serve on the tenth circuit whom President Trump is previously listed as a nominee for the Supreme Court. We also have District Court comedy for the longest open vacancy in the country, they can see the Previous Administration attempted to address twice. I know my North Carolina supports this nominee but i would respectfully note the nominees also opposed by several groups including the congressional black caucus. I wish as a duplicative proceed with visit at a time when more of my colleagues couldve attended. It is important we continue to function as the committee consistent with the senate institutional norms and traditions. Let me briefly also say word about an local tradition of this committee, the blue slip a in recent weeks ive seen reports questioned the centuryold senate tradition. The blues the process ensures senators, republicans and democrats alike get to weigh in on judges nominated from their home state. These blue slip practices were honored by chairman leahy and even honored by chairman grassley. If a senator does not return a supportive blue slip that nominee did not proceed to hearing in the committee over much of the last century. This is not a partisan issue. And might you a different president might make different nominations to the same judicial vacancies and in certain cases home state senators have objected and those objections were respected. I can live with that as long as the tradition applies equally to both sides no matter who occupies widest or i think all should be afforded the opportunity to ensure hosted senators are consulted on nomination for seats in the states that we should Work Together in a bipartisan way to uphold the long tradition of this important body and as a component part about this committee serves its role in our constitutional order. Thank you for the Opening Statement opportunity and look for todays hearings. Thank you. A couple of things. Senator gardner, i apologize for calling you corny in the heat of the moment as soon as my glasses gator i will not pronounce any other words or names for the remainder of this hearing. On the topic of this hearing today, last week my scheduler put this hearing on my calendar because by rule we notice these hearings a week in advance. When i got here in monday night i had full expectations that i would be working on wednesday because the business was scheduled to the end of the day. None of us knew that we would be out of session until yesterday afternoon or evening as a matteroffact during the senate large republican members yesterday we had no notion were going to be out of here. By the same token, where the number of family members and nominees before sipping preparing for this moment who traveled some distance to get here. I think its reasonable to request members and the something really pressing occurred at about 5 00 just a afternoon till today thats more pressing than a judicial nomination hearing. I think it is appropriate and i think that i think the chairman for moving forward and welcome all the family members who are here today. With my friends, comics outstanding but i think its important to have it. Today what we want to do is move on to the agenda and get my colleagues an opportunity to introduce the nominees of either of the two panels and will begin with the distinguished gentleman from alabama, senator shelby, for your comment. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator coons, other members of the committee, i want to thank you for holding this hearing today in view of what happened yesterday. Today we have before us here the first of i hope will be five more District Court nominees in my state of alabama, Annmarie Carney axon. I had the high honor to recommend, senator strange will not be here today. Hes busy but he recommends and he backs her all the way on this. Annmarie carney axon is a member of the Birmingham Law Firm wallace, jordan, ratliff and brandt where she litigates etruscan estate and business cases both trial and appellate court. Before joining the firm she was an assistant Vice President of amsouth bank an associate of a rhode island laufer. After graduating from law school at the university of alabama, she served as a law clerk to the Federal District judge johnson in the Northern District of alabama. She also received her undergraduate degree from university of alabama. She is married to distinguished lawyer in her own right. She has a couple of children but shes been involved that only as a lawyer but has been involved in the community, president of the ywca junior board, president of the girls on the run board of directors and a member of for Communities Foundation board and a member of the American Cancer Society where she has toiled for many years. I recommend her to this Committee Without any reservation. I think shell be a distinguished and outstanding Federal District judge. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator shelby. And with the case of all the other senators, i know you and other commitments and schedules and please feel free to leave as appropriate. Thank you. Senior senator from North Carolina, senator burr. Senator tillis, senator coons, to all my colleagues on this committee, im pleased to appear before you today to voice my unwavering support for thomas farr to service judge against assisted work for the Eastern District of North Carolina. I also want at this time welcome his wife who was here today. As far as legal career includes more achievements than this committee has time to hear this morning. But if you want to give you some highlights of that. He earned his jd from Emory University and besieges llm from Georgetown University and following Law School Graduation he had the same title as some in this room have, counsel for the Senate Committee. As he served on the Senate Committee on labor and human resources. He then served as a staff attorney to the office of Personnel Management followed by a clerkship for judge Frank Bullock junior in the United States District Court middle district of North Carolina. After his clerkship, he stayed in North Carolina where he is at an accomplished legal career in private practice working on issues of constitutional law, Employment Law and workplace safety. He as represent both business and workers in his employment practice. He has argued before the Supreme Court. He has received numerous honors for his work, including being named in North Carolina superlawyer annually since 2006. The name a fellow with the college of labor and Employment Lawyers, and most recently receiving a ranking of unanimously wellqualified to serve on the federal bench by the American Bar Association. Hes also demanded gets back to his community. Currently he is serving as a board member of the shepherds table soup kitchen in raleigh, North Carolina. In addition, his significant professional experience, the committee has received letters of support for his nomination from individuals of both parties. No one can personally i can attest that he has the requisite expertise, character and judgment required for the federal bench. Hes in and was earned the right to serve as a federal judge and who understands the privilege of receiving this appointment turkey will serve in this role honorably, and its my hope that he will get a swift confirmation by this committee and by the United States senate. Senator tillis, let me add at the end, most important thing is, tom farr is a good man. I think what we look for are good people to serve in the capacity like a district judge. He fills every piece of the word good. I think the chair. Thank you, senator burr. Senator isakson. Thank you very much. Senator coons, its great to be with you. Chairman hatch, always a pleasure to have your and we appreciate very much. On daughter daughter to join the judiciary from georgia senator perdue. First i like to introduce to you or talk to you for Billy Ray Billy is from georgia come serve in the Georgia State send from six years, went from there to the superior court of going to count and from there to the court of appeals in the state of georgia and is been outstanding participant of the bench in all those times. Whats most interesting about is some is they have deep and stored tradition in terms of Public Service. His family includes two democratic, richard racer can use as district represented district three and congress of the United States from georgia and the other one robert way one of my best friends who served in the Georgia Statehouse of references for tinges. A tradition of Public Service in the family also has a tradition of getting the job done. When it showed in the states that he created hyades law, wrote it, push it through and passed it. The most significant reform of dui laws in the state of georgia for which dates to landmark and recognize run the country. Equally well he was an innovator on the bench pictogram a drug court which in georgia was a race step 490 with a firsttime offenders with narcotics and drug violations to try to get them the right path. Hes a leader and his penalty on the bench in georgia. He will be a leader on the benh into United States of america and im pleased to commend billy to you with my highest recommendation. Equally as well michael brown. I guess were supposed to do both at the same time, is that correct, mr. Jealous ex michael is a great lawyer from georgia. The former federal prosecutor. He has a great experience on both sides of bench and its got a great life practice and all that he has done. A graduate of the school in atlanta come later Georgetown University in washington and a graduate of law school at university of georgia. He clerk for judge edmondson on the court of appeals for the 11th circuit in 19941995. Before entering Government Service he spent four years as mitigating associate at the stored law firm of king and spalding which among other things produced people like griffin bell, sam nunn and Larry Thompson all known to each of you on this committee as outstanding jurists from the state of georgia. He served six use District Attorney and the Southern District florida and tried more than 25 cases before the bench. Current Equity Partner in alston and bird named by chamber usa is one of americas leading lawyers for business law. He served in the editorial Management Board of the georgia law review, outstanding citizen and i commend them to you with my highest recommendation. Thank you, senator isakson. Senator perdue. Senator tillis, senator coons, committee members, thank you for having this hearing today. Its my high honor to be a today to introduce to outstanding individuals who have been nominated by President Trump to fill to judicial vacancies in the Northern District of georgia. Mr. Mike brown and judge billy ray. I would be brief and not echo what the senior senator from georgia has just done to introduce these two fine man. Both of these gentlemen that serve my state well in various positions at the course of their careers. After graduates audits and users of Georgia School of law in 1984, mike went on to clerk for judge edmondson on the Atlantic Basin at 11 security server six years as an assistant United States attorney in both the new edition of george and the Southern District of florida. When he tried more than two dozen cases. His career has included stints at two of atlantas most respected law firms, where he currently serves as cochair of the government and internal investigation team. Judge ray graduated from university of Georgia School along with honors in 1990 and begin his legal career a as a Trial Attorney in private practice in georgia. In 1986 judge ray won a seat in the state senate where he served with distinction for six years. After being appointed by former georgia governor roy barnes to fill it unexpired term for superior Court Judgeship in gwinnett county, judge ray would auto surf serve in the position for ten years and was the presiding judge one of our states first treatment court. Judge ray carley sits on the court of appeals of georgia where he has served since 2012. I practice for both of these impressive nominees without reservation and applaud the president for selection of two such qualified and wel wellregd georgians to fill the seats on the federal bench in my state. Thithis is a high honor, mr. Chairman, to introduce to you both of these candidates from georgia. Thank the chair. Thank you, senator perdue. Senator cardin. Thank you, mr. Chairman for as he only western augustana of southerners upset if i talk funny. [laughing] chairman tells commits great to see, Ranking Member coons thank you so much for the opportunity before this committee and, of course, to Charing Cross and Ranking Member points taken thank you for leadership. Its an opportunity to be before the skinny. Its an honor and general pleasure to be attentive to use my good friend Justice Allison eid and offer my strong support for her confirmation as a judge on United States Circuit Court of appeals for the tenth Circuit Court of appeals. Theres no doubt that she is superbly qualified for the position. Its great to see her entire family here and children i knew from when they were very little. Her husband troy, a great family of public servants. For the past decade she has served as a justice on the colorado Supreme Court and in 2008 justice eid is overwhelmingly retained by the people of colorado here prior to her appointed justice eid represent the state of colorado before the state and federal courts as the state solicitor general. She also served a as a tenured member on the faculty at the greatest law school in the country, the university of Colorado School of law. Where she is taught courses in constitutional law, legislation and sorts and publish scholarly articles on the topics of federalism and tort law. In addition she has practiced commercial litigation of the law from arnold and porter. Justice eid begin her legal career as a law clerk to judge smith on the United States Circuit Court of the fifth circuit. She then served as a law clerk to United States to print court, Justice Clarence thomas. Prior to attending law school she was special assistant and speech writer for secretary bill bennet. She received her law degree from university of Chicago Law School where she was articles editor log review, received her undergraduate stanford graduate with phi beta kappa. What her resume makes clear is that whatever justice does she doesndoes it at the highest ant levels. Indeed the National Native American Bar Association has noted she has significantly more experience with indian law cases that any other recent Circuit Court nominee. She even does being a nominee at the highest level, at the highest level. But as impressive as her credentials are its her demeanor and approach to the law that make are ideally suited for the court. Justice eid have been called a mainstream commonsense westerner. Is also as a former law clerks have noted, fiercely independent. Independent. She will decide cases as she believes the law requires. At the same time she seeks a different viewpoints and wants to understand all sides of each issue she addresses. Thats the professor i know from addicts assisted at the university of colorado law school. I can say from personal experience that while justice eid has a perspective on the law she has and does her deeply about robust debates injuring the views of others. I know from my classmates that didnt always share her perspective that justice eid open to the views engaging with them and never biased against different perspectives. Yet i also know fiercely independent jurists, her former clerks describe, justice eid will follow the law regardless of the popular went. Whether considering the plain meaning of the statute to sedate the role of the court, the lips that a branch of the executive and its agencies, or evaluating the relationship between the federal government and the states. Justice eid will side with what the law says. She will do it in that commonsense western way. Its a privilege to introduce justice eid to this committee. I look forward to working with you throughout this nomination process. I asked for your support and the support of all of our colleagues in her timely confirmation. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank all the senators for being here. I also want to thank and congratulate tom farr on his nomination to service District Court judge in the Eastern District of North Carolina. Also want to welcome his wife. I know your family is very proud of you and so many of your friends and colleagues back in the state of North Carolina are as well. I would also like to thank chairman grassley and the staff are working with senator burr and be to schedule todays hearing. I want to thank the president for consulting with our offices in nominating mr. Farr to fill this important judicial vacancy. Senator burr discussed toms education, background and some of his experience so i want to get too may be some aspects that were not covered. When nominees come before this committee, its our job as senators to evaluate whether the nominee as the appropriate temperament and the requisite qualifications to uphold the constitution, a plot and a law faithfully and fairly, and serve the court with integrity. Anyone who wants to serve on the bench as the intelligent, ethical, impartial and objective. Tom farr clearly meets these criteria. Tom is been evaluated by the American Bar Association twice. Both times unanimously receiving wellqualified ratings, the highest ratings they offer. Many of the members of its been referred to the aba ranking of wellqualified as the Gold Standard for evaluating whether a nominee is qualified to serve on the bench. I think getting this range on two different occasions speaks volumes for toms qualification for he is widely respected one of the best legal minds in North Carolina and is consistently recognized by his peers as an elite lawyer. He is stored in credentials a note humanity than a judge who will be fair to all parties who come before him. I have no doubt tom will apply the law faithfully and fairly. Lawyers who work with the tom farr stock that only by his intellect but also his fairness and respectfulness. All parties on both sides. Thats why he holds widespread support from so many people, many of those people were at an opposing position. Tom is unquestionable capable of the people of North Carolina and he will be an honorable and fair judge. I want to thank chairman grassley again for holding fishing today. I want to thank tom for his hard work that made him to this point. I want to congratulate both him and ann and all the nominees for being here today. Now with that we will call forward the first nominee. Ms. Eid that i want to make sue pronounce it right because that you make them stacked into make it again so i tend to think of the ides of march without vs. Thank you for being here today. Before you sit down, if you will please remain standing to be sworn in. Do you affirm the testimony youre about to give before the committee would be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god . Thank you. You may set. You have an opportunity to make an Opening Statement and introduce any friends and family who is in the room. We ask that you try to keep your statement to the extent you need to about five minutes. Thank you. Thank you. It is a real privilege and pleasure to be here today. I want to begin by thanking you, chairman tillis and Ranking Member coons, for inviting me also i want to thank chairman grassley and Ranking Member feinstein and all the members of the committee for taking the time to have me appear today. I would also like to thank President Trump for the privilege of this nomination, and i would like to think thank senator gardner for that kind introduction. I do not have an Opening Statement today but i would like to introduce my family if i may. First director donny i have my husband troy. He is, my husband of 28 years, just celebrated our wedding anniversary. Hes a former u. S. Attorney for colorado, and he also made extraordinary efforts to be a today because hes going around on a new scooter having just had achilles surgery. I know, its it was terrible. So i really want, i would want to thank him for being here today because he really, it was a rough trip. Id like to introduce our children, alex and emily. Alex is about to be a thirdyear at the university of chicago. He is double majoring in physics and east asian languages. I do know you might ask how did two lawyers produced a physicist, and that something that we wonder ourselves but we are so proud of him. Then we have our daughter emily who is a sophomore, honor student in high school, and she is a beautiful dancer and artist. And we have my motherinlaw, troyes mom, sandy, former junior high science teacher. Then on the side we have my mom, janie come from greenacres washington no joke. She is my hero in life. She raised two daughters by herself under some pretty adverse circumstances, as she worked incredibly hard and made a lot of sacrifices. So really want him what i want to do is just say thanks, mom. Then we have my sister, amy, who is an amazing architect in los angeles, specializing in affordable housing. Then we have ramona who is my step mother in law who is our computer whiz in the family. So thank you so much for coming and it want to thank everybody who is here who i was able to introduce for being here and supporting me. Thank you, justice eid. Justice eid, if confirmed t youe taking the seat of now justice gorsuch. When he was before this committee, and i participate in virtually every hour of that committee, he eloquently pointed out on a number of occasions that it was his job to interpret and apply the law and that it was our job, congresses job, to craft and write the law. It is consistent with your views on the separation of powers . Absolutely. Aas a judge deeply it is your job to remedy poorly crafted legislation . No, i do not. During Justice Gorsuchs confirmation, there was also a lot of discussion about ruling in favor of the big guy instead of the little guy. Do you side with the big guy or no because when youre considering cases . No, i do not. Can you go further into that . Yes. I took the oath from my current position city on the colorado Supreme Court, and i can tell you the oath says that i promised to obey the laws and constitution of the United States, and the laws and constitution of the state of colorado. There are some of very, very difficult cases that have come before me in my 11 in a half years and my husband knows that is a hard case. But i have to tell you it is my job to set that aside to look at the law in the facts to follow the law where it takes me and i have to set Everything Else aside to obey the law and follow the law. Some individuals argue the United States constitution is a living document and subjects to different ideas . Thanks for that question i actually believe my judicial philosophy is to follow the law. I dont come with preconceived labels i read carefully and consult with my eight colleagues or discuss with my former law clerks and they can vouch for that and i try very hard to go where though law takes me and that is what i do in every case. What do you think . You believe judicial activism is something that is real and that you consider appropriate . I served with seven other justices said they are incredible and i value what they do. Every member of our court does the best that they can. So i wouldnt say judges are people love good faith and that could take them to a different place than where i end up. I am not an attorney. Mile last question for you is could be straightforward with in my remaining time is that the expectation of the judge . Youve taken the oath to be impartial you have to be impartial. That is the requirement. Sometimes people say it is aspirational because we have to remind ourselves everyday we come to work to be fair and impartial but absolutely it is an expectation. Thank you justice eid. Congratulations on raising two wonderful daughters and successfully raising wonderful children it was great to do the introduction of your family to get a sense in and scope of your reach and as you come to this opportunity with his expertise seurats the solicitor general of colorado to argue this states should use evidence that was searched without a warrant even when the defendant objected to the search vigorously because psycho occupant or a spouse allowed the police and over the objection of the defendant. Do you recognize that was correct or is there a concern about your position on behalf of your client . And that it was a violation of the Fourth Amendment right howdy you look at miller verses colorado . Thank you for that question. As you mentioned i was defending the position taken by the state of colorado at that particular case they had its own president president and actually it was held primary and at that point there was a split in authority about how the defendant and coopted and what role do they play in the defense . To the Supreme Court street did out to resolve the split to say if the defendant is theyre protesting you cannot search. I am committed to following precedent if i was so fortunate to be confirmed to this position. Their word to decisions nearly construing miller vs. Alabama sentencing to mandatory life without parole is unconstitutional but you hold that aggregate term would still be permissible even if they add up to the mandatory life sentence. That outcome would continue to be allowed them to sentence to life without parole but that juvenile at issue would be eligible so why did you reach this results in an otherwise it would be on a narrow ground . Thank you for that question i actually wrote the majority in that case we actually thought that narrow ground was to consider the aggregate term to be stacked because that was the narrow position to go into the facts of each case. That is how we viewed it had absolutely with respect to the Supreme Court precedent and we subscribe of boundaries certainly we were following the precedent along the narrow grounds. I will invite you to talk about Public Education so that partial dissent did not amount to government funding for a religious affiliated school so out of 120 preschoolers to use the vouchers 119 to attend the affiliated school but you said the program was neutral and though he wasnt directly as a result why was that facial neutrality the critical turning point . I have to preface that case is front of me it went to the United States Supreme Court and withheld for the trinity tire case that has been vacated. But i cannot go beyond that. And that is my current job. So i have to preface my remarks. And i pointed out the funds in that case go to the parents, not to the school but i also said as a primary focus the majority was interpreting or implying the constitutional provision there is no aid through religious schools. And to say with a religious cause case to go behind the words and then to show what i could what is going on there with the intent behind the wood the words. So welcome to the committee. Above the kind of judgment will be. And with those that produce certain results whenever means necessary. As that is always the case. And that one has a plaintiff is says of the facts just dont matter at all. No matter which side wins. I agree. I strongly believe in it but i think that with those past 11. 5 years. But i have participated in almost 900 cases with almost 100 myself. And then to come to the conclusion i looked at of faxes to fairly and impartially and when you take that oath that you follow the law and that is our job. But if they dont like your opinion and to carry on campus . I dont go. So it is a preemption case which level of government can govern fire arms regarding concealed carry and also a twotime bin did not List University of colorado. That was a seven zero opinion and we are not struck were not shy. With a very diverse court. If you look at that Legal Mission should that make any difference . Not all. Expat explained on a personal agenda. Not to engage in constitutionally prohibited activities. Is that true . And delicate the parties in front of me but i just need to decide on the facts of the loss. But they say you are bent on undermining to protect American People is that your agenda . I think they were relying on my earlier academic writings but to talk about a series of cases from United States Supreme Court to put some boundaries around a the Commerce Clause. So we need to Pay Attention to what the Supreme Court is doing with those for regulations i dont think that description accurately reflects. But as far as i can see and they tell me youd rather bleak legally correct them politically correct . I enthusiastically support your nomination. Chairman and we join my colleagues in expressing our disappointment this is not the First Time Ever a hearing has been brought forward under these circumstances even that was not i agree to buy the minority so that is a novel discourtesy and i hope to have some much of a up pattern in order to push nominees i know that is the accepted cartoon of the committee these days that judges are neutral ciphers to come in and apply the facts of the law of than wash their hands and move on to the next application of the law to a fact i think anybody who is practiced law knows that is not the way adjudicating works and i think that to word rebuttal to anybody who says that is true is eric garland. If there is nothing to this business rather than assessing those qualifications without any personal professional political ideological philosophical economic or other personal point of view , to apply neutral facts to a clear and some clear and simple what then why did they even give him a hearing . Why did they hold the Supreme Court seat opened for those that could be shoved on to that seat . And that stuns me to think to propagate that fiction so readily. We will see with justice eid record i dont think anybody has been slowed or stopped were at the beginning of the another judicial ramrod in overtime we will see the concerns that we have the fault of the of candidate not the nominee. And it seems to me what is respected of the republican nominees with the Traditional Group of requirements that you support dark money in elections and a second to have a skeptical view of womens rights and third with a skeptical view of any limitations about guns or peoples access to guns is a good idea and finally to protect the general public which all of this happens to align very nicely with the religious right and the firearms industry and chemical and Banking Industries with those supporters of the republican party. There is more to this than those statements we wouldnt we having these fights are probably not even this hearing without the of possession of the minority if there was not Something Else going on. And then with the judicial activism with brown v board of education activism . I can tell you it is a long established precedent. But looking back at president requires you follow they say they are obliged to listen to president but and with that judicial activism. It is in my place to say anything i am obligated to follow it. And if i were so fortunate to be confirmed to the tenth circuit i would follow it it, is the important precedent of the United States Supreme Court. I am not of lawyers of this could mean Something Different but january 9th and 12th with april 17th with the Judiciary Committee where we were not in session to consider a nomination. Let me finish. Also of a like 2. 0 for these 11 legislative days since the end of august and intel last night every Single Member of the senate had a calendar of this hearing except for one physics student who was not in class today and that is one reason among many that understand those senators have devised without objection we will move to senator grassley. Your then on the colorado Supreme Court for a long time how does this help you prepare for the federal Circuit Court and would you anticipate to be the most difficult about a transition if confirmed . Thank you as i mentioned earlier it has been such a privilege to serve the people of colorado for all lebanon and a half years. I have participated in maybe 900 cases and have written almost 100 of those and 100 separate opinions. I do think that is a huge amount of experience to bring to the tenth circuit with deciding cases and looking at their briefs and talking to my colleagues and my clerks thinking very hard about these cases so that is an experience and to be chair of the Water Committee in colorado my experience is not only substantive and that is important to the west and to the tenth circuit so i hope to bring bad expertise to the tenth circuit if i am so fortunate to be confirmed it would be different because i have focused on colorado. The tenth circuit is a vast multistate areas of that is different and certainly there are different challenges presented that i am not familiar with so i am excited about the up prospect and excited to be nominated. In what ways has that worked outside the courtroom why is it important for lawyers to be involved and the wonderful thing about being on the colorado Supreme Court to where that adjudication had to and where we are looking at the system. And that i have worked very hard to be more accessible to litigants were not represented in my capacity. And how that is interpreted by those laypeople. We have worked very hard and then to give a shout out to mcfadyen eight priority to make sure it works to everyone so that is a priority of mine and a passion. Congratulations on your nomination. Senator white house for all members i want to keep to the Time Commitment before we allow the of justice but we will finish the second round. [laughter] justice eid . [laughter] talking about policing in 2010 he participated people verses mitchell and this is a case with the exclusionary rule that says generally if the government collects evidence in violation of your Constitutional Rights and if they should use that this evidence and with those six hours of medical attention before he could even be questioned with a suspicion in the drug deal then to become of agitated and then the Police Officer decided to arrest him the officer grabbed the back of mr. Rituals shirt and when he tried to shrug him off the officer responded by punching mr. Mitchell to shatter multiple bones in his face he dropped his knees and pain were a second officer pepper sprayed him in the face then struck him three times with a metal baton. Both officers wrestled him to the ground putting him in handcuffs and at that point with the weight of two fully grown men on his back beating his proteges pushing him into the pavement he told the officers that he had drugs in his left pocket he hoped that by confessing to the crime bill would stop beating him. But mr. Mitchell was transported by ambulance where he received more than six hours of treatment taken to the Police Station by the same officers who had been and arrested him at 2 00 in the morning those same officers interrogated him with as he waved his miranda rights making statements recognizing that prohibits the admission into evidence the trial court prevented his confession of the drugs in the statement to be used on evidence on appeal the Supreme Court affirmed that decision. Correct . That is not correct. What the majority said in the case is the confession was involuntary i did write separately with the concurrence and the dissent that was obvious. Im also said to them to affirm that decision . Im sorry. I ask a simple question. I would like a simple answer. Recognizing the constitution doesnt recognize into evidence the trial court prohibited his confession and statements to be used against them as evidence on appeal the Supreme Court confirmed that decision. That is correct. Justice eid you agree his original confession was coerced and involuntary . But when it comes to the way of the physical evidence because he was arrested without probable cause that the drugs discoverer as a result could not be used as evidence against him . That was the fruit of the poisonous tree. Should that be admitted into evidence . That actually was us separate portion of my descent but i disagreed not considering the peoples argument that there might be another ground to a mitt the physical evidence away entirely agree with regard to the promise of the police this is my question. You thought the drugs should have been admitted into evidence. Why . I do have a procedural disagreement because the majority stated they did not believe the people raise separately the issue of the physical evidence but i believe they had and would have found that to be a viable place. So the majority had died wondered if they properly raised the arguments and i thought that they did consider that doctrine. Thank you for answering the question. Thank you justice eid for being here. My brother since regards to both the u. S. Has no dual long time since law school. I would like to spend some of my time today addressing something that has come up in recent hearings with the idea whether to what a judges personal background batters . My colleagues will say there is a law of discretion so as a result we need to delve deeply into these associations with personal values in the effort to get to that ideology. And maybe to do that because that will be the tie breaker and that is what makes all the difference in the important case for girl and then they feel that nominee shares that ideology. To say we want someone who will interpret and apply the law in a particular case. Very enough sometimes they will say we want to shun judicial activism like the plague. It is just as bad to be a pessimist as an activist for greta know what is more defensible rather than invalidate something that is not constitutional. So what that overlooks it is very important to understand our jurist approaches of law. When we sit on a Multi Member Court to which you are nominated you will not always agree with your colleagues. But when you disagree you will disagree as lawyers or legal scholars to figure out what that means and what does that mean to you . I will begin with the last part. I am so honored to set on the seventh number court and i can tell you we are very Diverse Group of people. We enjoyed that diversity because it challenges you because you think you figure that out that a colleague says something and you said never thought of it that way. A law of that is wonderful. We are all very collegial and respect each other and dont make it personal. One of the great traditions of my court we have conference on thursday we do get out and then we go out to lunch so i have to say that we talk about the broncos. [laughter] that is one of the great resources i have. Also of just uniqueness of my court we are a the certiorari court we have mandatory jurisdiction with water been one of them but normally we picked out the hardest cases out of that group. They are tough and hard that have come up through the court of appeals usually with a split decision. When you say you do it out . That is not the save in a legislative body i would assume on the basis of your approach to the law or your methodology . To say i like this type of case or party but it is about that methodology . It is. I use that do get out metaphorically. Im sure it makes it much more fun. We are so respectful. And we all do the same thing. To read the brief and talk to each other and the law clerk. Tuesday i will not listen to all of the other voices out there. We follow the law. I want to tip my hat to the of colleagues to summarize what the process is all about from opposite sides of the table. Thin as the premises. With insights into who you are and to project those into the future. What do you do with faced with a case . And to have a dissent if they could follow the law coming to the same decision over and over to see the facts and a law differently when judge or such course such was the forest the guy that was stuck on the side of the road outside chicago said judge dissented on we spent a law of time asking why he would descent into the set of facts i thought it was an insight into his values of the Supreme Court but to support his nomination and that was one of the reasons. That is a parallel and to consider that duty of care and to friends from the of westin hotel when overnight on the town and would not have to drive on afterwards. They return at 2 00 in the morning making so much noise the Security Guard threw them out to savor making too much noise and as they were escorted out they said they could not leave because we are drunk and cannot drive. One of the friend asked if they could wait in the lobby while they would call a taxi because it was freezing in the Security Guard refused blocked them from entering the motel lobby and told them to get the f out of here so they drove off the driver was drunk and got an accident one person was killed others were injured and she suffered a brain injury left in a persistent the agitated state. Her parents sued for negligence that they failed to exercise the minimum level of to care for their safety the hotel moved for Summary Judgment. The majority of the Supreme Court in colorado a firm to the denial that the hotel must refrain from the victim in intoxicated guest into a forcibly dangerous environment they thought that should proceed to trial to give them the chance to explain the facts of the freezing weather and level of intoxication but you dissented he said it was a dangerous environment but to dismiss the case of a Summary Judgment motion because they could have taken a taxi and you said it your descent there is no suggestion the she was so intoxicated she cannot get into a taxi. Use odd note dispute of fact that there was no concern with the freezing weather or for intoxication to prevent a Summary Judgment progress has been many years since i filed a Summary Judgment but if i remember correctly in most states you argue there is no set of facts by which the other party can prevail sunday said there was no set of facts the majority of the court saw the other wives the disintoxication woman in freezing weather being denied access to the hotel lobby to call a taxi. You said you did not want to hear those facts to heard enough already she could have called a taxi. Explains. Thank you for that the in a recitation in all due deference the critical fact that you left out was that the party walked by a waiting calves and that was caught on videotape there they go walking right by the cab. And it my view that the hotel had not evicted them in to that injury is environment because i irrefutably showed that there were calves waiting and they could have taken in the cab and that is what i based my defense on. That would seem so obvious it would upheld the Summary Judgment but didnt they did not see that clarity of fact to think the plaintiff deserve day date in court but you did not. Ive pointed out that videotape and gave my dissent and a majority of the court disagreed. I want to be sure i understand the plaintiffs sued for personal injury and she alleged they prevented her from calling a cab . That is correct and the videotape for she was walking by a the cab . Was there a driver . Was the of duty . I believe so i believe the evidence showed there were cabs available. But she guided a car and drove away anyway. Where she driving . I believe so. And voluntarily drunk of her own volition . I am not sure what the evidence showed. Nobody poured liquor down her throat . How do we know if this is a fundamental right with the u. S. Constitution . Now why would go about if i were so fortunate to serve on the tenth circuit i would follow Supreme Court precedent to identify certain rights as fundamental. What it felt was First Impression there are no zero cases of First Impression. Made not squarely to address that question but it is helpful. A delicate the Supreme Court precedent to understand to determine if it did say fundamental right. What if you didnt find that precedent . It is the case of First Impression. In my experience there is is always president. It doesnt always clearly resolve and that happens to me on the colorado Supreme Court to somehow make them consistent to the United States Supreme Court. Sanders and. Is there under rights under the constitution if the bill of rights were not ratified . That is a great question. I would defer to United States Supreme Court precedent on that. I will put that another way. You used to teach . Do you still . If i am a student will your answer be go read the Supreme Court precedent . Unfortunately right now is a sitting judge i would tell the of a student at that or talk about that president these are these applicable precedents but i challenge recisions to think for themselves and come up with their own answers. Like this is how i would go about that classification . I point to the applicable law and we discussed that. They can tell you i of a vigorous believer so why ask what do they think how should this be resolved . And the standard answer. Tell me something israeli good idea and is unconstitutional and in that position of the justice to uphold the law at the state of colorado. I really dont think it is my place to question those laws. Im sorry to cut you off i have 14 seconds you have an extraordinary resonate purple you wore bright i havent had the chance to read 900 opinions. [laughter] but i do agree on what my a colleague said to a understand what you stand for. I get disappointed with they dont answer the questions. To make sure the president in his wisdom does not make a mistake. It is really hard to do that would read cannot have interchange in terms of the law is and what ought to be. Thanks for your time. And consultation a few would like to go to a second round. I want to explore why arent other case that requires a soulful left behind in the bathroom light understand your descent but i want to probe that because sulfone privacy and suppression of evidence is a boundary area and that is critical for privacy without personally identifiable information. So in this reticular case the Supreme Court of colorado held evidence taken from the cell phone without a search warrant should be suppressed and you were though lone dissenter because you found it had been abandoned. I dont want to spend time on the facts but they left behind came back to find a bathroom was locked into the attendant was that i am busy and cannot unlock getting comeback later and he laughed there is a difference between the majority and you whether or not that amount amounted to the abandonment is a their privacy surrounding data within a persons phone and how do we ensure that we are appropriately treating the cellphone that the founders might have imagined . Thank you so much for that question because that brings me to the majority opinion and harassed i recognize that expectation extensively United States Supreme Court to say maybe there is a heightened interest with private information and i held upheld that because they exceeded the scope and i rejected that proposal recognizes the published opinion of privacy interest in a phone the warrant could not uphold the search. While the defendant went back and said i left my phone in the restroom then he left he did not leave his name or a phone number to be reached and never went back to get that followed and that constituted abandonment. I understand he said i want my phone and that he left without taking further action to secure the phone so you look at that difference. And ball you point me towards that case could you tell me how you see that suppression doctrine to protect one of the most fundamental rights but that the cost of making a bit harder for police to find evidence . I have written many opinions that is a Supreme Court precedent to have the exception. We get a law of those cases with a procedure in colorado with the nerve the appellate review so the court put say high priority on that as well and then have the exception to a warrant. Senator you have not had an opportunity in the firstround so we will go to you. Justice eid your the only dissenter in the case involving the redistricting of the Congressional District after the 2010 census and in that case and upheld a lower court with the congressional map that made them more competitive with the limited nature stating the path is to review the remedy to determine if it is lawful. Ultimately the court found those constitutional factors so in your descent they failed to give adequately to minimize the disruption of those districts at the same time to not require the District Court why the majority went the other way. Can you elaborate how you view the nature and there is a pending case on gerrymandering in the Supreme Court and our state is one of the few that has the court involved it is not a partisan situation but i do think it makes for that delegation because it has not been carved out in anyway. Suggest from observing this in my state can you talk about why you wrote that dissent . Yes, and bad instance there are multiple factors to be considered and the General Assembly has listed them. My criticism the majority did not put any weight of the existing boundaries in fact, there was no way to the state of colorado said a full onethird of the population changed districts even though there is not an additional seat. Was there other factors . With those communities of interest but to me they at least have to consider all the factors. And i stated in that dissent that disruption of current district was give been no weight actually none at all and that at the with the General Assembly that you need to look at all of them. So the majority did not look at that final factor. I understand at Academic Work has focused on federalism which you defined as the Supreme Court revitalization including the the of Commerce Clause and in one article that new federalism decisions which invalidated that Gun Free School zones act. Notably were the first decisions under the Commerce Clause from more than 50 years ago. With a more limited view some have raised concerns it would jeopardize the federal government of civilrights or the Environmental Protection can you elaborate have adieu viewed the authority here on this side under the Commerce Clause . Those were articles a wrote as an academic at that time United States Supreme Court came up with a series of decisions that you mentioned that as you suggest they were out of this business and then to say we think there are limits and to enforce them. So i was describing those cases is what appeared to be a movement in the Supreme Court to adjudicate those cases to raise federalism. If you read the articles from beginning to end, i take no position for what the fallout may be ended one of the articles with those enumerated powers. Thank you i will ask additional questions with their Public Education funding with your opinion in 2013. Congratulate you for this nomination some say that it should be filled due to lack of caseload. I had a chuckle of that because they said the same thing in 2013 to push those vacancies which those appeals were filed and were terminated almost three times as many decisions in the tenth circuit from the Circuit Court of appeals for the district of columbia. So with these leftwing groups opposed to filing a single vacancy to or three times busier for filling multiple vacancies and mr. Chairman served 40 years im amazed with some people will say with a straight face all i can say is i know a law about your background with your terrific legal mind with all types of cases to refer to and to be hiding respected and i want to say things are going through this and willing to serve. Thank you senator i this does see how anybody could vote against you. But just one . Question justice eid, so under what circumstances should a court consider the consequences of its decision . Looking at the law and the facts we look at where the law takes us back to a point. What i said several times is this is where the law has taken us with the colorado Supreme Court. Almost all decisions are statutory and you as the General Assembly and congress can fix this. And that is the job to take the law where it takes us and if the law needs to be changed and they do that in colorado. And to make the statutes to be clearer that they will even overlook the plain meaning of a statute even if it goes to the absurd result . Yes. I thought so. Is in a savage opinion hour to think of that . Even lopez or morrison were five four decisions what senator of the broad up that senator of the sort of accused us that judges with those associations and i will just read something and does Jeff Sessions said i am sure that less than 1 of the lawyers of america are members of the aclu but it seems you have that dna you have a good leg up to be nominated. And those coming before the aclu and to question that. That you cannot have it both ways that they cannot accuse us and that they were chosen by the federal society or the Heritage Foundation when the president outsource. So it just seems to me that and lets be honest and with the accused to judge people only buy their affiliations that senator sessions that i just take some umbrage with that because i like to consider judges with a law of factors. And to be accused each other of things than that side is sent a little guilty of themselves. If nobody is willing to ask additional questions thanks for being here today and congratulations and save travel back to your home state. Colorado. Wasnt going to mention that as a source subject. Asking the nominees for the second panel to come forward and we will pause briefly for the transition. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] welcome to all of the of nominees and to your family at this point we will give you each and opportunity and before we get to that of all expect your testimony of friends and family to be true you go by the book. [laughter] please raise sure hand your firm that testimony will give is the truth and the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god . And reba girl from left to right. Good morning and to a the rest of the members of this committee i would like to thank President Trump for his nomination and senator shelby for the kind words it is an honor to be here and dont have an Opening Statement i am lucky to have many members here today. Three sisters and nephews and cousins in attendance. To be his wife is hands down the best thing that has ever happened to me. And where it devotes its press practice to civil litigation a newly minted nine yearold and jane is seven and im extremely proud for their love and support and i was reminded this morning and on the floor of the house of representatives and then i fell asleep for that but and then to have three amazing parents. And four years later by a mother remarried that became my father. He is loved me and raised me with three of the of four sisters and my sister is in minnesota at work today. Today is the of first time her husband will lobbied by a my side for a major life event he was my cheerleader and mentor who passed away a few months ago but the gaping hole in my introduction my mom is and was the most extraordinary woman i have ever known and it pains me that she is not here today but i can assure you i would not be here today if not for her. And with me is my friend and law partner of to traveled with me to be here. Four sisters i waited all my life to get up brother. And i appreciate them making this effort and look forward to answering your questions. I would also like to think senators grassley and feinstein and the other members of this committee to talk with you today and considering my nomination and also with President Trump to nominate me and with the senators isaacson and the staff of george us every day. And to introduce family and my wife that is here with me my best friend 10 times over a lawyer where our practice one of the heads of the of litigation group. And as a devoted and loving mother and a wife and i cannot say enough about her. Our daughter just started a school as an athlete a swimmer and volleyball she listens to music and some of that i dont care for any wonderful person to spend the afternoon with. My middle daughter is in the sixth grade and is a big reader and writer and teachers always tell us what a good writer she is. I know she was listening during the last hearing because when there was the word umbrage from senator frank in she thought of harcourts harry potter. Sawyer is nine on monday is delightful a thing she will be a scientist or engineer she likes building things and taking things apart. Living in the area and to have a doctor at do he and his family could not be here by suspect they are watching. Also parents that could not be here father is dealing with issues so they cannot make the trip but i think about them i was getting ready to be here and those law firms that have supported me. And to be one of the of mentors end to speak quite frequently and has encouraged me every step of my career. I am very grateful for this opportunity to appear before the senate to discuss the nomination to the Eastern District of North Carolina and never like to think chairman grassley for arranging to have this hearing today and also to President Trump for interested me with this nomination. With me today is my wife and then it has been a great place to have support for the partners ended is appropriate to think my mother and father and with that ability and i am grateful that i have that. I am happy to answer any questions. And also to chairman grassley and the Ranking Member added is a particular pressure pleasure and then a democratic member of congress but i would like to thank President Trump for his nomination and what has been given to me to give my name for consideration but for many people that play a role in my career and then to be spread out among various firms to be helpful and supportive. And to my colleagues during maya their careers and with that court of appeals for where i serve. I am for stick to the appreciative and behind the my wife of 28 years as a clinical psychologist to have my three sons that are with me as well and is my oldest son for those around the country to be the sophomore studying engineering and as a Highschool Senior now we all attended the university of georgia over the next three if four months. As a product of the of very big world that has been proven by the fact one of those cousins is here today fairly recently retired as a professor of law and with her is that a second cousin and also here today is the former Senate Colleague and we have of pleasure to represent georgia together i served six and he served 20 and to have an incredible impact here is my good friend who is a partner in a law firm in washington d. C. To begin his legal career as that legislative counsel later serving as chief counsel and legislative director here in the senate building. As that Summer Associate in 1988 which was the electionyear. And then the congressman and. Than to ba camp counselor. As friends and family and then as say theres an with dr. Chandler but recently had surgery and could not travel unfortunately. And as a victim of the of homicide the mother coincidentally end five months ago. So with this somewhat ironic before she died about my interest and she heard me talking about it to that maybe i was getting fired. And now she thinks highly and the smiling broadly looking down upon this hearing. And with those different judges what makes a good judge . Thanks for that question. To have as a privilege to clerk for renewed judge and if confirmed zero have the honor. These two gentlemen represent will models for anyone who wants to know what it takes to be a good judge. To be unfailingly kind. That respect all parties and witnesses. And that is committed to following the rule of law. To the best of their understanding. To judge how that would align with the judge. And then to submit a letter coming from someone that does not share your ideological or judicial philosophys with your role so what type of the advice would you give the other attorneys . And when senator kennedy was asking about the advice that teeeighteen would give to students but with that next generation of legal professionals to practice law . And how to practice law as a member of the bar where collegiality is high. So was a good lawyer does is to take on causes and then to maintain respect. And with those judicial officers. It would be impossible to overturn an 11th circuit or Supreme Court decision is a District Court judge. Thank you for your testimony. Mr. Ray, i will tell you i actually pull for the georgia bulldogs when theyre not playing any North Carolina team. In the interest of time i defer to my friend and colleague. Thank you. Thank you to all of you. You are at a law firm know, set current. Yes. I went from a law firm to be prosecutor to the senate. I did that for 13 or 14 years. Can you talk about that transition and how that expense will be helpful the District Court . I think it will be immensely helpful having litigated for the better part of 16 years. I think that i have had the opportunity to have a wide breath of experiences litigating many Different Cases involving many different laws. I also think to echo what mr. Fullmer said earlier, being a litigator in becoming a judge if i am fortunate enough to become confirmed lives with me the most recent oppression of what it is like to try case in front of a judge. And, the importance of courtesy, respect, preparation, and openmindedness. So that is really what helps me prepare. Mr. Brown, your experiences as a prosecutor . Yes, as a prosecutor for six years. I tried a number of cases. For the past 15 years ive been in private practice trying cases from the defense side. I think that all helps me because it gives me a fairly good view of at least criminal cases from both sides of the aisle. Having seen some of the pressures and problems that prosecutors face as well as some of the pressures and some of the problems that defense lawyers face, i think that would give me a leg up on how i would handle my courtroom in trying cases in front of me. Thank you. I know that senator coons will ask about some of this as well, but my state has a tradition of high voter turnout, the highest in the last election. I am Ranking Members of the rules committee so i do a lot of work in this area. I think we know that you previously represented the North Carolina legislature in several cases involving Voting Rights and then out of that the Fourth Circuit, and later found that North Carolina buttery dealer intentionally discriminated describing the law as discriminating with surgical precision. What i specifically want to ask i understand that the North Carolina legislature has wreaked questa data regarding the racial breakdown that was requested during this time. The racial breakdown of how frequently these water access tools were used before drafting the law. Despite this information, you argue that the law was not connected with the discriminatory purpose. How would you explain the legislators request for this information, if not for the purpose of drafting law to target groups . And, can you tell us about why you argued the law which was struck down by the Fourth Circuit was not intended to discriminate . Thank you for those questions. I appreciate it i will recall a story that took place, it was a fourweek trial and during the course of the case you may recall at the time these laws were passed or being considered theres an issue about section fives applicability throughout the country to cover jurisdictions. At the time, some of this information was requested section five was still in place. During the course of the trial, the judge asked the attorneys for the Justice Department what wouldve been better for North Carolina given the fact they had to consider the impact of a law and they bore the burden of proof to show that it was not purposely discriminatory under section section five . Should they have asked for the racial day about or not since they were going to have to explain how the law does not have a discriminatory impact. The Justice Department at the trial the permit said we cannot answer that question. It was a prudent thing for the legislature to ask for that information and essentially under section five they would be obligated to ask for such information. Regarding purposeful discrimination, thank you for asking the question. The Fourth Circuit decision is binding on everyone. As a judge i will have to follow it and i will follow it. At the time our clients connected those less i do not believe they thought they were purposely discriminated against africanamericans. I can tell you the practices of our adopted which were subsequently struck down by the Fourth Circuit, are majority rule practices read the rest of the country. For example, most states dont have sameday registration prior to voting. Most states dont have 17 days of early voting. Most dont have out of precinct voting which will allow someone to go vote outside of their precinct on election day. Another important point is that the judge who is the trial judge in the case of the other witnesses after a fourweek trial, he made a finding that none of these laws that were eventually struck down had a discriminatory impact on africanamericans. In fact the africanamerican turnout 2014 went up during an election were some of the practices were in place. The judge is responding that they had no discriminatory impact was overturned by the Fourth Circuit. People see these differently. On bound by the decision of the Fourth Circuit. I have the greatest respect for the judges who sat there. They saw things differently than my clients. I am absolutely convinced that my clients did not intend to intentionally discriminate against africanamericans. The Fourth Circuit sought the other way. When it was a pretty aggressive a pinion the words that they use. I cannot tonight that and again, i have the greatest respect for the judges on the panel and i know they base their decision based on the facts and the laws they understood it. Just one less question, thank you for your work on drug courts. That is something i care deeply about of the work that you have done on that. I had one question has someone who is a prosecutor in cayman when then president clinton introduced or pushed for advocated for the hate crimes legislation. I know you posted as a state senator and the stated georgia and could you talk about why you did that . I did not oppose hate crime bill is a concept, i opposed to specific bill. When it was introduced in the senate are required the judge was the one who is going to make the decision as to whether or not the defendant acted with hate toward a particular group. That was in direct contradiction to the state Supreme Court decision which said it had to be a jury decision. When the bill was voted on in the senate that was one of the reasons and primary reason i oppose the bill. It did pass the senate went to the house, when it came back from the house late in the session, i dont remember exactly the day the bill was structured in a way that it didnt have additional penalties. For example if you commit an aggravated assault, text somebody with a gun or hammer in georgia the crime the judge can sentence you from 1 20 years. Under the bill that came back from the house and allowed the judge to impose a penalty up to the maximum, the judge already had that obligation right to make that decision. It didnt really do anything. I felt it was simply a political statement be made. Sometimes if you pass a bill that doesnt do anything it takes that bill off the public consciousness and many dont anything for a long time. Theres also one other problem with that bill as it did not really identify the groups when it came back from the house, the groups that were targeted. At the time you said it would create two tiers of victims and provide protections for some citizens but not for others. I believe i said that when it was in the senate. And if i might explain that, my dad was murdered when i was 13. So my sister and i were traumatized by that. One of the views i had about the bill given it didnt impose additional penalties was it was the state seeking to say that if you are a victim in one particular class you are entitled to greater recognition and protection than another. But the reason i voted against the bill is that i felt it was unconstitutional and too vague. When it was challenged i went to the Supreme Court they found it was unconstitutional for that reason. Thank you. Thank you senator, and congratulations tour for nominees, each of you different ways pay tribute to your parents, your family, your spouse, your children and i appreciate the opportunity through those statements to learn more about you the people who have help support you in your Public Service careers and in your preparation for today. Have a broad question but i give a specific introduction about defense and axis to justice and right to counsel. Judge ray, as a state court judge you done interesting things recognizing the importance of Adequate Funding and the utilization of diversionary programs. In a 2013 case switches versus miller, was sent to prison, these individuals were not giving counsel at the hearing, you found they were not tonight counsel is the never asked for counsel. Many defendants dont know when the have a right to counsel. The georgia Supreme Court recognize that when they said a failure to ask for counsel. More broadly, what steps we take to ensure parties who appear before you have access to counsel and we are careful in making sure were doing what we can to ensure parties appearing in front of judges are adequately represented . Thank you. The case that you mention i point out that the Supreme Court did uphold the decision that i rendered, i cannot argue with their logic, i disagreed with it because when i thought my opinion said was that the judge did not know that they would want to cancel counsel, is not typical the fathers or mothers in court facing content for not paying Child Support are given lawyers, thats not routinely done and is not the practice in georgia. I was concerned about the judges themselves not knowing that they wanted it. Was also a case where he served for ten years the Capital Punishment case during the mist of the recession with a statement on the money. I brought a halt to proceedings in my Death Penalty case that i had because the defense counsel was underfunded, not given investigators, overworked, they can never show up because its so many cases. My calls a Supreme Court case as well. Ultimately it led to appropriating emergency funds for the capital defender program. We had a practice of my trial court that the District Court judge id ensure that folks represented think its important that all sides have a seat at the table and that means a skilled advocate presenting those. I think it is important in cases that involved unsympathetic defendant such as those who failed to meet their Child Support obligations are those facing capital charges that we be systematically insistent. If i might, i appreciate your representation of state versus lewis of a pro bono client that helps overturn a unilateral decision to ignore the plea deal. How can you ensure that. [inaudible] i share the senators concern and up important representation for indigent defendants. The representation of doctor lewis is one of many are taking on an including some that i am taking on today. Its very important. In the federal system in the Northern District of georgia we have a robust federal defending program and a robust conflicts counsel when theres a conflict with the federal defender. They work well with the judges. I saw that when i was a prosecutor and when i was on the defense side. One way that it judge can assure its working properly is to be accessible, to be patient and have opportunities to bring parties before them early on in the case, status conferences rather than waiting until the end and bringing people before them at that point. I think theres an oversight the judge can provide. Thank you. How do you ensure the parties who are before you are well and adequately represented . My reading of your record is that youve had relatively little criminal experience. I have no criminal experience before coming to this job either. How will you get up to speed on the demands of the district judge and managing trial issues and assurance adequate access. Youre right, i dont have criminal experience. I think in approaching a criminal trial i will do it i do in any other case that i have, we is research the law, learn the facts and apply the law to those facts. I agree with everything mr. Brown said, i think it is crucially important that criminal defendants have not just adequate counsel but really good counsel that advocates on their behalf. The way i can make sure that occurs is by asking at the outset, are you aware that you are aware that you are entitled to counsel . And if they are not, make them aware of that fact and point them in the direction of where they need to go to obtain the counsel. In my view and experience, judges also have the opportunity to advocate appropriately within the bar to ensure there is broad anticipation and pro bono opportunities of folks that are real risk are well represented. Ill ask you the same question, how as a District Court judge you can ensure access to justice and effective representation is balanced between all parties who appear before you. I cannot agree more with your sentiments that you have expressed with that issue. I started as an intern for the federal Public Defenders Office a long time ago and thought i would work for the fulltime they got their budget cut and then a lost my job. I agree with everything the other panelists have said, but a couple thoughts came to mind. One is that because ive not a lot of criminal work to make a real effort, we have really great criminal defense lawyers in our county and im in a make a serious committed effort to meet with them and get their ideas think they should be considering into. Another thing ill say is its not just assigning cases, sometimes unfortunately our system the quality of the learner you have has an impact on what happens at the trial. I want to make sure that even criminal defendants who may not have an assigned lawyer it has somebody who might not be some of the same level that that person is getting a fair trial. Situations like that i will not be shown to use my program test questions during the case the police, the fbi to make sure that important facts are brought into the record for the jurys consideration. Thank you. Ive to more questions. In employment discrimination generally is an area. You represented a client 2003, corporation against allegation of gender discrimination. The plaintiff claimed managers told female employees a variety of inappropriate things that women with children should be at home and not employed, that female employees were awful or stupid or should wear shorter skirts to attract attention. My understanding is that you wrote in a summary that the alleged conduct wasnt neither severe nor pervasive. Understand the application of the and attorneys active aggressive. Did you view that conduct is not rising to the level of gender discrimination . And i wanted to ask about Price Waterhouse. Thank you for the question. I will say, i have given many articles ive written over the years to the committee and one of the things i believe firmly in the night, laufer believes firmly that our main goal is Employment Lawyer system or vendor clients from being sued. The way you prevent your clients from being sued and i have preach this practice, i always recommend that clients adopt a golden rule philosophy for human relations, if you get into a jury trial, the jury will be sympathetic with the employee starting up. Where i want you to be which is not a good thing, if jury jury trials or give the lawyers do not typically good for anyone else. I want that jury after couple of days to say, i wish my mother, sister, brother worked at that company. The case that you mention, those type of contacts are not things that we would recommend support, endorse, or condone our clients to do. Keep in mind, there were allegations at that time theres a difference of opinion about whether they took place or not. Finally, in this area there are situations where somebody engages in behavior, behavior that my mother would wash my mouth out with soap over but they still dont rise to actionable Sexual Harassment under the standards. And celeste i got to watch Supreme Court arguments. So this sticks in my mind. It happened to be Price Waterhouse versus hopkins. The Supreme Court held under title vii jurisprudence gender stereotypes also lead to title vii liability. Would you agree thats a legitimate part of title vii jurisprudence and failure to conform to gender stereotypes can create an employment decision based on a failure to conform and it can produce legal risk for client . I agree with that statement and im proud to say that my law firm has a strong policy against that discrimination which i endorse. I will also say that my Senate Questionnaire one of the things i handled in the past as i had a lady friend who was fired from her business because of gender identity. I dont think people in the workplace should be judged based upon anything other than how they perform. Senator Clover Charlotte also asked about the significant body of cases in which you are active representing North Carolinas legislature around gerrymandering or redistricting, its gone up. To the Fourth Circuit a number of times. This been a number of strong opinions and if i understand yesterday, the Fourth Circuit yesterday concluded that this is one of the most widespread serious and widespread in violations in terms of gerrymandering. You pointed earlier about the compliance and meeting other constitutional protections. Is it permissible in your under federal law for state legislator to engage in gerrymandering that takes race into account . How would you suggest we move forward to a place where district lines are drawn in a way that respect the fundamental rights of all americans . I think thats an evolving area of the law thats taken different turns over the last 30 years. My understanding todays set the course of said anytime a state re districts theres a consciousness over race. Based upon the most recent decisions legislature cannot take race into account until they have essentially the same type of evidence the plaintiff would have the section two case to show that remedial districts were necessary. They would have to have evidence that the Minority Group was politically cohesive, geographical compact to constitute a majority and then you need evidence of polarized voting. That was an issue in our cases in North Carolina. We had evidence of racially polarized voting, i dont think anyone disputes in North Carolina theres racially polarized voting. If you studied the cases and prior redistricting efforts, the racially polarized voting was sufficient in the minds of the legislator to support the remedial districts. They have clarified the standard is higher and you have to have evidence the white majority votes to typically defeat the Minority Groups to elect the candidate of their choice. I think theyve help clarify the standard that legislators now have to follow to take race into account. I think they should not have to take that into account drawing districts. Thank you and to your families for their presence and support today. Thank each of you for being here today. Congratulations tina families. This concludes the committee hearing. I suspect therell be members who will have questions they will submit. The what record will be held open for a week. Thinking congratulations. This meeting is adjourned. [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] today the Senate Finance committee holds a hearing, two of the bills lead sponsors, are subcommittee ed yulled to testify. Cspan 2 will have live coverage starting at 2 00 p. M. Eastern