Transcripts For CSPAN U.S. Court Of Appeals Fifth Circuit Confirmation Hearing 20240713

People . Have remote 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. The hearing will come to order. I believe we have some of our colleagues who will be remote. I dont really have an opening statement. We will hear from judge wilson and a bit. We will let our colleagues from mississippi to the introduction. I will defer to senator feinstein if she was to seining first. Senator feinstein thank you very much. Today we will hear from cory wilson, nominated to a mississippi seat on the fifth Circuit Court of appeals. As i stated during the nomination hearing for the District Court in january, i am interested in judge wilsons views on a number of issues including health care, Voting Rights, womens reproductive rights, gun safety and the rights of lgbt americans. His record of opposition to the Affordable Care act is troubling, particularly because we are concerned with covid19. I hope people straighten us out on that. It has been reported judge wilson has a commitment to undermining the Affordable Care act. He has called the acas passage illegitimate. I would like him to flush that out for us as well. And encouraging the Supreme Court to overturn the aca he said this, for the sake of the constitution, i hope the Court Strikes down the law. I think that too we need to better understand. He has a troubling record on Voting Rights. According to a letter from the opposesdge wilson, free and full exercise of the franchise for communities of color. The naacp also highlighted judge wilson has been a strong supporter of voter id laws, while at the same time indicating his disdain for the concept of Voter Suppression. His record on Voting Rights is all the more relevant to his nomination for two reasons. We have seen the profound effect of the covid19 pandemic has had on americans ability to exercise the right to vote. Fifth 30 is a majority minority circuit, with people of color comprising 55 of the circuits population. Given this demographic in judge wilsons record, the naacp has written that judge wilson is singularly unsuited to hear Voting Rights cases in the circuit. I have never seen that written in my 26 years in this committee. I have concerns about jug wilsons judge wilsons temperament. In an oped he linked president obama to a for throwing teenager. Throwing teenager. In between t cap public even while serving as a state court judge, judge wilson called Hillary Clinton crooked hillary and said she was criminal and clueless. He also called congresswoman alexandria because of cortez claptrap. Tez a i will ask about these and other aspects of his record, but i find it regrettable the committee is proceeding on this nomination. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Judge wilson entered private practice after his clerkship. Commercial disputes, regulatory compliance, intellectual property and securities, insurance defense, and assorted tort claims. His practice with numerous law firms both large and small, trying four cases to verdict in 2005. He served as a white house fellow. He continued at the department of defense. Deputy secretary of state and counsel to the Mississippi State treasurer. Working in the state executive branch, he won election to the Mississippi Legislature in 2016. He served three terms before being appointed to the Mississippi Court of appeals in 2019. As of march 31, he has participated in a proximally 450 cases and authored 42 opinions. The aba rated judge wilson wellqualified. Senator, would you like to introduce the nominee . Thank you, mr. Chairman. Im delighted to be here with my colleague, senator highsmith. And to make a presentation to you and participate in introducing judge cory wilson once again to the committee. Know t trump, as you cory wilson is President Trumps nominee to serve as the u. S. Circuit judge for the added states court of appeals for the fifth circuit. Judge wilsons credentials, intellect and respect for the rule of law are wellestablished. It is significant that the , whichn Bar Association many people call the Gold Standard for assessing judicial candidates recently gave judge wilson his highest rating of wellqualified to serve on the fifth circuit. He is a native of the mississippi gulf coast. Judge wilson currently serves on the Mississippi Court of appeals as the chair just stated, where he decides appellate matters including civil, commercial, domestic and criminal appeals. He graduated summa come lottie from my alma mater, the university of mississippi. Afterwards he attended Yale Law School he served on the el law journal, yale law member of the federalist society, and was on the barristers union, which at other universities would be called the moot court. He served as a clerk for judge cox on the 11th Circuit Court of appeals. The court of appeals is not strange territory for judge wilson. He was a white house fellow at the department of defense. Before becoming a judge, judge wilson was an accomplished lawyer and served in senior roles in mississippis secretary of state and treasury offices. And also represented mississippi 73rd district or one term in the state house of representatives where he was vice chair of the Judiciary Committee. Active in hiss community is active in his community and his church, highlands presbyterian church. He and his wife stephanie, whom you met earlier this year, have one son. Distinguished Ranking Member feinstein, given his professional and academic achievements and his stronger be tatian in mississippi is a fair and impartial judge, and a good and decent man, im confident judge wilson will serve the fifth circuit and our nation well as a circuit judge. Thank you very much. Senator hydesmith. Is an honor and privilege to recommend judge cory wilson of asssissippi to serve a circuit judge on the United States court of appeals for the fifth circuit. I am grateful to you and to the Ranking Member and the distinguished members of the committee for the opportunity to speak in support of judge wilson. I have no judge wilson for many years. He is an excellent choice to serve on the judiciary. His experience as a public servant, his legal knowledge and his personal qualities will serve him and the American People well when he takes a seat on the federal bench. While i am confident the committee has reviewed his very impressive resume, i can assure you that judge has a wellrounded career that includes experience working in executive, legislative and judicial branches of government. Over the years he has gained extensive and diverse litigation experience, and is wellqualified for the position and well respected by all of his colleagues. One colleague described judge wilson as an individual of good character, respectful, patient, hardworking, a good listener who is inclusive of others ideas and has the legal intelligence and knowledge of the complexities of law. Another said he wants to use this his extraordinary gift of vision, writing and oratory to accomplish great things in his home state. As you can imagine, the list of people willing to speak on behalf of judge wilson is numerous. I am thankful President Trump nominated a qualified, impressive and solid conservative candidate to this vacant seat. My colleagues and i are proud to support judge wilsonsnomination, and urge the Judiciary Committee to approve his nomination expeditiously. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you both very much. Judge wilson, would you please rise . Razor right hand. Do you swear the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you god . Judge, the floor is yours. Judge wilson may i take off my mask . Thank you. Graham, Ranking Member feinstein, i want to start out today by thanking you for having this hearing and for the consideration of this committee of this nomination. I also want to thank President Trump for the confidence and the honor he has shown in me for nominating me first to the district judge for the Southern District of mississippi, and now for the fifth Circuit Court of appeals. Tois an honor of a lifetime have to be considered for this position. Senator wicker, senator hydesmith, thank you both for your strong support. You honor me by the kind words you say, but more importantly you honor me by considering me for this position as well. I thank you for that. Chairman graham, if i could acknowledge. A couple of people if i could recognize my wife, stephanie, and my son web. They are not here today. I know they are here in spirit. Without their love and support this would not be possible and it really would not be possible to do life without them. I really appreciate all their support and encouragement. I want to recognize my parents and my parentsinlaw. And all my family for their support to this process as well and for all the love and encouragement they have given to my family over the years. There are too many friends, too many family watching and rooting for me to name them. I would just like to single out the colleagues i have on the Mississippi Court of appeals. There are nine other judges on the court. It has been extraordinary privilege to serve with them on the Mississippi Court of appeals. Each and every one has taught me how to be a better judge every day i have served with them for more than a year now. Finally, i want to acknowledge judge cox. I dont know if he is watching andy, but he modeled for me i clerked for him on the 11th circuit how to be a judge. Particularly how to be an appellate judge. I learned many more lessons from him over a lifetime of mentor ship. It has been a great privilege to put those lessons into practice on the Mississippi Court of appeals. With that, i thank you and look forward to answering the committees questions. How long have you been on the Mississippi Court of appeals . Judge wilson about 15 months. I was appointed in february of 2019. Sen. Graham during your time on the court what is the jurisdiction of the court of appeals . Judge wilson its an intermediate Appellate Court. The Supreme Court gets all the appeals that are lodged from our trial courts. 70y assigned us about 60 to 60 to 70 of the appellate caseload. They retain jurisdiction over certain cases but we handle a large number of cases, about 412 last year was a number. About 50 are postconviction relief. Sen. Graham how do you get to be appointed to that position in mississippi . Judge wilson the judges on the Mississippi Court of appeals are elected. Judges on the court of appeals serve eightyear term. I was appointed by governor bryant to fill a vacancy that opened up on that court. Sen. Graham thank you. How long were you in the statehouse . Judge wilson i served about 3. 5 sessions. More than half a term. I had about a year left on the first term. Sen. Graham you worked in State Government . Judge wilson i did. I was in and out of private law practice. I spent about three years at the secretary of States Office from 2008 to 2011. I spent about a year and half of the state Treasurers Office from 2015. From 2014 to 2015. Sen. Graham senator feinstein mentioned some of the quotes. When did you make those . I will give you a chance to explain the difference between being a politician and a judge. Judge wilson thank you for that question because it is very important. In between the time i served in the secretary of States Office and served at the state Treasurers Office ever commentary for my local newspapers. My hometown papers. On the issues of the day, political debates, policy discussions. I was involved in a number of campaigns as a volunteer before i ran myself. I like to tell people when i was active in partisan elected politician i was active in partisan elective politics. Those roles are completely distinct and different than the role in which i served now as a judge. Sure you are aware, the policymaking branches of government exercise the will of the people. To be a judge on the court, any court, we are only to exercise judgment in deciding cases and controversies that come before the court in accordance with binding precedent and the statutes, the law the legislative branch next. Sen. Graham when it comes to the Supreme Court cases, do you feel bound by those if youre on the circuit . Judge wilson absolutely. The Supreme Court precedent is binding precedent, much as the state Supreme Court precedent is binding on the Mississippi Court of appeals. Sen. Graham if you could you got about a minute what would you like to accomplish . Why do you want this job and why do you think you are qualified for it . Judge wilson senator, as far as wanting this job, this is an Incredible Opportunity to serve our country. Ive had a heart for Public Service much of my adult life. I have been privileged to serve in various capacities. I passionately believe in the rule of law, the constitution, the framework that the founders bequeathed to us. Frankly, i want to play a part in making sure those values, those important features of our democratic republic are passed on to my sons generation and the generations after him. Sen. Graham senator feinstein . Senator feinstein thank you, mr. Chairman. In a 2012 oped in the Madison County journey journal, he obamacare retains an air of illegitimacy dating back to its passage. In the 2014 column you referred to the acas passage as perverse and illegitimate. How is the Affordable Care act illegitimate and how is it perverse . Judge wilson senator, if i could i would like to say i share your commitment certainly is a policy maker, health care is an important issue. When i was in more of a policymaking mode i wrote these columns when i was active in politics. Columnsferring in those about the various policy features of the Affordable Care act, some of the politics involved, political questions. In way the bill was passed various aspects with which i did not necessarily agree. As a matter of policy and politics, i fully recognize, senator, my role as a judge is completely different than the role as a commentator or a politician, even in the legislative branch of government. At that time i wrote those, the Supreme Court had not issued one of the columns you referenced had not settled some of the legal issues. I wrote about that as well. Mainly i was writing about the political questions and policy issues related to the Affordable Care act. Sen. Feinstein let me ask this question. The words perverse and illegitimate bother me. If you are confirmed, how can a person seeking to enforce rights under the Affordable Care act have confidence you will rule fairly in light of your view . Judge wilson i think the first thing a litigant can do is look at my record on the Mississippi Court of appeals. I have participated in about 500 cases at this. Point and every one of those cases i endeavored to follow the law, to apply precedent fairly and fully, and to apply the statutes according to the plaintext and added by the enacted by the legislature. I will continue to do that, whichever court i may serve. I think that highlights the difference between serving as a judge and serving as a legislator or as someone involved in elective politics. Sen. Feinstein you have advocated striking down the act. Thatou telling us today that will not be your position . Judge wilson senator, when i wrote those columns i was in the policymaking realm or political realm. Versus o subalius, i find it binding. Sen. Feinstein i would like to be able to vote for you. But if i know ahead of time you will strike down a very important law covering a large number of people at getting them care they did not have before, i cant vote for you. Would it be your intent to strike down the Affordable Care act, yes or no . Judge wilson no, senator. I think many of the questions i debated and discussed in the commentary were unsettled questions that that question at that time. When the Supreme Court handed down nfib or the king versus burwell opinion around 2015, those issues are settled for courts to apply that president faithfully and i would do so precedent faithfully and i would do so. Sen. Feinstein that is helpful. Thank you. I askedgrassley questions different to you from other judges. For the last four or five years at least. For one exception ive been asking about more recently is because there has been such an explosion of nationwide injunctions by some of our judges, particularly district or judges. Is it ever appropriate for a federal judge to issue a nationwide injunction blocking the limitation of federal law, Administrative Agency decisions, executive order or any similar federal policy . If so, when and why . , and if so, when and why . Judge wilson senator, i want to caviar my answer, if i could, stating that i do not want to forecast how i might rule on cases coming before the quartet i know this is absurd due to litigation in our courts. Would answerhat, i your question this way, if i point and that is to pus back to my judicial philosophy. Restraint isial important. I think generally that cases should opinions or decisions in cases should be very mindful of the jurisdiction of the court. And i think i can say that i will be fairly skeptical of affording injunctive relief or Equitable Relief before the parties in the case. Sen. Grassley so you are saying within the jurisdiction of that judgeship nationwide. Judge wilson i think that is a very important consideration, yes, senator. Sen. Grassley ok. You previously had talked about your views on president. I would like to get specifically to the fifth circuit. What factors would you consider in reaching a decision to overturn a fifth circuit precedent . Judge wilson well, senator, i andk that stare decisis respect to president s precedents are important in determining a new case before the corporate i have not face this on the Mississippi Court of appeals, because we are bound by Supreme Court precedent. I guess there have been occasions where we have revisited Mississippi Court of appeals president , but i generally look to the court above us for guidance, and i would do the same thing there as well, in terms of the fifth circuit. Sen. Grassley next question is kind of general, but it is important to me. I would like to learn your views on judicial activism and restraint. What is your definition of an activist judge, and what is your definition of judicial restraint . I suppose one would be opposite the other, but answer it anyway. Judge wilson sure, senator. The firs short one first, perhaps. I view judicial activism as legislating from the bench. Courts should not impose the policy precedents in lieu of the legislative branch. They should view what is presented to the court based on the plain language, based on binding precedent. Judicial restraint may be the flipside about coin, and i would say this i mentioned in my opening remarks, one of the things that i feel like i learned from judge cox when i clerked for the circuit was deciding the case before the court, not reaching unnecessary issues. Narrower opinions that may not have dicta or unintended consequences. I think that is all part of judicial restraint. Sen. Graham thanks, senator grassley. Senator durbin. Thanks, mr. chairman. This is the second time we have entertained a nominee for a Circuit Courts vision who has spent so much of his life criticizing the Affordable Care act. When we arein time facing a National Health emergency where we have lost almost 100,000 americans who another 1. 5here million have been infected, where we have the largest viral diseasehis of any nation on earth, that the republicans would bring to us two nominees for the second highest level of federal courts in our land, who have such contempt for the Affordable Care in anhich was passed effort to give americans peace of mind to know that they had coverage of Health Insurance. As hard as it may be for some to believe, there are people who feel vulnerable at this moment in their lives, not just because of the virus come about because of the expense associated with medical care and hospital care. So, judge wilson, my question to you is very simple. You have tweeted over 30 times your contempt for the Affordable Care act. You have said it in so many different ways. You have characterized the former president of the United States in the most negative ands over his propagating championing that cause. In light of all the americans who died because of the coronavirus, in light of our doional health emergency, you have at least a moment of pause in your efforts to stop the extension of Health Insurance to so Many Americans . Judge wilson well, senator, first i would reiterate my view that i held as a legislator and even a private citizen about the tens of access to health care, and i think during the time the Affordable Care act was being debated and being litigated, both in the court of Public Opinion as well as in the courts, i think people of good faith, people of reasonable minds could disagree about aspects of the Affordable Care act, or about whether the Affordable Care act was the right if one moment, in light of all that we have been through over the last several months, you do not stop and say, you know, i may not have liked obama, i may not have liked democrats, it may not have liked the way the Affordable Care act it, when soi get Many Americans feel so vulnerable at this moment in their lives, i understand why we need a safety net so that people have the peace of mind that they have access to decent care. I get it, as i see people Wearing Masks in senate hearings. I understand what was behind that Affordable Care act and why many of us think it is the most important vote we ever cast. Is there just one moment, maybe, when that happened to you . Judge wilson well, senator, during my times of Public Service before becoming a judge, i felt like i always got the importance of health care. I think if you examine my record in the legislature, even when i was running for the legislature, i talked about how Important Health care was, for not only patients who need access to health care but also providers and it is an economic driver in mississippi. So there were a number of measures that i supported while serving in the legislature that i think would bear that out. And certainly, again, senator, i think it would underscore sen. Durbin because you want to be a federal judge, being on the Legislature May have some importance, but what has critical importance, as senator feinstein said, is this piece of legislation. I find it ironic that in the midst of this Public Health crisis, the republicans have brought us two nominees for the second highest level of federal courts in a matter of three weeks to have such disdain for the Affordable Care act, which provides protection to millions of americans. Now i want to ask you a question about something that is a little more personal. Subcommitteetake a on the road to florida and ohio in the year 2012. The question was on the suppression of the right to vote. These states, ohio and florida, had passed legislation that limit opportunities to vote. And so our subcommittee went to each of the states and called Election Officials of both Political Parties and put them under oath and ask them a very simple question what is the incidence of voter fraud in florida and ohio that you leave led the legislature to restrict the access to vote, to limit opportunities to vote, to require identification . Tell me of the cases of fraud that led to this. And in both states, in both instances, there were none. None and yet when it came time for you to take a look at my effort and to grade it, you called it a show trial, that there was no substance to it, i guess, is that what that means . Comment you like to about why calling Election Officials under vote and asking them about voter fraud is some kind of a show trial . Judge wilson respectively, as a sitting judge, i cannot comment because of the canons and political issues. Sen. Durbin go ahead. Lets hear it all. Judge wilson i cannot comment on political issues are issues related to policy. I can say, senator, what i wrote those columns, again, i was not a judge, and i was active in politics and campaigning remind sen. Durbin here is what we are faced with when people have been as outspoken as you have been, we have two possibilities as a deathbed conversion, or that you are going to be a robot judge, i do what i am told. There is really no discretion here. Whether i am conservative or liberal is immaterial to how i rule as a judge. I dont believe it. Never have. Never will. Your life experience, your political wills are going to be part of your decisionmaking, and we ought to acknowledge it, and i think you want to be more candid at admitting it. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Sen. Graham youre welcome. Think those of your party that gave this committee have the same rights he does, except they were democrats. I knew what i was getting what i voted for democratic nominees. Dont be surprised that we pick people who are conservative. And in terms of your ability to be a judge, i think youve got the ability to be a judge and understand that is different than being a politician. Senator lee. You, mr. Thank chairman. I would like to pick up where you left off on that. I served for this committee for many years during this administration the administration of president obama. President obama and i did not see anything alike, and he picked a lot of nominees with whom i disagreed on matters of policy and, at times, on matters of stature to show mary and constitutional stature to statutory and things. Tionary fact that with the your qualifications, or lack thereof, to sit on the court of appeals for the fifth circuit has, or ought to become influenced in any way, shape, or form by your political views, and in fact, if properly approached, the traditional role is analytically distinct from the legislative roles, from the role played by either of the two political branches, properly understood and undertaken, the judicial role involves a rearview mirror, it involves looking at what has been enacted by the legislative branch, what the law says rather than what it should be. I find offensive and repugnant to the very task of overseeing the judiciary and looking at these questions the suggestion that you have to somehow embrace the policy wisdom associated with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care act, or, for that matter, any aspect of it or any particular piece of legislation. Neither you nor any other candidate should have to swear an oath of loyalty to this or any other progressive peace of policy that is on the table. We have to remember what james in describing the role of the federal government, as compared to that of the states, and federalist 45, when he said the role of the federal government is few and defined. To theers reserved states are numerous and definite. It is a matter of Public Record that a lot of people express opinions about the Patient Protection and Affordable Care act at the time it was enacted and following its enactment. Significanted a step by the federal government to expand the federal law. You had a majority of the Supreme Court of the United States that recognize it was at least outside of the Congress Commerce clause power to do that. You had a separate fiveperson majority that upheld the Patient Protection and Affordable Care act and the individual mandate on other bases. Andander hamilton federalist 78 acknowledged the distinction between will and judgment. Explained, is something that is reserved to the legislative branch. Judgment is reserved to the judicial branch. He explained that those two things have to be kept distinct from one another. Judge wilson, could you explain to us how you view the difference between will and judgment and how that plays into your approach to judging . Judge wilson absolutely, senator, and i am absolutely 78 on aof federalist frequent basis, because i think judgment is the key. Course are deciding cases and controversy that come before them and go no for farther. I take hamiltons description of will to mean the will of the people. After all, people like the legislative branch, and it is supposed to be representing the people who voted for those representatives. Having served in the legislature and represented constituents to make those policy choices, i am differencee of the theerving and th in judicial branch, according to the law, and as the president handed down by the mississippi Supreme Court and the u. S. Supreme court. V. Sibelius was decided back in 2012. Nearly eight years ago. You would be bound to follow that another president s, is that not right . Judge wilson yes, that is right. In fact, it is settled law. Sen. Lee in fact, that is not diminished by previous political positions you might have taken outside of the Traditional Law . Judge wilson not at all, because i see that distinct from the legislative law. Katie it is not sen. Lee is not a convenient answer for this moment did i understand your philosophy based on my own view of your writings, your own statements before the committee, and long before you were nominated. This is part of how you view the judicial role, is it not, that it would be inappropriate for you as a judge to take that into account. Judge wilson that is correct, senator. Sen. Lee thank you, mr. Senator. Sen. Graham thank you for it i have believe i have senator a video. Se vi sen. Whitehouse you do. Judge wilson, thank you for being here. All nominees come to us with a certain amount of history, background,itical previous communications, and you look at that with a view to whether it signals that the leavedual will be able to whatever their politics and , as previously expressed, in the robing room, and that when they get out on , theynch in their robes will have all of that behind them. I hope you think that that is a fair standard. Judge wilson well, senator, certainly since joining the court of appeals over a year ago, i have left policymaking and the political side of my background and experience, those other roles, left those behind and endeavored to decide every case fairly, impartially, according to the law and applicable precedents. Sen. Whitehouse what concerns me is, in a lot of your communications, the tone is one and scorntterness towards democrats, whether it is attorney general holder or president obama or secretary of it is hardon, that for me to believe you can actually leave that bitterness and scorn behind you in the robing room. Ande is a degree of vitriol unpleasantness about it that makes me wonder, if there anything that you would like to say to that observation . Judge wilson well, senator, first, i think things said in the heat of campaigns, and political campaigns, would be more appropriate in policymaking, political, the partisan politics. All those comments that you referenced in terms of my writings came at a time before i was ever a judge. And the role is distinct, it is very different, and my personal views, political views of things, have no place in deciding the case that come before the court. Sen. Whitehouse so let me ask you about something specific that you said with respect to attorney general holder. You said that attorney general holder, and i am putting you laws whined that voter id are part of an illegitimate, orchestrated effort by republicans to suppress poor and minority voting. How do you know that voter id laws are not part of an illegitimate, orchestrated effort by republicans to suppress poor and minority voting . Judge wilson well, senator, as a sitting judge, i do not want to comment on issues that may be litigated by the court. To respond to your question, though, i can offer the experience i had in the secretary of States Office, as well as during my private practice years. The entity of the ballot is very important to me. In fact, i look at the right to vote, i believe it has been referred to as over other rights. Vitally important. I have spent my career working to protect the integrity of the ballot as well as to expand access to voters, to the voting process. Sen. Whitehouse so the fourth appealsu. S. Court of North Carolina Voter Suppression scheme, for want of a better word, and it made the following finding. I am reading here, the new provisions target africanamericans with almost surgical precision. so that finding would clearly seem to me that it is an effort to suppress poor and minority and the North Carolina decision in the Fourth Circuit also went on to say North Carolinas asserted justifications cannot and do not conceal the states true motivation, so clearly they attempting to conceal their purpose, which seems to be part of an illegitimate and orchestrated effort, so when you a notion that voter i. D. Laws could be part of an illegitimate, orchestrated effort to support poor and minority voting, were you aware of that decision . Where you aware of these voting practices that have been called out over and over again by federal courts . Judge wilson well, senator, again, speaking of my experience in mississippi, i was well aware of our voter i. D. Laws that were passed by a substantial margin, i think 62 . That law provided safeguards for voters who did not have an i. D. , for example, to obtain one for no charge. It also provided safeguards for voters who did not happen to have identification with them when they went to vote at the polls. It was based come if i recall come on the law from indiana that was upheld by the United States Supreme Court. Certainly the experience with mississippis voter id law is far different than what you described in the Fourth Circuit case in that it was implemented without objection from the Obama Justice department and without litigation, as far as i am aware. Sen. Whitehouse well, i am over my time, so i will conclude, but you did not say that mississippis voter i. D. Laws were the subject of your comment, you talked about voter i. D. Laws in general, so i hope well, i would feel pretty bad if i were coming in to challenge a voter id law before a judge who had made such a blanket statement as this, and i hope you have got the opportunity to correct it before base is concluded. My time has gone over too far, mr. Chairman. I appreciate your courtesy. Sen. Graham thank you, senator whitehouse. Senator cruz, you are next. If you could hold it down, i will be right back. Senator cruz. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Judge wilson, welcome back. Judge wilson thank you, senator. Sen. Cruz congratulations on the new appointment and a court that is near and dear to my heart, the fifth Circuit Court of appeals, which i will, perhaps parochial he, layout as the finest Appellate Court in the country. I ask you, judge wilson, you have served as both an elected state legislature, and now as a state appellate judge. How are those jobs different . What is the difference between being a legislator and being an appellate judge . Judge wilson well, senator, during my time as a legislature or, i was always in mind that i represented constituents who elected me, and they sent me to the capital to make policy decisions, to set for decisions on the issues of the day into devote for allegedly should, in other words, to codify, hopefully, the will of the people in our state law. Constituents, competing and balancing concerns about crafting legislation that would achieve policy goals through the best means, while minefinder minimizing unintended consequences. Crafting the laws that come again, reflected the will of the people. Searching as a judge is a completely different role in my view, senator, because judges are not to legislate from the bench. We are not to rule on cases based on how we think a lot to be. We are to follow the law as it is, as it is enacted by the Peoples Branch of government, the legislature. I take that very, very seriously. I think that also judicial restraint, being fair and impartial to every litigant that comes before the court, treating them with dignity, to decide the case or controversy that is before us by going where the law leads and going no farther. As an appellate judge come as a federal appellate judge, do you believe you have any difficulty, any hesitancy applying a law or upholding a law with which you might happen to disagree with as a policy matter . Judge wilson no problem whatsoever, senator, and in fact, over the 500 or so cases that i participated in on the Mississippi Court of appeals, there are no doubt cases with which i might not have personally agreed with the outcome, but it has been said that if judges are not deciding cases, they may not personally agree with, they are not doing the job rightly. Sen. Cruz and i assume, the flipside is true as well, that if there were a law that you agree with, as a policy matter, but it were nonetheless unconstitutional, if it violated the bill of rights or another portion of the constitution, that you would, as an appellate judge, strike it down, if that is what the constitution compelled. Judge wilson i would follow the law, and i would apply it faithfully, yes, senator. Sen. Cruz lets talk a little bit about the bill of rights. Talk to this committee about the First Amendment and the important of the First Amendment. Judge wilson you know, senator, i may have said this in my prior hearing in january, but in the last year or so, i gave an interview to a nice cool student, talking about the freedom of speech in particular, and i think i preferred to that as foundational to our process, the right to petition the government, the right to express opinions. Certainly in the first mma, religious liberty is ensconced there, freedom from the establishment of religion. Those rights are foundational to our society, they are foundational to our freedom, and if the First Amendment is eroded , i would dare say it will not be too long before the others are as well. Sen. Cruz talk to this committee about the Second Amendment and the importance of the Second Amendment. Judge wilson well, again, senator, the right to keep and bear arms is Second Amendment for a reason. I think it is an important part of the heritage that the founders have left us. I am familiar with the analysis in that case. I have not had a chance to apply it, but i would follow it carefully and faithfully, and, again, i wouldve floyd policy decisions about secondment rights or the problems with gun violence. Those issues are for the legislative branch, even though that amendment is therefore a very important reason. Sen. Cruz ok, and a final question, please tell this committee your views on federalism and the importance of federalism as part of our constitutional structure. Judge wilson well, and short, senator, it is a feature, not a bug, and having served in the state legislature, and even before that time, i was very mindful of the distinct roles between the federal government and the State Government feared i think, in part, it is a very important check and balance of the power of either one of those levels of government, the fact that the power is dispersed between the 50 states as well as the federal government. Sen. Cruz thank you, judge. Senator coons. Coons thank you, senator, thank you, your honor. I will know that we are again considering a judicial nominee, someone who, in your previous encounter, when you were here, demonstrated sharp partisan views, when, in my view, we should be Holding Hearings that are directly responsive to the Global Pandemic that has taken nearly 100,000 american laws. And where i think that there are pressing issues that this committee can and should instead be focusing on. But i will turn to the business before us, if i might. Judge wilson, you are a state court judge that has served just one year, is that correct . Judge wilson yes, senator, a little over a year, about 15 months. Sen. Coons you described passage of the Affordable Care act, which still today provides protection for over 130 million americans against preexisting condition discrimination, you describe that act as perverse, its passage illegitimate and reflecting colossal arrogance, i think i am quoting. And you compared it to ramming a freedom infringing mess down our throats. You previously testified that the Supreme Court has addressed the aca command response to other senators questions, and you say you will be bound by respecting that president. But we are talking about today an environment where the president is actively litigating to strike down the aca, based on a different theory. When tens of millions of americans pinned on it for their health care, how could any of them expected to decide these challenges fairly . I recognize you were in your role not as a judge but as a state legislature , but i think these very sharp words give us a real insight into your policy position. Judge wilson senator, thank you for your question, because as i noted, when i was a policymaker, i agree with your the importance you place on a health care and worked on that issue substantially when i was in the legislature. I think, though, that people can have confidence that i will decide cases fairly and impartially, in accordance with finding precedent in the text of the law, because the role of a judge is quite distinct and difference from the role of a policymaker. When i wrote those comments that you reference, i was writing as a commentator, as a private citizen. I was serving in the legislature, where policy and politics were very much a debate about the Affordable Care act i might, judge wilson, forgive me, we have limited time, calling a bill brings into mind legality, and your record leaves me concerned about facts of the law. View mocks president obama as the anointed one, president makebelieve, king barack, intellectually bankrupt. You close a country clinton clueless, corrupt. Litigantsd he say to if a judge before them on a really important Circuit Court people of criminality and bad faith because he disagrees with them on matters policy . Judge wilson senator, and over 500 cases now, i have fulfilled cases by applying the law and doing so partially and fairly. The comments you reference remain at a time when i was involved in campaigns, these issues were being debated, and frankly, i had personal perspectives about the Affordable Care act and the way it was passed in process, at the time, i was at a law firm, i had to go out and make a living before my family got paid, and i had to pay 100 of my familys premiums. Over that timeframe, my premiums went up. My coverage actually went down. So some of the personal perspective of what i was expressing may provide context sen. Coons i can certainly understand and appreciate people who have strong policy views. I, frankly, think there is value for people t who were former legislators to be on the bench. But the shrillness of these attacks, you did not just attack president obama and secretary clinton, you said an honest democrat is a rare sighting. Speaking as someone who is a democrat and tries to be intellectually honest, it is hard to take some concerns that litigants before you will have some concern believing that your record of one year as a state court judge will give you enough context of and partiality. A critical issue about our structure, our society, our republics access to the ballot box. Ballot, wet the cannot protect freedom. You have written multiple articles in your service as a judge in which he put Voter Suppression as if you did not exists, and atit the historical struggle for access to the ballot box, i thought it was important to as a question, again, but i ask at the last hearing, and which i do not think i got a clear answer. Do you acknowledge that voter i. D. Laws can result in Voter Suppression . And can you name one example of Voter Suppression that has actually occurred since the Supreme Court decided the Shelby County case . Judge wilson well senator, i guess i am not familiar with the details of the Fourth Circuit case that we have been discussing before now, regarding the North Carolina voter i. D. Laws, but, again, that case might be an example that, where the court found that that measure was invalid. But going back to my record as a policymaker, senator, i agree with you that the ballot box sen. Coons did the court find it was invalid, or did the court find it was on scones additional, and it was crafted withate legislators surgical precision for Voter Suppression . Judge wilson senator, i am not familiar enough with the case to be familiar with the holdings sen. Coons i will be happy to say that i will wait for your answer on the record. We have the opportunity to wait on the record, if we could. I am just going to ask, one last time, do you acknowledge voter i. D. Laws can have the result of suppressing the vote in ways that are unconstitutional and impermissible . Judge wilson well senator, i do not want to prejudge an issue that may come before the court. I do not feel like i can comment on that appropriately. I can say from my spirits in a Elections Administration and in my record in the house, i supported a number of provisions that actually expanded access to the ballet, that did modernize our election code, and make the whole voting process more transparent and more available for all voters. I think that a policymaker can be both in support of the integrity of the ballot, protecting the right of everyone to vote in a legal election, and expanding and making the franchise more available to exercise. Honor, is well, your certainly look forward to hearing from you in writing with more detail about how that is possible, what you have done to that extent, and your views on how we protect access to the ballot in ways that expand the franchise and ensure that we have free and Fair Elections in this country. A number of other, is that you have made them and i will include them for the record, leave me concerned about your views of the vote and about the franchise. Broadly speaking, the point i was simply trying to make of that policy disputes are one thing, but some of your comments andso sharply partisan demonstrate such personal hostility about who are real americans and who count that it leaves me gravely concerned about your inclination to be a fairminded jurist, despite your educational qualifications and your experience, it is those matters about your temperament and record that i am going to be looking at most closely, as i consider your nomination to this historic and significant Circuit Court. Thank you for your indulgence, senator. Sen. Cruz thank you, senator crucoons. Now we have senator blackburn, i believe, remotely. You, mr. Kburn thank chairman, and thank you, judge wilson, for coming before us. We. Cruz i am not sure if control the volume or if senator blackburn controls it, but the volume is too low to hear. I suspect the judge can hear it either. Judge wilson i am having difficulty, senator. Sen. Blackburn ok, lets see if i think the volume control is on your end. Sen. Cruz ok, we are here and you better now. Maybe try to speak loudly. We can hear you, but it is still pretty faint. Sen. Blackburn ok, my volume is up. Sen. Cruz ok, that is much better we can hear you now. Sen. Cruz ok, right. Mr. Wilson, gosh sen. Blackburn ok, great. Beginlson, i want to talking about another of our we are hearing about this time of covid, and as we look at technology, we are hearing more about it, and that is individuals rights. If you will give me, for the record, about one minute. Senator well, judge wilson well, senator, i heard your question to be about the right of privacy, and, friendly, i have not studied enough during my time on the Mississippi Court of appeals. There are a variety of Supreme Court precedents construing that right, and i would follow them faithfully come in any case that came before the court involving those issues. Sen. Blackburn ok. We have talked about your time as a legislator and your time on of bench, but just a couple minutes, talk about your time as a professor at that Mississippi College of law. When you have students in your classroom, how did you talk to them about being a fair and impartial judge . Judge wilson well, senator, that is an interesting question, because i taught as an adjunct professor at Mississippi College school of law legal writing, which i think is vitally important, because it is such a critical part of communicating, presenting cases, presenting claims, describing and persuading why your claims have merit or why claims may not have merit, if you are the defendant. Pretrial practice one summer at Mississippi College school of law, and in both cases, it was a great opportunity to try to mold new lawyers, soon to be lawyers, in terms of thinking about doing justice, being civil, being fair, and also zealously advocating for your client, particularly with regard to the pretrial practice course that i spoke, i shared a lot of experiences i had had in handling the rules of procedure, in rebounding discovery, written discovery, and conducting depositions and the like, preparing cases for trial, so hopefully i imparted some wisdom to them. It was certainly helpful for me impressions of the law and of litigation and the importance of doing justice. Sen. Blackburn i appreciate that, and i am not going to take further time. Thank you for coming back before us. Thank you for your interest. It is so important that we have judges who are westitutionalists and that have those on the bench you understand, from a legislators as well as those who have the judicial background, that you will carry with them on the bench, so we appreciate that very much. Mr. Chairman, i am going to steal my time back. Sen. Graham thank you, senator blackburn. Senator booker, are you with us . Ere senator booker . Apparently not. Ok. We will get back to him if that works out. Senator hawley. Awley thank you, mr. Chairman. The judge, good to see you again. Congratulations on your nomination. Good to have you before us. Judge wilson thank you senato. , discussley i wanted to some of the statements you made as a legislator versus your time on the bench. I understand that has been a point of conversation among some of my colleagues today. You are a federal unique person, will become if confirmed to the bench, and there are not many former legislators on the federal bench these days, anymore. Talk to us a little bit, if you would, about having been a legislator, now being a judge, how you understand the difference between those positions and how you have, in your experience on the bench so far, how you have worked to cabin your own views, set those aside. I am sure you have had decisions that you would personally disagree with or rule on laws that you personally thought were not the wisest thing ever adopted. So tell us a little bit about how you have managed that already in your experience and what that will mean for you when you if you were to be confirmed to the federal bench. Judge wilson thank you, senator. Sure. I think that, in short, the legislature makes the laws, and the court interprets the laws, and that is a very important distinction, but it is very important, because judges are not to legislate from the bench. They are not to substitute their policy preferences for those of the legislature that is elected by the people. Now, i will say that in terms of serving as a legislature and watching the legislative process come to completion and laws being acted, it doesnt somewhat inform my views of the statute, in terms of legislative history, for example. We do not have legislative history in mississippi. That is probably a good thing. My first resort is the text of the statute. What it says is what was enacted, and that is what we are to apply. Sen. Hawley tell me a little bit more about that, because the statutory question is a significant one, and he will face that in the federal bench, particularly in this, in this role, statutory interpretation, you will do a lot of it. As a former legislator, tell me how that will inform your views as you come to a statute and have to interpret it, what insights would you bring to that enterprise that the folks who do not have your background would not have . Judge wilson i think going back to what i just said, the text of the statute is what is paramount. That is what was enacted. Do think there are ambiguous statutes where you cannot necessarily ascertain the meaning from a particular clause. I have had that experience on the court of appeals right now. It is important, though, to look at the broader context of the statute, again, referring to the text of what was enacted. In section a, maybe looking at section bnc might tell us more about what section a means. But i think that discussions in committee, at least going back to the Mississippi Legislature, amendments that were offer that either passed or failed were attached to laws, conference reports, which we worked on a good bit, those are not persuasive. What is persuasive is the law that is enacted. Sen. Hawley senator, the other position that you have held, which is not terribly common, if you were solicitor general, if i am not mistaken, for your state. Tell me about your role as an advocate in serving in that role , how that prepared you to be an Appellate Court now, how that woul might inform, if you were o be appointed. Judge wilson well, senator, i was not solicitor general. You are giving me a credit i did not have. Sen. Hawley ah, you should have gone with it. Lets go back to a point mi 3. 5 overtime, mr. Chairman . Ok, good. I was. Ot think now they are giving me senator blumenthals time. You a chance, judge, to make this point, because, friendly, we do not see a lot of former legislators in the text again, you Reference Committee reports, and know as a legislator a lot of times there are various deals that are made to get you to the legislative text, but of course it is difficult to know whose personal interpretation actually made it into a text, what deal is reflected into a text, and so, at the end of the day, it is not a particular deal or any particular Side Agreement or any particular arrangement that is the law, right . It is the text that we actually vote on as legislators that is the law and that binds you as a judge. Is that a Fair Assessment to say . Judge wilson it sounds like it is, senator. , inertainly is in my view the Mississippi Legislature, bills i authored went through the amendment process, and the aversion of the bill, when a later version was passed and enacted did not matter, because what was passed and enacted by the governor was what was the law. Sen. Hawley very good. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Sen. Graham thank you. Senator blumenthal. Sen. Booker i apologize. O, dontham n apologize. Senator booker. Sen. Booker i really want to start with this. There is an incredible report that was done about a man in South Carolina named larry butler, after South Carolina where a voter id law, larry butler, who was a military veteran, had voted for years, and in 2011, he voted in the 2010 election, voted in 2011, South Carolina passed that strict voter i. D. Law, so here was an elderly man who had to obtain an idea, he was 85 at the time, had to chase down paperwork, ranging from his high school records, he had to get his birth certificate, his census records, he went to the dmv and kept getting the runaround, office of vital records, and essentially had to go to court. After all of that, he still was not able to get a South Carolina voter i. D. It was not until local elected leaders heard about his plate that they intervene. They looked at the cost of all the things that he did, from bus fares to the filing fees of about 36, and that is about the same amount ingested for inflation as what the infamous poll tax was in South Carolina and 1895, and im just curious, voter i. D. Called laws neutral, and said anyone who opposes them, you literally used the word tyranny. Do you really believe objections that many have come including other judges, who said some of the laws were drawn toh surgical precision disproportionately impact africanamerican voters. Do you believe that objection to these laws is tyranny . Judge wilson senator, thank you for your question. As i have noted, i share your view of the importance of the ofe, and i spent a good bit time, especially during the secretary of state years, working with local Election Officials to make sure that the provisions of federal law, for example, were being followed, were being complied with in terms of voter roll maintenance, in terms of making registrations available to voters at the department of public safety, for example. When i wrote the comments you referenced senator, of course it was well before i became and i was involved in politics and policy to die was expressing opinions, largely based on mississippis process, later as a Citizen Initiative that i think was passed in 2011, i think it was pete i was speaking about politics and policies that were intimate at that time regarding our voter identification law. Sen. Booker and so are you saying to me than i should discount what you said in a 2011 newspaper call him when you said concerns like mine about voter i. D. Laws and Voter Suppression were poppycock, to vote your language, unless you count the dead boat, which you said. Youthen in a 2012 column, reiterated that concerns like mine are as phony as the war on women. Is that something i should just discount now, or consider you for a federal position . Judge wilson well, again, senator, when i wrote about those issues, when i wrote about the issues of voter identity occasion and safeguarding the integrity of the ballot, i was more in a policymaking or an advocacy mode. All of those considerations, opinions, statements made while i was active in elective politics have no bearing on the way i have decided cases on the court of appeals over the last year and would have no bearing whatsoever on applying the president that is applicable to such cases that may come before the fifth circuit if i am fortunate to be confirmed. You knower sir, do how many cases of in person voter fraud have been documented in the United States in the last decade . Idge wilson well senator, cant speak necessarily to that, but i can speak to the experience i had handling a couple of matters when i was in private practice. We in two trials won elections because of significant departures, including voter fraud kid i am also personally aware and some of the same contexthere we had trial, people being indicted for voter fraud, people being either resigned from office or going to jail because of departures from the election law, so i think it is very important to preserve the right to vote by ensuring the integrity of the ballot as well, and i have certainly worked in those areas, again, in private practice, winning new elections in cases where the outcome was actually marred by significant voter fraud. Sen. Booker well, again, i was talking about, sir, inperson voter fraud, somebody showing up to vote and presenting themselves as someone else. I do not think you saw one of those cases, and i could be mistaken, because the number of toes, i can count on my hands the amount of cases of. Ctual inperson voter fraud my concern is, since the shelby decision, makes ordinary number of voter laws that are being andten and challenged going before federal judges and winning. I worry about someone who has such a long history and on many documented occasions not seeing this as a serious problem. My concern is something that is strike,an a lightning but instead, voter i. D. Laws being written with the express purpose of disadvantaging everything from College Students all the way to African Americans in this country. And as someone who would literally not be in this position that i am in today if it was not for the activism rights, toed see a lot of these efforts be done and struck b down by toeral results, from arizona New Hampshire recently, the push under the faux idea that somehow inperson voter fraud is great. I worry about, sir, and i appreciate you answering my questions directly, about someone going to the bench in my having to hear some of these cases, who wrongfully think that this is a big problem in this country, or, two, who think that there is concern, like me, is nothing but bobcat. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Sen. Graham senator blumenthal, i made a mistake. I got the information wrong. You should have been that, but if you dont mind, senator ernst. Sen. Blumenthal i dont mind at all. Sen. Graham thank you. I promise you. My bad. [laughter] senator ernst. Thank you, mr. Chair, and mr. Wilson, welcome. Thank you for your time and willingness to be able to serve on behalf of the American People. You have now been nominated to serve on the federal Circuit Court. You have previously served in the Mississippi House of representatives, which was of so if an elected office, i could dig in a little bit, and you have answered a number of questions previously by my colleagues, if i could go back and address some of these as well. Serving on the federal bench is quite different than serving in the Mississippi House of representatives, and it is not, of course, the federal bench is not a political branch. And despite what some might want, it should never become that way. In order to ensure this, my role in the committee requires me to ask some questions about your thinking and your judicial philosophy. Sir, would you consider yourself an originalist . Judge wilson i would, senator, to the extent that that is defined as applying the statute as it is written, the constitution as it is written, based on the intent of the language at the time it was enacted, so yes, i do consider myself an originalist. Sen. Ernst thank you, you answered the second part of that, why or why not. I appreciate it. That is important to many iowans as well, your definition of originalist. Is it the role of a Circuit Court judge to, quote, fix problems caused by politics or to get involved in political debates without clear, legal issues . Judge wilson not at all, senator. I actually was struck by what you said. Since joining the Mississippi Court of appeals over a year ago and even before that, an independent judiciary is very important, and deciding cases and controversies presented two the court by litigants is as far as judging should go. In other words, we should not legislate from the bench, we should not try to fix political problems, none of that is a part of judging. What is a part of judging is deciding cases before the court based on the laws that the legislative branch and asked. Sen. Ernst very good. Impartiality is something that i ans want to see in federal judges at all levels. How would a judge be impartial, especially since you have served as an elected official as well . Judge wilson senator, i take my judicial oath very seriously, and part of that oath is to administer Justice Without respect to persons, looking at each case impartially, based on the law, based on precedent, getting litigants a fair shake, that their claims and issues got address, but, again, to decide those cases fairly and impartially is a very important part of my judicial oath right now, and i consider that to become if i am fortunate enough to be considered as well. Sen. Ernst previous examples and what youve heard from other members of this committee, things that were said in respect to your position as an elected official, serving in the Mississippi House of representatives, then you would be able to set that aside, your personal speech and personal thoughts, set that aside in the position you have been nominated for. Judge wilson absolutely, senator. I think a judges personal beliefs have no place in what i consider to be proper judging. Have been you nominated for a federal circuit aret seat, but you currently sitting on the Mississippi Court of appeals. So what role does stare decisis play in your judicial thinking . I know you have spoken to this already, but if you could come up please, for my records. Judge wilson well, senator, i think it is important for the rule of law. In other words, once a matter is decided, it should stay that way, because parties, people, businesses rely on the constancy of law, and i think that undergirds the doctrine of stare decisis. Certainly on the Mississippi Court of appeals come as an intermediate court, i am bound by the state Supreme Courts president as well as the Supreme Courts precedent. Whether i faithfully like the outcome or not or agree with the president or not. That has no case either in judging. Sen. Ernst my time is expired, but i appreciate you being here, being willing to serve the American People, and being very upfront about some of the issues that you tackled as a member of the house in mississippi and what we can expect for you federal bench, so thank you very much. I appreciate it. Judge wilson thank you, senator. Sen. Graham thank you. Now the very patient and kind senator blumenthal. [laughs] sen. Blumenthal thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you to the very kind and patient senator graham. Ishink your nomination really unfortunate and in many ways indefensible, judge. It is not that i disagree with you i do, i many of the positions that you have taken. You have called Marriage Equality a french idea, you have spoken out against womens reproductive rights, you supported positions that would involve Voter Suppression, but on this issue of the Affordable Care act, what is really unfortunate and indefensible is your nomination in the midst of a Public Health crisis, and the majority leaders apparent determination to bring this nomination to a vote involving a judge and public official who has again and again, with vitriol and vehemence, spoken out against the Affordable Care act, which is so necessary now it is a lifesaver to people in the middle of a Public Health crisis. Obamacare, as you have illegitimate, to say it should fall of its own weight, as you did in your oped, is simply indefensible in this moment in our history, and i ife no confidence that sibelius, the case challenging the Affordable Care act, wouldve come before your court today, you would vote to uphold this supremeer Court Decision upholding it. Can you assure us that in fact if that case were to come before your court now, you would vote to uphold the Affordable Care act, given the Supreme Court precedents . Senator,son well, sebeliuss precedents, and i would follow that as i would all president s. Sen. Blumenthal so if that were to come before your court, you would vote to uphold it. Judge wilson senator, i want to be careful as a sitting judge and now i nominee, not to sen. Blumenthal i ask you for your affirmation that you would uphold that part of the law and that you would follow president and that you believe it was rightly decided. Judge wilson senator, the extent of whether i would follow sebelius, or any other part of the Affordable Care act, the answer is yes. Sen. Blumenthal but you continue to believe that the Affordable Care act was bad policy. Judge wilson senator, my belief that the moment have no part in serving as a judge, and i have not expressed that belief since becoming a judge. The reference you make to my oped or commentary, my work in the legislator, were all made before i became a judge, well before, in some cases, when these issues were being politically debated across the country, and my commentary was more about the policies, the way the Affordable Care act was enacted, and other aspects of the law, back when those would come i would say, live items for largely, thee, Supreme Court settled the issues in sebelius. Do you believe, judge, that ordinary should have good Health Insurance . Judge wilson senator, i have stated before, when i was a policymaker and when i was in the legislature, i discussed often the importance of health care, and i share your view, again, back in my policy days of how important that is for sen. Blumenthal and yet you denounce the Affordable Care act , correct . Judge wilson well, senator, again, going back to that time, i think reasonable people can have different views about the way to achieve the goal of increasing access to health care, and i express those views back in a time when, again, i was a private citizen and when i was in a legislature, and also look for ways to increase access to health care, the other measures, the Mississippi Legislature considered. Sen. Blumenthal i think that what you said then was more than just ordinary opposition. Vehemencee with a that reflected a deepseated belief, which you would carry out as a member of the court, that any and every opportunity to strike down this law would be taken by you as a member of this federal court. And for you to be nominated at a time when we need every and any opportunity to provide Better Health care and more Health Insurance coverage, i think, really mocks not only the Affordable Care act but the measures we should be taking right now, rather than considering the nomination of someone who opposes health care for americans who lack it. Now we in the United States senate ought to be meeting the Health Care Emergency we have right now by addressing steps we ought to take to provide more funds to the Health Care Providers in this country. My time has expired. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Sen. Graham thanks, senator blumenthal. Senator kennedy. Sen. Kennedy thank you, mr. Chairman. Judge, welcome. I just want to talk to you a little bit about the law. How not going to ask you you feel about certain Supreme Court precedent or how you would rule in a particular case, but i do want to know your thoughts on how decisions should be made. Have you ever been caught in an insurance roadblock . Do you know what i mean by an insurance roadblock . Judge wilson i am not sure i do, senator. Law enforcement sets up a roadblock, and everybody in line has to provide proof of insurance. It is kind of like a dwi roadblock. Judge wilson i have not been in one of those, nose, senator. Sen. Kennedy but you have been in one of those, right . Story,ilson a personal the week my son got a learners by at, he got stopped roadblock, which was a good experience for him, but i am not sure what the purpose of that was. Sen. Kennedy ok. What is the constitutional basis for that . The police do not have a warrant. How can they legally stop you . Sen. Kennedy pull that mic a little closer. Judge wilson i want to be responsive to your question, but i do not want to forecast her talk about cases that might be litigated. I have already established that there i am asking you what is the constitutional basis for the law . Judge wilson i am not familiar with the applicable precedent, but generally speaking, senator, i think it goes through the reasonableness of the stop and search we have certainly had cases that have not dealt with roadblocks but stops and searches. Sen. Kennedy ok. Supreme court says that is reasonable. What has the mississippi Supreme Court said under our state constitution is not reasonable, you need a warrant . Judge wilson well, i think it may depend. Certainly the federal constitution is supreme, but we that arereas of law disdained, maybe go a little further than what some of the constitutional guarantees may be in the federal framework . \ sen. Kennedy how can you sen. Kennedy do that under the supremacy clause . Aree wilson i think there frameworks where state constitutions can give other constitutions that go beyond what the federal constitution allows. They cannot do less than what the federal constitution allows. Sen. Kennedy that is correct, adequate, and independent state ground doctrine. Judge wilson yes. Sen. Kennedy the mississippi Supreme Court could go further, but they could not do last as mandated by the United States Supreme Court. Judge wilson that is correct. Sen. Kennedy let me ask another question. I am not trying to be rude, but we have a limited amount of time. Here is something i have never understood. We can agree, can we not, that under the United States constitution we have a fundamental right to travel from one state to another. Do you agree with that . Judge wilson i think that is right, senator. Sen. Kennedy how come we dont have a fundamental right to travel internationally . Whats the difference . Thee wilson well, difference would be sovereignty of this country versus International Law or sovereignty of other countries. In other words, i guess Great Britain would determine who can travel to his country sen. Kennedy but a serving assuming Great Britain says it is ok to come, how can the United States restrict my right to travel to Great Britain in a way they cannot restrict my right to travel to mississippi . Ime wilson senator, thinking again generally, i have not studied that issue, but issues like foreign policy, national security, other restrictions you know, i have used a passport before sen. Kennedy excuse me for interrupting again, what is the legal basis for my fundamental right to travel to mississippi . Judge wilson well, i would think that your freedom of association would be implicated. Also, your right to engage in commerce internationally. Sen. Kennedy ok. Shot at why ire toe a right to travel state stay but not internationally. What is your thinking there . Judge wilson well senator, i am not sure i can come up with anything else, other than maybe federalism is implicated in terms of relationships between states. Sen. Kennedy ok. I am over. Thanks, judge. Judge wilson thank you, senator. Sen. Graham senator hirono, are you available . Hirono yes, thank you, chairman. Last time you were here, i asked you to questions about Sexual Harassment and whether you had ever entered into a settlement for this type of conduct, and you answered no, so i assume those answers have not changed. Judge wilson that is correct, senator. Sen. Hirono thank you. Never you receive a vote supportive home state senators from mississippi, apparently not conservative enough for republican colleagues. Hearing,s confirmation whether a conservative group was wrong when they considered that, he had never affiliated with the conservative movement, he has never volunteered his time to advance conservative projects, he has never been active in conservative legal circles, and he has never won any cases that advance conservative principles. Would you conclude that you were nominated to take his place because we had never voted on him, because you likely checked all those boxes . It is effectively a requirement for the typical trump judge nominee. So i would like a yes or no answer to the following questions. Did you vote to ban abortions when a fetal heartbeat is detected, which can be as early as six weeks of pregnancy, before many women even though they are pregnant . Yes or no . Judge wilson senator, during my legislative service, i voted as a prolife legislature. Sen. Hirono that is a yes, thank you. Did you call the passage of the Affordable Care act perverse, and hope that the court, you meant the Supreme Court, strikes down the law . Judge wilson again, senator sen. Hirono did you say those things about the Affordable Care act, yes or no . Judge wilson again, senator, before i became a judge, i wrote commentary and served in the legislature sen. Hirono so the answer is yes. You know, you have made those i amlations, all asking is whether you put those thoughts to paper, and the answer is yes. Did you ever dismissed voter i. D. Laws as poppycock the mississippis naacp concern that the state voter i. D. Law would result in Voter Suppression . Their concern about the mississippi Voter Suppression, you called it poppycock . The answer is yes. Judge wilson well, senator, as i discussed earlier in the hearing, i spent years working in Public Service, working to protect the integrity of the ballot. I did have some role in the voter i. D. Unification law that was passed. Sen. Hirono i know you are running out my time, so lets just move on. It is a fact that you called the naacps concern about mississippis Voter Suppression law poppycock. So you have already come as my colleagues have maintained, attacked the Affordable Care act , and now you have been nominated for the Fifth District, which is where, by the way, the courts made a decision about the Affordable Care act, which is now before the Supreme Court. So would you recuse yourself if the incident came back to the Fifth District if you are concerned, having said all of these things about the Affordable Care act . Would you recuse yourself . Judge wilson well, senator, if i am confirmed as a federal judge, i would take the same approach i have taken in the Mississippi Court of appeals, on a casebycase basis. I would consult sen. Hirono ok, mr. Chairman, you know what . This is really important. I assume he is not going to recuse himself, because he is going for the explanation. Sen. Graham i hope he wouldnt. Sen. Hirono you filled out a number of questionnaires to seek endorsement from trumps Organization Responses to the questionnaires reflect your issues, did you respond honestly to the questionnaires . Judge wilson well, senator, when i ran for the legislature both in 2007 and 2015, i took a number of positions on issues so the voters would know who they were voting for. Sen. Hirono so i assume that your answer is honestly. Mississippi right to life questionnaire when you checked off you support the complete and immediate reversal of roe v. Wade, that was an honest answer. And the nras questionnaire, when you checked off that you oppose background checks and a ban on 50 caliber rifles, that wasnt honest answer. When you checked off that you support antiunion laws, such as socalled right to work laws, and opposed allowing government workers to exercise their right to strike, that was also an honest answer. So these are your views. In light of your record of making controversial statements and taking extreme positions, the question is really whether these views will seep into your decisions as a fifth circuit judge, if you are confirmed. I would say, common sense would intohese views will seep your Decision Making as a judge command that is why you are being nominated. Mr. Chairman, i yield my time. Sen. Graham thank you very much. You have been accused of being a conservative republican. [laughs] i do not think that is disqualifying. You have participated in politics. I have answered many of those same questions. I am running for office. People want to know how i am going to vote on these things. That is different than voting on a case in controversy before you. This idea that you have to recuse yourself because you have taken a political position in the past is absolutely, utterly ridiculous. It is not required in any recusal statute that i am aware of. The idea that you would be a conservative republican is a bad thing only if you are a liberal democrat. Who do you think we are going to pick . We are going to pick people that think like us that will be good judges. And when you get in charge, if you ever do, you are going to pick people that come from your world. But the goal here is to pick people who are qualified, people back and set aside their political views, so this is why we have elections. But when it comes to being a judge, you dont have to recuse yourself because you have a political opinion different than people on this committee. When it comes to being a conservative republican, you have nothing to apologize for. If you are a liberal democrat, i do not think you have anything to apologize for. The question is, are you the type of person that can satisfy those beliefs and render justice in a case before you with the intellect and the understanding that comes from wearing the robe . It is not just me saying that. You are already well qualified by the aba. That matters to me. With that, the hearing is adjourned, and i thank you for your time. Judge wilson thank you, chairman. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2020] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] [indistinct conversations] [indistinct conversations]