whether or not they are wrong. and other factors as well. so i agree with both of the statements that you ve read. let me add one to that and then we ll move on. i m particularly interested in the case of roe v. wade. roe was decided by nearly 50 years ago and reaffirmed over a dozen times since then. so my question is this. does roe v. wade have the status of being a case that is a super precedent? and what other supreme court cases do you believe have that status? well, senator, all supreme court cases are precedent, binding and they are principles and their rulings have to be followed. roe and casey, as you say, have
mr. chairman. i just would like to compliment the witness. i think you are doing very well. and as you can see this is a bit of a tough place. so judge, one of the issues that i often discuss with nominees, particularly to the supreme court, is the issue of abortion. i have asked the three most recent supreme court nominees about this issues and i would like to discuss it with you today. in 2017 i asked justice gorsuch about this during his confirmation hearing. i asked him to expand on a comment he had made about his belief that precedent is important because it adds stability to the law. in response, justice gorsuch reiterated his belief that precedent is important because, and i quote, once a case is settled, that adds to the
0 whether or not they still present a threat to the united states or the world at large and i think it s six months, maybe a year. but that goes on at least on an annual basis, and if there is a determination that this person still represents a threat to the united states, they are continued to be confined. that s the way the system works. are you okay with that? as a policy matter, senator, i m not speaking to my views. my understanding is the periodic review system is an executive branch determination of whether or not they are going to continue to hold people. does that make sense to you as a way to deal with these detainees? senator, i m not in a position to speak to the policy or discretion of the executive branch regarding how they are going to handle detainees. the reason i mention is because in one of the briefs you argued the executive branch doesn t have that option. if you had had your way, the executive branch could not do periodic reviews about the danger the detai