[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] this hearing will come to order. Today we hear from four nominees, justice ruth pardon me, Beth Robinson, Jennifer Sung to the 9th circuit. Dr. Rahul gupta, national Control Policy. Elizabeth prelogar. With this slate the biden Administration And Senate democrats are advancing nominees wellqualified that bring diversity. Historic firsts among todays nominee, mon confirmation, Justice Robinson will be the first openly lgbtq woman on appellate court. Ms. Sung, the first asianamerican women to occupy one of the oregons 9th circuit seats and dr. Gupta, the first medical doctor to head the ocp and two judicial nominees and dr. Gupta, i have the pleasure of nominating the Solicitor General. And Elizabeth Prelogar is one of the most accomplished appellate litigators in this position. Nominated nine cases in the Supreme Court. And hundreds of additional cases, outstanding choice, frequently referred to as deferred position referred to as the 10th justice. Born in boise, idaho, ms. Prelogar graduated Summa Cum Laude before a masters at st. Andrews scotland and went on to earn her jd magna Cum Laude from harvard and clerked once for late Justice Ginsburg and once for Justice Kagan and she was an appellate attorney. Spent five years as a Career Attorney in the department of justice. As an assistant to the Solicitor General and assistant special counsel in the office of special counsel worked for both democratic and republican President S and came to to an appreciation for the traditions and practices of the office of Solicitor Generalment after returning to private practice at cooley llp, ms. Prelogar was chosen to serve as the acting Solicitor General, a role from january, 2021 until her nomination last month. Two previous observations about her career, first, having served under both democratic and republican administrations and both career and political roles, ms. Prelogar knows only has unwavering Commitment Toen to unbiased legal, and having served in the Justice Department during the Trump Administration she demonstrated legal arguments irrespective of her own political and personal belief. Given her reputation its no wonder that she has broad bipartisan support. Received letters from four 12 confirmed and acting Solicitor Generals, george h. W. Bush. George w. Bush, Trump Administration. And these 12 former solicitors general wrote elizabeths prior experience in the office give her appreciation for the norms, traditions and responsibilities and prepare her well for leading the office and were confident that she has what it takes tore Solicitor General and supreme Court Practice tigers many to served in the republican administration, they write, the Solicitor General role is challenging, demends intellectual honesty, open Mindedness And Willingness to listen and throughout her career Elizabeth Prelogar demonstrated these qualities. She treasures legal rigor, committed to serving the public interest. High praise from leading practitioners, but a group that includes don ayer, John Elwood and peter keiser. Without objection ill enter the record into the letter and turning first to my colleague and ranking member. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to recognize the leaving of the Committee Staff mike fergoso. He was chief for nominations and before that he worked for chairman graham. Mike was an invaluable Member Member for my team, he cares for the rule of law and understands the duties in the senate and navigates the fine details of Senate Procedure with ease. Mike left our committee during the august recess, but this isnt of mikes time with the senate. s at mitch Mcconnells Office as chief counsel and im sure that hell continue to benefit from his work or were going to benefit from his work in that office. I also want to introduce my new chief counsel for nomination brendan chestnut. Some of you may know him from previous service. He worked for some of our countrys leading Law Firms. He clerked on the 9th circuit and he previously served as Nomination Counsel for the judiciary committee. We recommend brendan back and glad to have you here. We have four nominees today, two Circuit Court Solicitor general, and one director of office of national drug Control Policy. Before speaking about the nominees, i want to address the protests by left wing activists outside justice cavanaughs home last night, a partisan group announced that Justice Kavanaugh was going to hear from us, quote, unquote, hear from us because hes been protected from any backlash for his votes on the Supreme Court. This protest looks like another blatant attempt to intimidate the Judiciary And Anyone who disagrees with the radical agenda voiced bipartisan advocates. After all, a leader from this group recently pleaded no contest to criminal trespass and was ordered by a court to stay away from senator hawleys wife. Partisan shots aimed at the independence of our judiciary ought to be concerning to everybody. Dark money groups like Demand Justice, run dishonest attacks to try to under mine the Peoples Trust in the federal judiciary. These groups do it for partisan purposes. They want to bully judges into ruling in line with with their liberal agenda no matter what the law says and if that doesnt work, they want to pack the court. I believe the american people would object to the extreme agenda of these left wing groups. Now, to todays agenda. Justice robinson is nominated for the second circuit. She currently serves on the vermont Supreme Court. While in private practice Justice Robinson did a fair bit of civil Rights Work and as i said before, so did Judge Michael parks and Judge Steven manisha who President Trump nominated to the same second circuit. Judge park fought against racial discrimination and higher Education And Judge menasha fought against religious discrimination in the department of education. I supported both of those nominees because i felt confident their judicial philosophy meant they would rule based on the law, not their personal views. This administrations nominees have generally refused to answer questions about their judicial philosophy, at least when asked at a hearing. Its hard to support a judicial nominee who wont tell us their approach to these citing case is. Its hard to support a nominee for lifetime appointment if they havent thought enough about the job to have a judicial philosophy. Justice robinson has served as a State Court Judge for several years so i hope we can have a productive discussion about her judicial philosophy. I will also note that Justice Robinsons support comes from vermont and its legal community. Ms. Sung is the second nominee and she is nominated for an Oregon Seat on the 9th circuit. Judge graber who currently sits in that seat is wellrespected. She has said that some of her favorite cases involving interpreting statutes because its like a puzzle. She likes working out how different parts of the law fit together. Because of that, she takes an interest in many different areas of the law. I see miss sung this way, focusing intently on Labor Law and working closely with labor leaders. That may be why Demand Justice and Chris King are excited about her nomination and why miss sungs strongest supporters seem to be in san francisco and washington d. C. Shes also made a number of partisan statements about judicial nominees. Given those comments and her narrow focus on the law, im not sure shes a good fit for the 9th circuit which sees a broader range of cases. On the second panel we have the administrations nominees to serve as Solicitor General, ms. Prelogar. She has an exemplary resume. She clerked for two supreme Court Justices. She serves as acting Solicitor General for several months before her nomination. She may carry out this administrations priorities very well, but im concerned about recent choices making at the department of justice. I hope she will show a willingness to be a voice of reason there and push back on partisan decisions that have ive seen recently in this administration. Finally, dr. Gupta has been nominated to serve as director of office of national drug Control Policy. He has served in public health roles and state and local governments and as an extensive experience dealing with opioid crisis. I hope todays hearing shows hes a good fit for that role, thank you. Thanks, Senator Grassley, let me respond very briefly to your comments about the demonstrations before a supreme Court Justices home last evening. Politics aint the bean bag. We know you have to have a tough mental hide to be in this business, but its unacceptable in my point of view to involve any major public Figures Family or their home or to involve yourself in criminal trespass in the name of political freedom of speech. I think most of my colleagues share this feeling. Were the ones with the names on the ballot, were the ones that are elected and there are proper venues to express yourself and i dont believe the Persons Home or their family should be fair game in this business. I concur with that and when it comes to criminal Press Pass we got a bellyful of that on January 6th and i dont care if youre right or left or your political feelings. And we have a number to speak on nominees and start with senator layton. Thank you, Senator Durbin. Both as a senator and a former prosecutor i totally agree with what you said. You know, you can state your opinion of any one of us at the ballot box, you can write letters, and try to intimidate family and that is wrong. But on a happier note i couldnt be more proud to introduce vermonts very own justice Beth Robinson at her Conference Hearing this morning to serve as a judge on the 2nd Circuit Court of appeals. Senator sanders and i both know that vermont traditionally has one seat on that circuit and so we try to have the absolute best and weve done that here. I know her mother cynthia, her Sister Barbara, her wife kim all are here in the Audience Today and talking with them earlier. We all share that same sense of great pride. And i can say with confidence Vermonters Regard of party or ideology, im delighted that President Biden nominated Beth Robinson to fill the vermont seat in the second circuit. Last month as i went around our state of vermont i had so many people republicans and democrats come up and say, this is a great choice. Shes been hailed as a champion for equal rights and equal justice in the mold of the late Justice Ruth Bader ginsburg. And theres no exaggeration that beth in vermont and america full equality under the law. Thousands and thousands of lgbtq individuals across the country are able to live their lives with dignity thanks in part to the pioneering advocacy of Beth Robinson. And her nomination is truly to heart. But these are not the primary reasons that Beth Robinson is sitting before us today. If it is beths Track Record in vermonts supreme Court Justice, her fairness and partially and Loyalty And Ruler of law to make her the best nominee for the 2nd Circuit position. All current vermont supreme Court Justices are appointed by both republican and democratic governors and signing supporting letters from Beths Nomination and praising her, and the chief justice appointed by a republican was on the way to tell me that personally. Three former vermont supreme Court Justices, again, appointed by both republicans and democrats, have written letters of support for her. Vermonts Republican Governor, Phil Scott sent a letter and he noted that she was u unanimously confirmed, every republican and democrat voted for her because shes widely respected for her character and integrity. Mr. Chairman, i ask that those letters be included in the record. Without objection. Then the list of support letters across the spectrum, testament to her unimpeachable decade long Track Record as a jurist in her craft, loyal to the law above all else and that these qualities, compassion for all parties appearing before her collegiality with those who disagree with her and a brilliant legal mind make Beth Robinson the right person for the job. And i urge all senators to evaluate Justice Robinsons record, and obligation as senators to provide consent to the President S nominee. And i think that senators of both parties will see as i have that Justice Robinson possesses exactly the right qualities, skills, and experience to excel as a judge in the 2nd Circuit. I congratulate Justice Robinson, delighted to see her family here, its a historic nomination, and i look forward to seeing her expeditiously confirmed to the 2nd Circuit, thank you, mr. Chairmanments thank you, Senator Leahy. Senator sanders from vermont. Thank you, chairman, and rarpging ranking Member Grassley and Senator Lee. And Justice Robinson nominated for the 2nd Circuit Court of appeals and Judge Robinson is undeniably one of the most champions of equality rights and equal justice and most important pioneers in advancing lgbtq rights. In the Landmark Case of baker versus vermont, then Attorney General Robinson Marriage in 2009 this was one of our countrys first major advance Ins Lgbtq rights. It was a major step towards our laws acknowledging that people have the right to love whom ever they want and to get married regardless of their sexual orientation. As a direct result of this victory, Vermonts Legislature enacted the first civil Union Law in the country. Vermont has led the country on this issue and thats due in no small part to Justice Robinsons dedication and hard work. Justice robinson is extremely wellqualified for this position on the federal court. She has served on vermonts Supreme Court since 2011 and has built a reputation for her impartiality and fair application of the law. She treats people with respect and compassion, and she understands the duty of the court to provide equitable justice. I believe she will make vermont proud and that she will be an excellent addition to the federal bench. Congratulations Justice Robinson on your nomination. Thank you for your continued service to our country and for your commitment to equality and justice. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator sanders. The committee and those in attendance all understand that you have a busy schedule if you have to depart at anytime soon its understandable. Were honored to have senator Ron Wyden of oregon here next. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. And im pleased to be able to introduce Jennifer Sung, my neighbor, who lives around the corner from me in southeast portland, Whos President Bidens Nominee to serve on the u. S. Court of appeals for the 9th circuit. Ill listen to our colleague, my friend Senator Grassley saying ms. Sungs supporters were in various parts of the country. Her strongest supporters, Senator Grassley, are 100 of oregons United States senators who live in her neighborhood in southeast portland. Now, i got to know ms. Sung through a variety of conversations, im going to keep this brief, and i was struck that the story of the Sung Family is much like the story of the wyden family. The sungs fled violence and political persecution in china in the 1940s. My dad fled the nazis in the 1930s, got into the united States Army and was involved in dropping propaganda pamphlets on the nazis. Both of our families were ecstatic to come to the freest and most open country on earth where we were able to find safety and opportunity. In both families, the sungs and the wydens, we were taught to give back to america. Ms. Sung did that helping low income patients who needed help with health care. The wydens pitched in with senior citizens. I will say when you look fog forward at qualifications and in the employment Relations Board which adjudicate disputes over labor practices and Employment Law in my Home State. She has brought stellar impartiality. She decided over 200 cases and her impartiality and justice, and i take this because i heard comments about my good friend judge graber. She follows in that Graber Mold of academic excellence and impartiality. Finally ms. Sungs qualifications and her experience really stand as i stated on their own. Her nomination and her eventual confirmation is also going to help make the courts look a little more like america, a little more representative of what our great nation is all about. I offer a full and unqualified endorsement of my neighbor, Jennifer Sung, to be president Bidens Nominee to serve on the court of appeals for the 9th circuit. Thanks, Senator Wyden and now from the same neighborhood, senator merkley. Thank you, and thank you Senator Grassley and the opportunity to echo the sentiments of senior senator from oregon who has stated it so well that ms. Jennifer sung is nominated for the 9th Circuit Court of appeals. As weve seen time and time again that we have nominees with the Experience And Expertise necessary to serve the american people and the rule of law. And its essential that they will protect our nations values of Freedom And Equality for all and will assure equal justice for all stressing the word equal. Working with legislators to make sure there are as many protections for the rights of ordinary citizens as for the powerful and the privileged. And thats so often not the case. And we need champions to make it be the case. Ms. Sung has shown throughout her remarkable career that its precisely those attributes they will bring to the 9th circuit. As a union organizers, her voice for americans and time as a litigator, employment and constitutional Law Right up to her time as a recommend of our States Employment Relations Board where she helped to decide over 200 cases. Ms. Sung has been a steadfast champion for american workers and a committed servant to the public interest. When confirmed, she will bring with her a Breadth And Depth of knowledge critically needed on the federal bench. She will add much needed diversity, not only in heritage and culture, but in real World Experiences to events that does not come close enough today to representing the broad range of experiences, cultures and heritages that make up our richly diverse nation. Most critically, ms. Sung will bring with her a passionate Commitment And Equality justice for all americans so im proud to join Senator Wyden in giving her my full support. Thank you for the time considering her nomination, i hope that after this Hearing Today you will be as impressed as Senator Wyden and i have and represent the confirmation in the 9th circuit and expeditious consideration by the full senate. Thank you. Thank you, senator merkley. We have West Virginias entire delegation here to introduce dr. Gupta, Senator Manchin well start with you. And thank you my colleagues and friends on this prestigious committee. And were staying in the same neighborhood. Dr. Gupta, you need to know about this person. Before i start with his incredible career i want to note the wonderful people who support dr. Gupta, that are here today, his wife, doctor sima gupta who currently serves as a doctor at the va and twin boys, ive known these boys since they were babies and watched them grow. The accomplishment, theyve both completed undergraduate degrees at yale. They both are at harvard now, one in law, and one in medicine. Now, i think that says everything you need to know about dr. Gupta. First of all, to have such an accomplished family, and as a father and a husband. Dr. Gupta currently serves as a chief medical and Health Officer and senior vicepresident at march of dimes and Chiefs Office overseeing the research in global health portfolio. Clinical professor at georgetown school of medicine. Adjunct professor in Health Policy Management leadership in the school of public health at West Virginia University and visiting faculty at harvard th school of public health. Im proud that another West Virginian has been nominate today serve the american people and i have no. That dr. Gupta will be a director. As a long time resident of our Home State of West Virginia, dr. Gupta served as Health Commissioner of West Virginia under a democrat and Republican Governor and led the state as response to this horrible Drug Epidemic in our state and across the country. And dr. Gupta as received bipartisan support from myself and my friend and my Colleague Senator Capito and also from the republican justicement and we all have touted the valuable contributions to battling the Drug Epidemic in our Home State. I myself, when i was governor, had the honor of working with dr. Gupta and he served as the doctor of the county health department. Some many times during this horrible Ravaging Overdose Epidemic we have going on in the state he would talk and converse with me, we would talk together how we could overcould this problem and hes done so many things and been such a valued friendship to help me through the most difficult times as fighting this horrible scourge on our state. As a primary care physician, dr. Gupta intimately understands the needs of communities across america and hed be the first physician, as you know, dr. Durbin dr. Durbin, why not . Were in the neighborhood. [laughter] Senator Durbin, as you noted that he would be the first to hold this position as a physician. As a commissioner of the western bureau of public health, dr. Gupta saw firsthand the devastation that the opioid epidemic has unleashed, to tackle the epidemic. His work leading efforts to combat Drug Epidemic in a state with one of the worst overdose states, rates in the nation, we lost 1377 West Virginians to fatal Drug Overdoses just last year, one year, it makes him wellprepared to lead similar efforts on a national scale. I dont think a better person who has upfront on the line, onto front lines fighting this epidemic would ever be more prepared than dr. Gupta. Weve lost 93,331 americans in the last year alone. In 2017, he was even named West Virginian of the year as a result of these efforts that hes been fighting. So hes dedicated public servant. He has served West Virginians admirably throughout his time as a Health Commissioner. Im proud to introduce him along with my colleague, Senator Capito and strongly urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support his nomination and look forward to you all working together because i guarantee, it will be a pleasure. Thank you, mr. Manchin and thank you for conifering a degree on me. And reminded an old friend of mine said i missed the Deans List by two grades, a and b. [laughter] thank you for your testimony. Senator capito. Thank you, Senator Durbin and ranking member. And dr. Gupta, you could not have a better nominee for the director of omcp. He is a joined by his wife who was a physician at our veterans in charleston and visited there sorry when the guptas decided to come to washington to lose her and the two sons, arca and drew. But theyre wonderful top graduates of the high school in my district, george washington high school so the patriots are very proud of those boys. I first met dr. Gupta in 2009 when he moved to my hometown of charl stop, West Virginia to be the Health Officer of the county health department. I learned some things in researching to see what i would say today that i didnt know about dr. Gupta. He was actually born in india and raised in maryland in the suburbs of washington d. C. By the time we met, i met him, he already had an impressive resume of academic and medical accomplishments. At age 21 he completed medical school at university of delhi and did residency in chicago, illinois, earned a Masters Degree in public health from the university of Alabama Birmingham and a global masters of Business Degree from the London School of business and finance. Hes obviously a perpetual lerner. Prior to his position in charleston he was on academic faculty in tennessee and alabama. In 2014, dr. Gupta and i were boarding a plane to fly home to charleston West Virginia we did know the realize we had heard a story about a Chemical Leak into the Water Supply System of our hometown of charleston, West Virginia, we werent sure of the aspects of it. And i remember he and i talking when we were getting on then a Prop Plane to fly Home And Dr. Gupta really led the public Health Response to this Chemical Spill which really led us to not be able to drink our water for six to eight weeks with a mysterious chemical we werent sure what it was. So, im forever grateful for his leadership not just working with West Virginiaens, but with the c. D. C. To realize the best response in a water crisis situation. He was then appointed as Senator Manchin said, to the bureau of public health. Hes served two governors as Senator Manchin i keep want to go call you joe, as joe said. Still joe and shelly. Still joe and shelly and throughout his career hes done so much, but under the drug control poim. He understands the our state has been especially hardhit and hes used this knowledge to serve our nation, and i congratulate President Biden on this nomination, its just exceptional. As Senator Manchin mentioned our governor has very much in support, he has said that dr. Gupta led the way in our battle against the opioid Crisis Something that has and continues to touch the lives of one of our residents in some which. Under his leadership, our state has turned the corner and theres so much for to be. Jeremy nelson also said we believe dr. Guptas record of exlength at public service at both local and state levels makes him well suited to serve as the nations next drug czar. And theres a lot of support from our national folks and ill echo those sentiments as well. We got a lot of visits from jim carroll, and michael botticelli a former drug czar. We know that dr. Gupta will visit West Virginia, and we have solutions in West Virginia that i think can serve and help the nation tackle this difficult problem so im confident that President Biden has submitted a nominee who will continue to do the good work of his predecessors. I know he will visit West Virginia and please note he has on a gold and blue tie in honor of our state. He brings a wealth of real World Experience necessary to confront the realities of Todays Addiction Crisis and continue the work our nation was continuing to see prepandemic. Its not only a tribute to dr. Gupta, but his dedication to see to make sure that every public servant in our state was aware of what he was doing, the challenges hes facing, and how we could help. So congratulations to dr. Gupta, again, i thank President Biden for this excellent nomination. Thank you, Senator Capito and and Senator Manchin and appreciate your attendance. And well change the name plates and be sworn as soon as we get housekeeping out of the way. If ill please rise your Rate Hand . Both witnesses answered in the affirmative. Justice robinson please procedure with your opening remarks and you have to push the button to light up the light. Thats not indicative of my ability to follow the law and direction. Thank you, for your opportunity to appear before your committee and deep gratitude to President Biden for the confidence hes placed in me for in nomination. Senator leahy and senator sanders, thank you for your support. Ive been blessed with a large and wonderful family including my parents, siblings, siblings and parents in law, 15 beloved nieces and uncles and aunts, and cousins all part of my circle in life. And my Spalling Family is represented behind me, my parents have celebrated their Wedding Anniversary and they taught me what you give to the world not the other way around. My Father Couldnt be here, but grateful my mother made the trip from indiana. And grateful that my Sister Barbara made the trip from minnesota to stand in for the folks who would love to be here and joined by my Life Partner nearly 29 years, my wife kim. Without her decades of support i most assuredly would not be here today. For the past decade as a justice in the vermont Supreme Court, i have done my best to interpret and apply the law evenhandedly with precedents in the constitution that binds me. I would be honored to continue my work promoting the rule of law as a judge on the 2nd Circuit. Senators, im well aware of awesome responsibilities that the members of this committee juggle every day and i truly appreciate all your service. I look forward to he think a your questions. Thank you. Thank you very much. Ms. Sung, please proceed. Thank you, chair durbin, ranking Member Grassley and all the committee members for this opportunity to appear here today. Thank you to Senators Wyden and merkley for your support and the very kind introduction. Thank you, President Biden for the tremendous honor of the nomination, im humbled to fill the seat of the honorable Steven Graber who was served with distinction since 1998. Here with me today are my wonderful husband, ryan and our daughter may have, a bringer of great joy. I cannot thank them enough. Also with me is my brother, jeffrey sung, a proud army veteran. I thank him for his service and his support throughout this process. I would also like to thank all the family, friends and colleagues who could not be here, including my stepson niko, my sisterinlaw, sue. My nephews and nieces, lincoln, declan and malia. And my motherinlaw janetman, and fatherinlaw Ken Mann who we sadly last last year. To my parents, steven and Cheryl Sung i owe special Gratitude And Love for all they have given so jeff and i could pursue our american dreams, so finally, i pay respect to all of my grandparents, each of whom faced challenges with great courage and integrity. My Family Insteld in me a deep appreciation of how fortunate i am to be an american. To grow up in a country where our fundamental rights, like the freedom of religion and speech, are guaranteed in our constitution and enforced in our courts. And for this reason, it would be the highest honor of my professional life to serve my country as a judge and share the awesome responsibility for upholding the confusion that we all cherish. Thank you for considering my nomination. Thank you very much, ms. Sung. Let me start the questioning, youve been appointed member of the oregon Relations Board since 2017 and its commonly known erb is a Threemember Panel on diverse employment issues, of the approximately 200 matters youve presided over and ruled in favor . Some instances for employers and other instances for employees. As a member of that board you analyzed the Record And Case law and tried to be a neutral adjudicator, im sure and worked with fellow board members to try to find concensus where possible and draft language. What have you learned from that experience that you think will help you as a judge in the 9th circuit. Thank you, chair durbin. Ive been there nearly five years and Threemember Panel issuing decisions, and that is that panel is professionally diverse by design. And i think that experience has especially deepened my appreciation for collegiality. I work hard to reach concensus whenever possible, and the vast majority of our decisions are unanimous, and i believe that experience will serve me well as an appellate judge should be i be confirmed. Ms. Sung, in july of 2018 as a Yale Law School alum, you signed onto a letter to Yale Law School leadership expressing concern about then judge Kavanaughs Nomination to the Supreme Court . Would you like to comment on that letter in light of your nomination . Yes, thank you, again, chair durbin. The letter that you referenced was addressed only to my Law School Administration and i find it strictly in my personal capacity as a private citizen addressing my Alma Mater. I did not write the letter, but i recognized that much of its rhetoric was overheated. And if by signing that letter i created the impression that i would prejudge any case, or fail to respect the authority of any supreme Court Justice, or any of the courts precedents, then i sincerely apologize. Throughout my legal career as a litigator, and as an adjudicator, i have respected the authority of every supreme Court Justice and i have followed all of the courts precedents without reservation and i would continue to do so as a lower Court Judge if confirmed. Thank you. Justice robinson, youve been on the vermont Supreme Court for 10 years, before that in your private practice you were a Policy Advocate so obviously, wed like to hear your comments about how that those policy positions and your advocacy might impact your impartiality as judge. [inaudible] button. Thank you, Senator Durbin, appreciate the question. 10 years ago i did make the transition from advocate to judge and it was a major transition in two ways. As an advocate, trois to my client and that was my Duty And Commitment. And as a judge, my Duty And Commitment is to the law not to an individual client, or my own. And the advocate for policy matters i was very much a political person at that phase in my life. Upon assuming the bench, that aspect of my life ended because theres no space for politically oryented person on the bench so for the last decade that prior part of my life, of which im very proud, but it ceased to guide my work upholding the rule of law. The thing that made that transition easy for me is that i feel the same Passion And Commitment to my mission in this position, which is to uphold the rule of law, as i felt for any cause i advocated in the last chapter of my career. I take it from the kind words and support you received from so many of diverse backgrounds in vermont, that youve been able to stick with that basic principle for 10 years on the Supreme Court of that state. So i acknowledge that you have 10 years of proof that you can divorce a former life of Policy Advocacy to a new responsibility. I thank you for being here today. Senator grassley. Yeah. Ms. Sung, i was going to ask the same question that Senator Durbin did about the letter you signed. Im not going to ask you to speak more about it, but i just want you to know why i was concerned about that because i think it doesnt show the temperament that we should expect from judicial nominees. You dont have to comment any further so i am he going to the next questionment your career has primarily involved civil litigation and Labor Law. Do you have any experience in criminal law . Thank you, ranking Member Grassley, as a 9th circuit judicial Law Clerk i dealt with the full range of issues that are presented to the is circuit, including criminal and habeas matters and im confident on that experience as well as other experience i have had as a litigator and as a neutral adjudicator that i can quickly get up to speed to any criminal matters or other matters that may be presented to me if im confirmed. You might give the same, but the same in immigration, because 9th circuit has so many immigration, a heavy load of immigration cases. Please tell me your experience in handling immigration cases, specifically how many cases have you personally been involved in, involving immigration matters . Thank you, again, ranking Member Grassley and as you anticipated, i did have a great deal of experience dealing with immigration cases as a 9th circuit judicial Law Firm and as well as in Employment Law, there is some intersection with immigration law. Okay. Im going to go to ms. Robinson. Im going to give you a question and im going to give two quotes from something you said or wrote and then im going to ask the question again, just so you can be ready. What is the role of a federal court in making law and catalyzing social change. So on a panel before the vermont judicial system you suggested that the judiciary has a role to play in making laws. You said that, quote dont enact laws is not quite the same as dont make laws. On an Aba Panel, you once said, quote, court decisions dont simply provide the remedy ordered in a particular case, they can catalyze broad social and legal change. So then the question again, what is the role of a federal court in making law and catalyzing social change . Thank you, senator. The role of a federal court is to interpret the law and apply it to the facts in the case before it in an individual case. Im not familiar with the specific i am familiar, but dont remember the context of the exact quotes you read. I have in public speaking about the role of courts tried to educate folks about the fact that in state courts we have commonlaw, which is judge made Law And Something people whose only education about the Court System comes from the federal hearings dont realize. I dont know if that was the context, but it may have been. The 2nd Circuit also for you, the 2nd Circuit is known for having significant numbers of Security Class actions, antitrust cases, and other complex commercial cases. Can you tell us about your experiences handling these types of cases . I can tell you, senator, one of the things ive learned about myself during my 10 years on the vermont Supreme Court, i love learning new things and i actually enjoy complexity and i enjoy figuring out complex questions of law, and maybe if they make it more confusing. Those are the challenges that i enjoy and i think that that will serve me well in the second circuit. Okay. Back to ms. Sung. This will be my last question. How many cases have you personally argued before the 9th circuit and how many briefs have you filed with the 9th circuit . Thank you for the question, senator. As a litigator, i argued and filed briefs in one case before the 9th circuit. Okay. Thank you, i yield back my time. Id ask our witnesses to get as close to the microphone as you can so you can be heard by everyone and ill turn the floor over to Senator Leahy. Thank you, mr. Chairman. You know, i love this committee having served on it for some time. I enjoy the hearing the various nominees and, Justice Robinson, obviously i have a personal question as a vermonter, to your nomination, but i have a hard time remembering people came to this Confirmation Hearing with such a truly impressive set of supporters from across the political spectrum. Vermonts Republican Governor, multiple sitting and former vermont supreme Court Justices by both republicans and democrats. Former republican legislators in the state and others, the letters ive had have been so impressive that have come in support of you because i know these people and i know they go across the political spectrum in our state. How have you managed to garner this much support from leaders and colleagues, especially reflecting such a diverse ideological spectrum . Whats your secret . Because id like to try it. [inaudible] youre kind, Senator Leahy. I appreciate the question. I treasure the collegiality in the vermont community across the political spectrum and ive felt privileged to be a part of those conversations. The law is complicated, policy is complicated. There are a lot of hard questions out there and i believe that we accomplish our best results when we come together across the spectrum. And truly engage with one another and i hope that thats been the experiences of Folks Id have the opportunity to work with in vermont. Thank you, like so many of the men and women who have been nominated to our various courts of appeals, you have a long and proud record of advocacy on behalf of certain causes. Would that change your ability to serve as an impartial judge in the 2nd Circuit or do you feel you can be an impartial judge on the Secretary 2nd Circuit . Thank you, Senator Leahy, i hope a fair read of my record for the last decade as ive served in the vermont Supreme Court reflects my commitment to judging fairly and impartially and my departure from the prior phase of my career as an Add Vo Advocate and i would expect to bring the same rule of law if i were confirmed to the 2nd Circuit. Could you just kind of elaborate on that . Because youve had 10 years as a supreme Court Justice, youve had to hear cases, a multitude of things, youve had to serve with other colleagues that come from a variety of political and economic backgrounds. What kind of lessons did you learn that would teach you to be impartial . Well, he think we have to recognize this, all of us bring ourselves to the business of judging and the responsibilities of judging. We bring our background, our experience and attitudes. But our challenges and responsibilities as judges is to transcend that and to interpret and apply the law in a way thats reflective of the laws command. And one of the many checks and balances built into the legal system to help us overcome our individual perspectives is the give and a take among judges on an appellate court and ive had tremendous respect for my colleagues past and present on the vermont Supreme Court and i have no doubt that ive been a better judge because of what theyve taught me in difficult cases that weve confronted together. Well, youve also served as chair of the vermont access to justice coalition. Thats a partnership between the vermont Supreme Court and legal aid providers to bring meaningful access to vermonts justice system. Youve participated in the vermont Supreme Courts on the Road Series which i wish theyd had when i was involved. Youve held hearings in communities across vermont to increase transparency. How were these kind of things important to the way that judges carry out their carry out their duties . That will be my last question and i apologize to ms. Sung, i strongly support her nomination, go ahead. And thank you, senator. I think its important, as judges, that we find ways that are appropriate to engage in the broader community, the broader legal community and the broader community at large, and those are examples of ways in which our court as a whole and myself in my individual Committee Work have tried to be a part of the vermont legal community and make the systemic change that we dont make in our adjudicating role when we decide the legal cases. Thank you very much. The next republican senator by order of arrival, Senator Cotton. Thank you. Justice robinson, i think i know the answer to this since youve been on the court the last 10 years, ask you a couple of questions, have you ever represented before you a judge, a terrorist at Guantanamo Bay . No. Have you represented any client in any matter relate Today Terrorism . No. Ms. Sung, same two questions, have you ever represented a terrorist at Guantanamo Bay . No. Have you ever represented any client in a matter relate Today Terrorism . No, senator. Thank you both. Ms. Sung, you were nominated to the 9th Circuit Court of appeals and the 9th circuit has a checkered Track Record at the Supreme Court. Its the Supreme Courts taken more cases from the 9th circuit than any other case or any other circuit and its Batting Average over the last few years has not been great. Four out of five case from that circuit has been reversed by the Supreme Court. Its gotten somewhat better after the judges nominated up there over the last administration, but still not great. If you were confirmed and the Supreme Court issues a ruling in any case where you basically apply that supreme Court Precedent . Ments without reservations senator. Thank you. I want to return to the letter that Senator Durbin referenced. About the nomination of then Justice Kavanaugh, you signed that letter in the summer of 2018. You said in your answer to Senator Durbin you only signed it you didnt write it. You dont draw a distinction between writing a Letter And Signing onto a letter of someone else. I certainly take responsibility for signing the letter, senator. That would be the case as a panel of judges in the 9th circuit even though you dont write the person, you sign onto it youre responsible for the reasoning in it. Yes, senator. And you said some of the rhetoric was overheated with which i agree and lets just explore some of that rhetoric. You said then judge kavanaugh was quote, a threat to the most vulnerable and you also thought that he was quote, intellectually and morally bankrupt idealog . That it would fail to respect the authority as a supreme Court Justice or any of the Justices Authority or their precedence, and to do sincerely apologize but i can commit to you today that i would if confirmed as i have throughout my career i would respect all of the Courts Precedence without reservation. When the authors of the letter or whoever it was who contacted you decided present it to you, did you have even a Moment And Thought and say lets hold on. We can agree with brett scapula, thats fine, but to call them morally bankrupt that really is inappropriate. Appreciate the question, senator. As i stated before i simply signed the letter. I understood that the statements were rhetorical. When i signed it i believed the only intended audience was my Law School Administration. I believe they would understand the statements to be rhetorical. But as this that i do apologize if by signing the letter i created the impression that it would be anything but impartial and fully respectful of the courts authority. Another statement was quote people will die if he if confirmed end quote. Has anyone died as a direct result of Brett Kavanaugh being on the Supreme Court . Thanks for the question. As i said before i understood those statements to be rhetorical, advocacy only. And i do understand that i have to take responsibility for signing the letter but i would like to assure you, the public and every supreme Court Justice that i do respect the authority of the court as every justice duly confirm sitting on the court and it would follow without reservation all of the Courts Precedence. So you Cant Point to someone who has died over the last three years as direct result of Brett Kavanaugh being confirmed as that letter predicted . No, sir. Just to be clear, if the Supreme Court issues a ruling whether that opinion is authored by Brett Kavanaugh or Stephen Breyer or Clarence Thomas you will treated with equal weight and you will follow it if youre confirmed in the ninth circuit . Absolutely, senator. Thank you. Senator feinstein. Thanks very much, mr. Chairman. Justice robinson and ms. Sung, i noted in reviewing your backgrounds that you both have significant experience in deciding legal disputes. Justice robinson, uscert for more than a decade on the vermont Supreme Court you have served ms. Sung, youve also experienced in deciding legal disputes through your services, a member of the Oregon Employment Relations Board. Heres the question. I like each of you to please a speak on what youve learned about deciding legal disputes as a result of your experiences. Thank you, senator feinstein. One thing that ive learned is that when a case comes in you might have preliminary hypothesis about how its going to be resolved but theres no substitute for drilling down into the record deeply reading all of the facts, researching the applicable law and then conferring with your colleagues. And as often as not your initial impression may prove illfounded. Its one of the reasons why its important to approach every case with an open mind and do the work to ensure that your legal reasoning is sound. Thank you. Im not sure i can state a better then could you speak into the microphone . I mesh i did answer the question better but certainly my experience as as a neutral adjudicator on the board has taught me the same lessons and importance of approaching each case with an open mind, diligently reviewing the record and redoing the law, and collegially conferring with my board colleagues before reaching any final decision. And i have benefited greatly from those conferences with my colleagues and i would approach judging in the same way as an appellate judge, if confirmed. I would like both of you to answer this quick question. You have both served as litigators, and as such zealous advocates. How do you see that changing as a federal judge . Senator feinsteins, thank you. I have had the experience of the past decade of playing a different role in the legal system and what about which him every bit as passionate as i ever was as an advocate. And i think we need advocates in our system. We need good advocate here we need robust legal argument and research, but in the end i found my home in the judicial role and a grateful to have had the opportunity to serve as i have. Thank you. I addressed you as judge, and it should be justice i want to apologize for that. Please go ahead, ms. Sung. Thank you, senator. I left behind the role of an advocate five years ago, and as a neutral adjudicator the role cannot be more different. As an adjudicator it is my duty to consider the arguments of all the parties to neutrally and impartially apply the law to the facts as established, as established by the eminence and the record, and to go where the law and the facts lead me and not without favor to any party. I continue to do that if confirmed. Justice robinson, i was impressed to see that during your decade of experience serving the vermont Supreme Court, in one of the cases from earlier this year you joined an opinion that upheld for Months Ban on large Capacity Gun magazines under the State Constitution vermonts can you describe how you would approach this issue as a court of Appeals Judge . Thank you, senator, and i would like to be clear that the occasional describing was a case in which the court was applying the vermont constitutional protection for the right to bear arms. And nothing about that decision purported to address the second amendment of the United States constitution. The court did conclude in that case, and i joined the opinion, that vermont State Constitutional right to bear arms does include an individual right to bear arms for the protection of self, Family And Home here thats a conclusion that resonated with the conclusion that the u. S. Supreme court reached in the Heller Case with respect to the second amendment. Thank you very much. Thanks, mr. Chairman. Senator cruz. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Welcome to the nominees. Justice robinson, let me start with you. I am concerned about your record both as an advocate and as the justice that demonstrates a Market Hostility towards religious Liberty Market when you were in private practice you wrote a brief in favor of forcing the Baker Family, a catholic family that owned a print shop, to print membership cards for a proabortion activist group. The Baker Family believed that was in violation of their deeply held religious convictions. In your brief you used strong and even incendiary language to describe the baker families religious convictions, referring to their views that they did not wish to actively advocate for and promote abortion. You refer to those religious views as invidious and pernicious. As you note the very first clause of the first amendment of the constitution protects religious liberty. Given that history of litigating and attacking an exercise of religious liberty, how might a litigant in the second circuit have any confidence that as the judge you would actually follow the law . And in particular honor the religious liberty protections of the constitution . Thank you, Senator Cruise. Just to put the case in context, and a donor all the Details Mmi because it was 30 years ago, it was my very first year of practicing law in vermont but the claim by my client was that she had been subject to discrimination on the basis of a religious conviction. In particular she had asked to print cards for vermont catholic school free choice to her contentious was that the bakers said we wont print these cards because we dont think catholics can be for choice. She brought a claim for discrimination on the basis of greed and we acknowledge that if the facts show that the bakers declined to print the placard because of their opposition to abortion rather than their belief that whole string of catholic faith was wrong, that she wouldnt have a claim. So hold on a second. I have to say you said that that clarifies things but anything that makes it worse. So your argument was that if their view was this is the teaching of the catholic church, then that the court should straighten that out and say no, you dont get to have your own understanding of the teaching of the catholic church, we are going to force you to save the catholic church is proabortion even if you dont believe it is. Is that right . Senator, the applicable law as stated by Justice Scalia in his opinion in the Smith Case was and remains that a neutral law in general applicability applies without thats like August Thats religious freedom restoration act. I understand the over one by Jordi Majority cannot protect religious liberty. You likewise during a Marriage Law Symposium said quote, long after every state in this country allow samesex couples to marry there will still be churches that declined to recognize or celebrate samesex marriage. And we are not suggesting that should be otherwise. Well, they beat should be otherwise but thats not our mission. I find it quite astonishing as an advocate that you are suggesting that the law has purview to force pastors and priests and rabbis to change what they teach as a matter of faith if it does not fit a political position that you happen to support. Senator cruz, i would agree with you. That is not my position. Im not familiar with exact context of those remarks but when i i was in advocate our position was always that the debate about whether a particular religious community should or shouldnt recognize marriages between samesex couples was for the members of that religious community to decide. The question of whether the law should recognize marriages between samesex couples was the only issue of concern for our advocates. Ms. Sung, do you believe Justice Kavanaugh is intellectually and morally bankrupt . Senator, i would want every supreme Court Justice to know, colluding Justice Kavanaugh, that i respect completely their authority as a supreme Court Justice. I would follow the President S without reservation. You are an experienced lawyer. You know when someone is not answering a question to my question was simple and straightforward. Do you believe Justice Kavanaugh is, quote, intellectually and morally bankrupt . Thank you for the question, senator. As i stated earlier i recognize that that statement was overheated rhetoric, and thats all that it was. Im going to try one more time because you signed your name to it and it wasnt years, decades ago. It was very recently. You signed your name to the statement. Asking simply today do you believe that Justice Kavanaugh is, quote, intellectually and morally bankrupt . You signed your name to that proposition. Do you still believe it . Thank you for the Question Senator Kirk as i stated that was rhetorical, advocacy only that i sign strictly in my personal capacity as a private g my Alma Mater, throughout my legal career as a litigator, as an adjudicator i have followed all of the courts precedents you refuse to answer that question. At the support yes no question and three times you refuse to answer it. Thank you, senator cruz. Senator hirono. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I asked all nominees who come before any of my committees the following two initial questions which will ask the both of you. Since you became a legal adult have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical Harassment Or Assault of a sexual nature . Justice roberts and . No. Ms. Sung . No. Have you ever faced discipline or entered into settlement but it are to thd of conduct . No, senator. No, senator. Thank you. Justice robinson, in the past you have discussed how courts dont live in a vacuum and are responsive to public Opinion But Youve also talked about the limitation of the court, no Agenda Setting and limited ability to we love and compassion into work. Can you tell us about the role of public opinion or personal experiences in judicial decisionmaking and what role it has and what role it should have sent you said that judges dont live in a vacuum . Thank you, senator to. I think our constitutional democracy the courts have primary responsibility for the constitutional part. I think the elected branches are also responsible for ensuring that their acts comport with the constitution but thats with the Democracy Part of our Constitution Democracy lives. So in deciding cases i dont think its the role of the course to think about how popular or unpopular our decision will be in a particular case. In my time on the court ive been part of decision that and you would be unpopular and we made the decision because they were the decisions we felt the law compelled us to make. So im trying okay, well, i am of the view that judges dont get on the bench and forget about all their life experiences and that they are not like slates and there are many times when they are interpreting the law which have to apply to the case, to the facts of a case. I think your experiences do come into play but for anyone to say otherwise as many of nominees previously have said i think that is really kind of unbelievable. Ill leave that. You also have a long record advocating for lgbtq rights including samesex marriage. You also gone out of your way in your statements to defend a faith unities right to set their own rules on who may marry. You asked about your approach to religious freedom just now and you were instrumental, for example, including protections in the vermont marriage equality bill, protections that were requested by religious leaders. Why was it important to address or protect religious liberty with respect to lgbtq rights . Thank you, senator. The discussion that you are referencing was again in my last role as an advocate and it was part of the legislative giveandtake in vermont legislative enactment of the first bill in the country, law in the country that extended marriage to samesex couples, not as result of a court decision. I have that one opportunity to deal directly with the first Amendment Issue in my time on the bench, and in that case, a case that involves the question of whether a Grant Program that provided grants to community organizations that serve the community was off limit, local church that served as a Kennedy Center was offlimits for that Grant Program. And following the United States Supreme Courts decision we concluded that it was in the context of a preliminary injunction to wasnt a correct decision on the merits but that the claimant saying that the Grant Couldnt be made faced steep headwinds in their claim. I would say that you do not have a hostility to religious liberty. Mr. Chairman, i would like to ask a few questions of ms. Sung, if i could just go over just a little bit, with your indulgence i would appreciate it. Thank you. So ms. Sung, i note that you said that you left behind the role of advocate when you joined the board. I think that was a significant because you have been asked questions about the letter that you signed on to, and so i do appreciate the fact that on this board we have a lot of contentious cases because whenever you have employees and employers or management and employees or unions, it tends to get very contentious. And i note the other two members of the board have cited your ability to be very fair in how you come down on these kinds of very contentious although they can be somewhat boring no Offense Or Cup had to deal with some of this issue myself in the legislature. But i think its also significant that they have noted that you have an ability to be very fair and openminded and how you decide your cases. I also would like to note that you have a lot of support from communities of color and you would only be the third woman on any federal circuit only 11 serving out of a total of 179 authorized federal appellate Court Judges. How important is diversity to the federal Court System, do you think . Thank you for the question, senator. I think that diversity of all kinds is important to our federal judiciary because it enhances the public Confidence And Trust that the judiciary as a whole is impartial and wellbalanced. And i think, i sit on a board that is professionally diverse by design. And i know from speaking with the stakeholders that are affected by our decisions that their trust in our boards impartiality is greatly enhanced by that diversity on our board as well as our collegiality. I think that we work hard to reach consensus whenever possible and that also inspires public confidence in impartiality of our decision. Thank you. I couldnt agree with you more. Mr. Chairman, with your indulgence i would like to ask unanimous consent to introduce into the record a letter that i have from the national asiapacific Bar Association without objection to put entered into the record. Thank you very much and ugly Senator Tillis by order of arrival is next up on the republican side. Senator. Thank you, mr. Chair. Thank you both for being here and congratulations on your nomination. Judge robinson, you responded to Senator Hirono about you said in your Opening Statement i believe are in response to Senator Durbin how you had a political life and that you flipped the switch and became a judge you want me to get that for you . And responded in a way that said you couldnt will allow your past political positions to influence matters of law. Im not sure that satisfied Senator Hirono but it did satisfy me. You also said there were some cases that you wrote that you knew were potentially unpopular. Can you think of any cases where as a matter of law and the facts in the case you came down on a position that may have differed from the position you would have taken antipolitical chapter of your life . I Cant Think of a case specifically that conflicted with i think which are described with the political chapter of my life. Its not uncommon at all for all of us on the court to express to one another that this is a decision that we feel compelled to make either because of the law or because of the record that comes up to us on the Trial Court which makes findings that as we review the record may never been the findings we made. Im not as a said, he may be up to start main because it would be important for me to tell you i made this decision in this case i wish i didnt have to. You also mentioned i think in one case about i religious Freedom Matter where a religious Freedom Matter where you are sympathetic public to the religious, the religious leaders who were trying to limit who they would actually provide marital services to, is that true . Im sorry, Senator Tillis, i think that was a reference to something from the sort of Advocacy Chapter and the not entirely sure dash im not sure i speak i may have misunderstood but i do know, i think that you were involved were you involved in the case, ms. Sung, i make it my record confused your butt it was one where you are advocating for i think it was regal printing, and regal printing come that was a case where you actually advocating for the printing against the objections of the owners of regal printing. Us this is a Case Stork Reason i spoke about earlier and again this was 30 years ago. I was branded as a lawyer so my memory is not to my door to be a candle for all the competing claims in the case is that our client is claiming should been denied service make public accommodation on account of her religious belief. The defense was no come we denied you service because we didnt want to print a proabortion think and we also have a first Amendment Defense. We never result either the factual issue or the first Amendment Defense because the case ultimately settled but that was the context of the case. Ms. Sung, it would be against your time as you click on the ninth circuit or ms. Robinson have either of you all had experience with intellectual property matters . On the ranking member, Pursley Think theres a lot of jurisprudence that needs to be reworked. I was curious giving insights into metals that may come. Ms. Sung, we will go to you. Not the level of expertise that would be the type of experience that would be helpful. With your time on the circuit i did not something had gone to your office. Ms. Robinson . I had occasional dabbling with copyright issues but nothing that would cause me to think of myself as expert. I put that in the category of type a think i look forward to learning if i have the opportunity theres a lot of work to get it any think Senator Leahy agrees with that so we look forward to a least having congress went into it. Just a final comment. Ms. Sung, on the letter, have you thought about aspiring to being a judge for some time . I was this a Surprise Nomination . I would say its fair to characterize it as a Surprise Nomination. I just think that given, i i had a discussion with a nominee last night about i dont really buy into it is going back 30 years and criticizing somebody for making an illadvised statement that maybe they regret today but the letter does concern me because you are obviously very well educated, very bright person. You had to have at least assumed that it would not be viewed just in the context of a communication to your Alma Mater, that it would come out. And it does raise some concerns in my mind about temperament or maybe predisposition but i will just leave it at that. Im not going to grill you on any questions. Thank you both for being here. Thanks, Senator Tillis. Senator blumenthal. Mr. Chairman, Senator Tillis and i have quite an agenda on like to raise that issue, thank you. Senator blumenthal. Thanks, mr. Chairman. Thank you both for your service and your willing to continue to serve. Justice robinson, the second Circuit Court of appeals is very close to my heart, having appeared before it numerous times and having great respect for the quality of Scholarship And Courage of many of its decisions, which i know you will continue to uphold as a tradition. And i respect your experience. 1800 decisions on the vermont Supreme Court. Which has a great tradition also of scholarship and excellence. I would like to ask you how your experience as a litigator as an advocate has shaped your performance as a judge. Because i happen to think that experience as a litigator and an advocate is important to a judge. But at the same time obviously you have to separate advocacy from judging, and how do you do that in terms of compartmentalizing the two experiences but drawing on one to benefit the other . Thank you, senator. I think you cant be a successful litigator without being well steeped in the law and without being able to do good legal analysis. I think that practicing as a litigator is the right Training Ground for somebody to become a judge. Youre right that the transition from Advocacy Role to a judicial role is a significant one. For me what made it easy is i i was motivated as an advocate because i was passionate about the clients have represented and the causes that advocated for. I am as a judge passionately committed to the rule of law and my duty to uphold it from the bench. And so i carried that same sense of mission in a different role, thats made the transition easy for me. And do you feel that you can separate the advocacy that you may have done . I know my colleagues have asked you this question various different ways but i but e to give you another opportunity to answer. Thank you, senator blumenthal. I have written over 310 f engines. I participated in your 1800 decisions in my time on the vermont Supreme Court. Im quite sure that no One Person would agree with every position i taken in every opinion ive written but i hope that a thorough review of my record would support my own belief that i try in every case to be evenhanded with fidelity to the law, i tried to bring announces to the cases before me. Let me ask you kind of a loaded question, you can feel free to avoid answering it, butt i happen to feel we need more judges at the district court level, possibly even the Circuit Court level your do you have any views on that issue . Senator blumenthal, because i dont currently serve in the federal system im not in a position to weigh in base in any kind of personal experience. I thought especially because youre not currently in the federal system you might weigh in on it but thats fine. Ms. Sung, tell me what is it that you will look forward to most about being on the ninth Circuit Court of appeal. Thank you for the question, senator. I think i will look forward to most continuing my work as a neutral adjudicator in the sense of diligently reviewing cases and researching the law and impartially applying the law to the facts of the record while working collegially with other judges to hopefully reach consensus about what the correct result in the case is. Because i already serve as a adjudicator i would say one other thing i especially look for to is the opportunity to work on a wide range of issues that are presented to the circuit. I have throughout my career dealt with a variety of subject areas, including constitutional law and the opportunity to serve as a judge responsible for deciding those types of issues would with the a great Responsibility And Something i think i would particularly also enjoy. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator blumenthal. Senator cruz. Im sorry, senator cornyn. The senior senator. The senior senator from texas. The better looking one. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Judge in this song, i want to ask about an article, actually an Opinion Piece that one longtime reporter covering the Supreme Court wrote in the near times on september 9, 2021, the title of the article is god has no place in Supreme Court opinions. And she goes on among other things to talk about the courts abortion jurisprudence, and i would just like to ask both of you, do you believe that when life begins, judge and ms. Sung, is a religious question . Is it a legal question . Is it a scientific question . Is it a philosophical question . Or is it a political question or some other category that i havent mentioned . Judge . Thank you, senator cornyn. I think those are important questions and i will say as a sitting judge and as a nominee for the second circuit, it would be appropriate for me in this setting to offer an opinion as to the framework for evaluating that question. What I Cant Speed is im not asking in the context of deciding a a case. Im asking you what is your personal opinion is about when life begins, whether its a religious, legal, scientific, else obligor political question. No, i do stand that, senator cornyn. My concern is that if faced with a case that involved a Cellist Restriction i would be obligated to follow the President S of the United States Supreme Court. Its statements i might make today as of the question should be evaluated could suggest speeders so youre not going to answer the question i understand that. The circuit that you will be sitting on will be the court of last resort for many cases, as you know the Supreme Court of United States only hears roughly 80 cases a year. And so you will be in effect sitting on the Supreme Court for all practical purposes for a number of cases. And so i think its a fair question. Let me ask you under the Supreme Courts jurisprudence, and asking you now for a legal interpretation, does question of when life begins, is that relevant to a legal discussion about abortion rights . Senator, as i read the courts current case law, viability is the touchstone of the legal framework that the court is built. I dont understand it to weigh in the questions of when life begins from that perspective. And answer the question of viability or when life begins is an important legal question under the Supreme Courts jurisprudence. Do you agree with that . Yes. Okay. And i guess, you know where the court, ms. Sung, youll be sitting on the ninth Circuit Court of appeals. Where does the Supreme Court look to determine the question of when life begins . Thank you for the question, senator. As i recall from the courts current jurisprudence on the issue, they look to scientific evidence to determine with a fetus is viable. Would that be the state of scientific evidence back when roe v. Wade was decided i would that be the state of Science Today . My understanding from the courts of the jurisprudence is that it has to an extent moved, recognize that scientific advances can change the point at which a fetus is viable. Justice robinson, do you believe an unborn child at any point up until the time the child is delivered by the mother, does that child have rights under the supreme Court Precedent . I believe that the Supreme Court general terms has recognize that after the point of viability one of the interests that is within the scope of permissible regulation for the state is the interest of the fetus that would be born as a child. Do you agree with that, ms. Sung . That is also a understand of the courts jurisprudence. So the question of liability are when life begins is an important issue because if the fetus is viable, then the fetus has rights they can be protected by the state, correct . Judge . Senator, in broadly general terms, yes. Do you agree with that, ms. Sung . Yes. So i wont ask you this question but i will just close on this. Maybe continue the conversation. Seven out of 198 countries in the world about abortion after 20 weeks. I presume the basis for those decisions is when they believe the fetus is a question of viability weve been talking about here. And the United States finds itself among those seven countries, north korea, vietnam, china and singapore, canada and the netherlands. Thank you. Thank you very much. Senator kennedy. Can ask unanimous consent this article be made a a partf the record . Without objection. Senator kennedy . Thank you, mr. Chairman. If you could indulge me i would like a couple extra minutes, too. Certainly. Council, did you really say that Justice Kavanaugh was a morally bankrupt person . Senator, as i explained i did not write that letter. I did sign and you signed . Yes, sir. Did you really say that Justice Kavanaugh, if he was confirmed, would cause people to die . As i stated, senator, i understood those statements were overheated rhetoric but i understood them to be but you said it, right . I did sign the letter, yes, senator. Do you believe that Brett Kavanaugh is a morally bankrupt person . Senator, sitting here as a judicial nominee, it is not appropriate for me to comment do you believe you said it. You said. Do you believe he is a morally bankrupt person . Senator, its not appropriate for me why not come you said it . I understand. Senator, im giving you extra time i can she be allowed to answer . Sure. I just want an answer. I agree that she should answer. Youre not going to answer my question . I believe ive answered it to the best of my ability. Honestly, senator, i respect completely the Confirmation Process and the authority of Justice Kavanaugh and every supreme Court Justice. But do you come this is real simple. You said just a few years ago, you were not in Law School, youre not in college. You said that kavanaugh is a morally bankrupt person. Its clear as thunder on a summer night. Now, you are under oath. Do you believe he is or not . How hard is that . You have much harder question asked a federal judge eq you make it that far. I appreciate the question, senator. As i stated, those statements were rhetorical advocacy and i signed as an alum addressing my Law School Alma Mater. I did not let me ask you about this rhetorical advocacy. Does rhetorical advocacy mean you said something by now that youve been nominated youre scared that you cant get the vote so youre going to try not to answer the question . Is that what rhetorical advocacy means . What is rhetorical advocacy . Is it a lie . No, its not a lie, senator. I would say that its statements that are made in service of an advocacy position. Okay. And if you issue an opinion and you get reversed by the Supreme Court, are you just going to say dont worry about it, justices, that was just rhetorical advocacy here what is this . Absolute not, senator. If the court issued an opinion, as a lower Court Judge i would be absolutely bound to follow it. It is not rhetorical advocacy. It is of the law of the land. Let me try one more time. Do you believe that brett Brett Kavanaugh is a morally bankrupt person . Senator, as sitting here today under oath. Sitting here today under oath i i can assure you that i respect completely the authority of Justice Kavanaugh as a newly confirmed supreme Court Justice of the United States. Yes, maam, but you believe he is morally bankrupt . Senator, as i stated i respect his authority and the authority of every supreme Court Justice sitting on but he believed he is morally bankrupt . My personal opinion is not for me, its not appropriate for me to say. I respect his authority as a Supreme Court so you do think he is morally bankrupt . I did that say that. But you signed a letter saying he was morally bankrupt. Seven years ago as an alum addressing my Law School Alma Mater i did sign a that a belief was addressed only to my Law School Administration. You didnt think it would be public . I did not understand that it would be used as a public advocacy piece, no. I believe it was only addressed to my Law School. And you signed that because you wanted to show fidelity to your Alma Mater Law School . I signed it, senator, at the time because i felt that it was an appropriate statement to make to my Law School Administration, notwithstanding the overheated rhetoric, but sitting here today as a judicial nominee what i want to assure you is that as advocate, as a litigator come as a neutral adjudicator and as a judge, if confirmed i would absolutely respect the authority of every supreme Court Justice and all of its precedents without reservation. See, i dont believe you. I think you said, i think you mired your political beliefs to cloud your judgment. And i think you said a few years ago what you said about Brett Kavanaugh and i think you believe it. And I Cant imagine what its going to be like to be a litigant in front of you. With that demonstration of lack of judicial temperament and judgment. How can a litigant possibly think that you are not going to act on personal beliefs if you were so intemperate to say something like this . Last question. Are you proud of the fact that you Law School has a Quota System limiting the number of asian americans . Have you ever written a letter about that, or does that not, where does that fit in your socioeconomic view of the world that you think everybody else should adopt and you will impose if youre in a position of power . Senator, im not aware of any policy like that, but what i can assure is that i have you need to get out more. I have a Track Record as a neutral adjudicator. I had decided cases for nearly five years impartially by applying the law as set forth in a statute, our constitution, and a precedents. And ive apply the law impartially. Your the only person in the milky way who believes your impartial. Mr. Chairman, can im done, trenches. Yes, you are. Mr. Chairman, i thought come seems to me this idea, especially if we have a woman nominee, can interrupter anytime you want, state your own things. Shes answer this question over and over again. I would hope we get back to show some respect for those who are answering questions under oath. [inaudible] trenches since my name has been invoked, Senator Leahy knows how much i admire and respect him. I resent the suggestion im doing that because shes a woman. I would be doing it if she made those remarks as as a man apparently the senator has any evidence to show that im somehow being misogynistic. I have respect for the rule of law, whether its by a male or a female. Gender has nothing to do with it. I respect for this committee but also look at the record about the boats go on nominees. Ive seen in my years here, a disproportionate number of votes, not referencing any particular senator. You can go back and look at all record. A disproportionate number of votes against women and people of color especially women of color. Ive seen that. I mentioned that before. Im not mention any particular senator. Every senator has a right to vote however they want but lets all stop and think of what we are doing. I fired senators talk about democrats are against any nominee to any republican nominee to the Supreme Court. I would ask any republican senator, shelby a republican senator who for more republican nominations to the u. S. Supreme court that i have. I dont think there is what. Mr. Chairman, let me respond to that now. Senator leahy knows how much i respect him, and they do. More than i there are not words in english but i dont care how long hes been here. I dont think theres any evidence in this record to show that i have voted on a nominee on the basis of race or gender. And i resent that. Were going to terminate this conversation and go back to the business of the committee, and i believe Senator Blackburn is that the next person up for questioning. Senator blackburn. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I appreciate that. Justice robinson, i would like to begin with you. The second circuit is one of the most important forums for securities law, antitrust, which is an important issue will look at in this committee, complex commercial litigation, Shareholder Class actions. To date you have participated in over 1800 matters, but none of them, not a one, appear to be security Shareholder Class actions, commercial litigation, corporate entities, complex financial transactions. So given this, if you were to be confirmed what are your plans to familiarize yourself with his Te Areas of the law . Thank you, Senator Blackburn. Its too ive had some cases that involve commercial litigation more broadly speaking, but its true i agree most of the subject as you listed are matters of focus on the federal courts. I can tell you in my tenure on the vermont Supreme Court i found that i really like learning new things. I like broadening my horizons and i enjoy complexity. When cases come in that some people look and say oh, my gosh, and a look at the record, i get excited. And i think that Disposition Something that would serve me well in trying to expand my knowledge. Let me ask you about this judicial activism. Want to talk with you about that. You made a statement as an Aba Panel you said court decisions can catalyze broader social and legal change. So what does that you do dash of what is judicial activism mean to you and you think it is appropriate . Thank you, Senator Blackburn. I do use term judicial activism because it is very different meanings to different people. Okay. So then you have no answer to that . Well, onsite at the questn is what is judicial activism mean to me and i dont all right, but you see decision as driving broader social change but then you do not interpret that as being judicial activism . Senator, i think the role of courts is to decide the cases that come before them pursuant to the law that they apply. One of the things tennesseans dont appreciate is having activists on the court. They want that to be a neutral body, and thats what they expect. Ms. Sung, i want to come to you. Going back to this letter that you signed. What youre saying is that it is a heat of the Moment Decision that you made, that probably you exercised poor judgment, and its a been difficult for youo separate that personal from your professional as you signed that in your professional capacity. Would i be correct on that . Thank you for the question, senator. To be clear i signed a letter strictly in my personal capacity. So you did that in your personal capacity. Okay. In the letter, i want to go to this. You said that you thought he was a threat to the most vulnerable, thats a quote, and that a threat to many of us, and the letter went on to say that people will die if he if confirmed. So why did you talk to me about who is the us that kavanaugh is a threat to . And who are the people that you expected to die if kavanaugh was confirmed . I mean, this is a pretty broad, brazen accusation. It is pretty out there. So why dont you bring some clarity to that . Thank you for the question, senator. I agree that those statements were overheated rhetoric, and as i stated before is by signing the letter i created the impression that i asked a judge, if confirmed, which failed o respect the authority that i do apologize. You created that. You created that perception, and many times people believe perception is reality. So you have established that as your Thought Process that you as a person in your personal capacity you say not in your professional capacity, but you as a person in your heart of hearts, you think here is someone who is unacceptable. He is a threat to us, but you still havent defined us. He is someone who will himself cause people to die. So if you dont want to bring clarity to that for me, then by signing the letter, have you proven yourself to be acceptable as as a nominee for a federal judgeship . Thank you for the question, senator. I think the best evidence of the kind the judge i would be, if confirmed, as my Track Record as a neutral adjudicator. As a neutral adjudicator i have decided cases impartially by applying the law, to the facts as established by the evidence in the record. I have lets talk about that. During her 11 by the way, youve still not answered the question on this. You are taking the can on the road. You are punting on it and you should know that that is that something that is accessible, and until you conclude the record on that, it is going to bring that perception to bear in how people perceive your Thought Process to be here so i think it needs a little bit further thank you, Senator Blackburn. Time has expired. Okay. Thank you. Im sorry, my Clock Isnt working, working over here. Thank you. I have questions i will submit to you for the record about your judicial record in the number of times youve actually been in federal court. Thank you. I believe Senator Lee is next by order of arrival. Ms. Sung, i wasnt personally intending to ask you about the letter. I i wanted to ask about other things. Some of your answers have me confused. When you call someone and intellectually bankrupt ideologue who is intent on rolling back our rights and the rights of our clients, you either mean that or you dont. I assumed assume you woe if youre thinking of someone that way and you dont believe that speaking you to reason to think that, i would be defamatory, would it not . Thank you for the question, senator. As i stated i did not write those statements. I take responsibility for signing the letter and you recognize a were overheated im asking with this be defamatory if they were not true . The definition of defamation and the standards for defamation are complicated but they vary depending on whether someone is a public figure. They vary on terms of whether they were statements of fact, whether they can be proven or disproven. It was, in fact, a a Sittig Judge at the time you made this statement so its not you are pulling them from arabic you are purporting to have some knowledge of it. Its not just that you said he was a morally bankrupt ideologue that would deprive people of bright picky also said people will die if he if confirmed. Theres no Qualifying Language in there, nothing saying we fear that this might result in decisions with quote in turn would result in terms of things that would be bad for people. You called and quote a threat to the most vulnerable, quote hes a threat to many of us simply because of who we are. If you were saying that of someone and you didnt believe it was true and you didnt have a reason to make such a statement, wouldnt that be defamatory . Respectfully, senator, there is requirement for defamation, would require statements of fact not mere rhetorical people will die if he if confirmed. Is that not a statement of fact . Its not couched in any logical we are talking at how this might lead to things. Nor is it ambiguous to say that he is intellectually and morally bankrupt Ideologue Intent on rolling back our rights, and the rights of our clients. So lets just start with that one. Would you agree that is defamatory if not true . Appreciate the question, senator. As i stated when i signed the letter i understood the statements the rhetorical advocacy, not statements of fact. Rhetorical advocacy is not the defense to defamation, not in common law, not under the law of any state familiar. Can you tell me how that is relevant to my question . Respectfully, senator, as i stated before i did not consider those to be statements of fact. I okay. I dont think its a defense ever to a claim of defamation to say i didnt intend it as a statement of fact if, in fact, you are making statements of fact. Nor are these things just a rooted in the ether. Figure not purporting to draw from them in the absence of any context. You are drawing from it apparently in the context of his status as a been sitting judge on the u. S. Court of appeals for the d. C. Circuit. Is that not itself undermining the legitimacy of the courts as an officer of the court . Is that the sort of thing you aspire to . Senator, as a stated, i do apologize if my signing that letter i created the impression that i dont respect the authority of the courts or any duly confirm supreme Court Justice. Throughout my legal career as a litigator, as an adjudicator and as a judge, if confirmed, i would respect the authority of every supreme Court Justice. I followed the courts precedents without reservation. I have applied them as an adjudicator and i would continue to do so as a judge, if confirmed. When you described his nomination as a threat to the most vulnerable and creating an emergency, that tends inevitably to suggest that your confidence in him is so lacking that someone would be justified in doing anything they could to undermine his judicial authority. Will in which case i find it difficult to believe you will be able to respect his ruling that he will be bound respect given that he is sitting on the Supreme Court of the United States. Finally, Mister Chairman i think it is important we be able to ask these questions. People can have a legitimate concerns without having our motives questioned particularly in the context as Someone Question motives of the members of the Supreme Court of the United States. I find this troubling, troubling trend on the committee and not one we should aspire to continue. The record will show there have been ample opportunities to ask a question about that letter this morning. The chair is not cut off anyone or do we plan on it. Senator halley. Thank you for being here and congratulations on your nomination. Justice robinson, i am troubled by your history of compelling individuals to express Proabortion Viewpoint against their religious convictions, talking about the press case, Senator Cruise asked in 1994, demanded two devout Catholics Print Custom membership cards for an organization that advocated in favor of abortions when they declined to do so citing teachings of their church you and your clients filed a complaint with the vermont human Rights Commission in the lawsuit and your briefs, you argue their decision was invidious, pernicious and akin to racial discrimination which is quite a claim. Really quite a claim and i have to ask why did you feel it was important to leverage the machinery of government, these are two private individuals, why did you feel it was important to leverage the machinery of government to force these two catholic business owners to violate their sincerely held religious convictions. Help me understand this . As i indicated that case was 30 years ago. I apologize if im not as precise about all the details but generally speaking we conceded that if the printers have declined to print the materials on account of their opposition to abortion there was no basis in law to pursue our claim. The issue, the Threshold Issue in the case is whether my client was a catholic. She was there to get flyers for vermont which was printed, she was deeply offended by the suggestion she wasnt a true catholic and thats the reason why the Printer Wouldnt Print the materials. The case never proceeded beyond that stage and it was the end of it. I understand the issue of the government had told your client she wasnt a true catholic or true hindu but we are talking a suit against two private individuals, the basis of religious viewpoints, they couldnt print these cards, you and your client attempted to leverage the maturity of the state, to compel these private individuals to speak. It concerned compelled speech. In light of masterpiece cake shop, your client would not have the right to compel other individuals, i dont read the masterpiece cake decision. And and nor do i understand the speech claim, turned on the fact the court concluded the process has hostility toward religion and it wasnt a factor in that respect. Your view, the law can compel, and it is labeled as neutral but it compels, it is okay under the first amendment. Is that correct, your understanding of the lies are currently sits . Im not aware the us Supreme Court has addressed the nuance coupled with free speech claim which is what you just described. What i referenced earlier was free exercise claim, the us Supreme Court hasnt backed away from the decision in the Smith Case in terms of applicable law. You stand by your presentation of all the arguments she made including calling the position of these two catholics, Malcolm And Susan baker on racial dissemination, do you regret that . I dont remember the context. I havent looked at that brief in 30 years. That the passage of time make it different . I am quoting you, invidious, pernicious, as you sit here does that not trouble you . Your describing religious beliefs of practicing exciting the teachings of interest, you think that is akin to Ku Klux Klan . I suspect we are dressing in that passage was with this was discrimination against my client on the basis of her religion. You were saying these two catholics did not want to provide the speech, you are engaged in the speech, your client wanted them to on the basis of their faith, doing so was a can the last President Since somebody appeared to this committee have made that exact argument was a republican who made that exact argument. I voted no. That person didnt get confirmed. Ive got profound, profound concerns about your position and the passage of time doesnt do anything to alleviate my concerns with one more question, lets shift the criminal law. Can you help me understand this case, september of 2017, this is a defendant living with his girlfriend and her 6yearold daughter, the defendant was using Box Cutters to open boxes, the 6yearold asks him what he was doing, the defendant held a Box Cutter to the girl thats stomach, told her he would kill her in her sleep, then laughed as the girl ran away, the girl later told her father about the incident, so she was unable to sleep understandably, the same defendant later convicted of aggravated Mystic Assault with a deadly weapon, you dissented saying shouldnt have been convicted and you in part because the blade was covered with plastic it shouldnt have been considered a real threat and you went so far as to analogize this to a pillow fight, you said this thread in this case is akin to the threat to use a pillow to swat somebodys back side. This completely baffles me, the threat of a Box Cutter to a 6yearolds Stomach and the guy says hes going to kill her and that is akin to swatting her with a pillow . I think if the picture in your mind is the Box Cutter we used to open boxes in our garage i understand. The picture is the one in the record because it is in the case. I can see it. It is right here. It is right here. It is a Box Cutter. There is a blade. He put that to her stomach. The blade was completely covered in the question of law 1 was the record and what the record showed. I understand your description of what you stand understand the record to have showed. The legal question is whether the definition of deadly weapon in vermont law was satisfied by that implement. The fact the implement may be used in a deadly way doesnt make it by definition a deadly weapon. The question involved the specific nature of the Box Cutter in the way he used it. All i can say is i find your position in this case frightening and the idea as a father of 3 young children, a Box Cutter and a young girl at stomach is not an issue, i think that is crazy. Thank you, Mister Chairman. Senator durbin has gone to vote. I will go that concludes our first panel, we thank both of you for your excellent testimony and congratulations again to you and your families. We will now move to the next panel. Please be mindful that senators may submit written questions and we will ask you to work diligently to respond to them. Thank you very much. Thank all of you. With that we moved to our second panel. I will ask Everyones Patience for a moment while we finalize the setup for these two nominees. [inaudible conversations]. Doctor group the, you may take your seats. Im going to ask you to stand and take the oath as is our custom. Do solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole Truth And Nothing but the truth so help you god . Thank you. Thank you, rahul gupta, you may proceed with your Opening Statement. Good afternoon. Chairman derman and chairman blumenthal, distant was members of the committee, thank you for inviting me to discuss my nomination for director of national drug Control Policy with you. I would like to thank my Home State senators who are here today, Senator Manchin and senatoritoh, im honored President Biden has nominated me to this positions i would like to thank my family for their fantastic support. Im grateful to my wife of 25 years who serves our nations veterans and my twin sons who have taken time from their studies to be here. Im also happy to have my dear friend Jeff Reverend John Unger who has worked with Mother Teresa in india and brian skinner with me. Im eternally grateful to my late parents without his blessings i would not be the today. It is a privilege to appear before you as the President S nominee and as a practicing physician, first generation immigrant and public Health Official from a rural state. With decades of experience in the intersection of public health and public safety im ready and eager to lead the federal Governments Response to addiction and the overdose epidemic. I want to get to work as soon as possible. This epidemic has cost hundreds of thousands of american lives, methamphetamine and cocaine, this urgent challenge has grown, there are more than 21 million americans with a Substance Abuse Disorder but only a fraction of physicians with the qualifications to treat them. No surprise that so many people dont know where to turn for help. As a physician ive taken the hippocratic oath, served in town the smallest 1900 residents in cities as large as 25 million. As ive seen the challenges, people, providers and local communities face, as a public Health Officials in County And State levels my record reflects my commitment to addressing differing needs of diverse populations. I launched the first statewide social autopsy, a review of the lives of all West Virginias who died of Drug Overdose in 2016 and many of those findings were just studied, four of every five victims with contact with healthcare system, our system of care failed to provide timely help they needed. We used this data to change the approach, to prevent fatal overdoses and scale effective programs to families and partnered with the department of corrections to provide treatment to justice involved individuals, reduce recidivism and help people transition back into society. I work with the appalachian hideout to bring the Od Program to the state which enabled Law Enforcement and public Health Officials to collaborate and track overdoses the crosssections in realtime and respond. These partnerships have been critical in my public Health Work and i look forward to continuing the strong relationship with state, local and tribal Law Enforcement agencies. Over the decades i have learned that an overdose is a cry for help and for too many people that cry goes unanswered. Of confirmed bible do everything in my power to make sure these cries are heard and people receive the help that they need. My immediate focus would be to reduce and eventually illuminate overdose deaths. We must build a better Addiction Infrastructure centered on individuals, families and bringing communities together from public health to Law Enforcement to faithbased organizations and the private sector so we can meet the people where they are and save lives. We must reduce the supply of illicit substances entering our country including illicitly manufactured fentanyl from mexico and china. Methamphetamines from Mexico And Cocaine from colombia and hold the drug traffickers accountable. While the Biden Harris Administration priorities set us on the right path to we have much more to accomplish, the challenge we face is enormous. My lifes work with patients and communities has prepared me for this challenge. I would be honored to be the first physician to lead this office. Of confirmed i look forward to working with this Comedy And Congress in a resultsoriented Datadriven Manner to turn the corner on this devastating epidemic. Thank you for your consideration. Im happy to answer your questions. Let me thank senator blumenthal, we do a tagteam here to keep the committee in session, you waited patiently for this opportunity. Thank you for the opportunity. Please proceed with your Opening Statement, Elizabeth Prelogar. Mister chairman, thank you for that kind introduction earlier. Sitting before you today i am overwhelmed by a sense of gratitude. I want to thank President Biden for the honor of this Nomination And Attorney general garland for his strong support. If i am confirmed i will work every day to demonstrate that im worthy of their Confidence And Yours and i want to thank my family whose Love And Support mean everything to me. My husband brandon is the best imaginable spouse, Friend And Father to our children. Despite having a busy career in humanitarian Protection Brandon has always made time to support me including being an equal partner at home so that i can pursue my career in public service. We have two wonderful sons, lacey was 10 years old and beckett who is a, they are both here today. I promised them we would go out for milkshakes after this to reward good behavior so the whole family has a lot riding on this hearing. My incredible mother is here as well. There are no words to express how grateful i am to her for shaping my values and work ethic and always demonstrating the importance of service. I wouldnt be here today without the example she said, the encouragement she provided to always pursue my dreams and the unending support shes given me to help me reach them. My brother eric is here also, pretty much from the day i was born he has been my best friend and i finally went to thank all the family and friends who supported me including many who i think are probably glued to cspan, my Mother And Fatherinlaw in kansas, my sister leah and my nephew taylor. I wish my father had lived to see this day. He was an attorney too. He loved the law and took great joy in watching my legal career unfold. I think about my dad every day and i know how much he would have enjoyed this moment. One other person whos very much on my mind is Justice Ruth Bader ginsburg who i had the privilege to serve after Law School. Justice ginsburg was so much to so many, rightly and inspiration for the entire nation. To me she was a teacher, a mentor, a Justice Seeker and the epitome of unrelenting grace. Justice ginsburg moved my admission to join the Supreme Court bar and i have to think she would have thought there was no better use than to serve in the position for which i have been nominated as Solicitor General of the United States. When i return to the Solicitor Generals office in january it felt like coming home. I worked in the office for several years across administrations as a Career Attorney and more recently acting Solicitor General. There is so much i love about the office and i can say from that up close view there is no better place to work. I love the intense commitment to integrity and professionalism, recognition we must turn corners in our filings with fidelity to the rule of law and the role of the courts and constitutional structure. I love the unparalleled intellectual rigor in our work, we probe our arguments, Pressure Test our theory of the case and seek to protect her presentation in setting forth our understanding of the law and i love the exhilaration of standing up in the highest court in the nation when it is considering the most important legal issues of our time to present arguments on behalf of clients who im deeply honored to represent, the United States of america. Im humbled by and filled with joy at this opportunity to leave the office of the Solicitor General. Of confirmed i will work as hard as i can every day to honor the traditions of the office, to carry out the responsibilities of this position with integrity and to serve my country by always seeking to protect and defend the interests of the United States. Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to answering your questions. As i introduced you im convinced of your qualifications and dont feel any less after your Opening Statement. Rahul gupta, thank you not just for aspiring to this important position but for your lifes work. As we said in our Telephone Conversation i was struck by the fact that you didnt head to the bright lights in your life, you headed to the communities that needed your help and many times chose rural areas and parts of this country others might not have chosen, in your determination to deal with the Drug Crisis we currently face and have faced over the years. Two things i want to make comment on, ask your reaction to. One, many people are to blame for the opioid epidemic and im not taking away any of the responsibility that they have but there are two areas that i think of been overlooked. Despite the growing evidence of the addictive nature of opioids many people in your profession, the medical profession continue to prescribe them in vast quantities, some of them clearly with criminal intent but others seem to be with indifference to whether or not the person became addicted to the product when a conscientious doctor following the patient wouldve realized over some period of time, the drug salesman, whatever other influences were involved in that pushed many of these doctors to continue to prescribe opioids in indefensible amounts even after we knew they were addictive. I would like to comment on that and secondly, it was in this room 6 or 7 years ago where i discovered the role of the Drug Enforcement Agency which has to approve the annual quota of production for opioid products. They were authorizing at Farmers Request, let me underline that, Farmers Request amount of those drugs to be produced each Year Way beyond any of the needs of medical practice. They were clearly setting them up to be part of an illegal and sometimes committal undertaking in selling these drugs in quantities. Tell me what you think of those two elements and what youre going to do about it. Both are important questions which i have worked closely as you are aware or may be aware, West Virginia was the worst hit in terms of shipping of hundreds of millions of opioids into the state, we worked very hard across jurisdictions, across the state and in multidistrict and multifaceted manner. I was happy to see the prescribing of opioids, a part is needed, there is no doubt there are doctors who have ill intent in prescribing them. There is no doubt there is a lot of other doctors who have been told or otherwise believed it was a good idea without having scientific evidence at the time. We still have more physicians who overprescribed. That is the problem of volume, Problem Version and it will take us time to get there but we must also make sure the pendulum swings, take care of the people who have legitimate pain. The same time i agree is a lot of work we need to do and if confirmed you have my commitment to working on both of those aspects. In our conversation i noted that theres been a dramatic change in our feelings about addiction. 15 or 20 years ago, if you said someone overdose, who do you think they are and where to their lives, would have said i would guess africanamerican, 30 years old, innercity and you would have been right. Not so it will with opioids and Heroin And Fentanyl and things being used now more frequently. Those have affected the white Cheerleader Girl in the suburbs that it is her family that comes forward heartbroken and learns shes overdosed and did as a result of it. It forced us to throw out the stereotypes and look at addiction as a medical problem, not just a failure of moral purpose but a medical problem. To you since the change in conversation as well . I hope my being here is a nominee reflects both the President S focus on this is a public Health Crisis which it truly is which is going to require a lot more than one aspect so we have to take all the tools in our toolbox to act but it is clearly a public Health Crisis. Cant think of a better introduction than to have those two senators from West Virginia and the glowing praise of your work, glad you are taking on this job. No reflection on you that i direct my questions to rahul gupta. Im for you all the way. Congratulations to both of you on your nomination. Let me start with Elizabeth Prelogar. While you are acting Solicitor General, a political article noted that the biden administration, quote, is on track to reverse the Governments Position in more cases before the Supreme Court then the Justice Department did during the first full high Court Term of donald trumps presidency and such flipflopping impacts the credibility of the Solicitor General. If you plan to continue with this practice are you worried about the office losing credibility . Thank you for that question, ranking Member Grassley and let me say at the outset that i think Consistency And Stability are important values for the Solicitor Generals office. I dont think that changes, the position should be undertaken lightly. In the time i was acting Solicitor General did not make it lightly and i recognize anytime we same Change Position is that in vestment of the opposite credibility. The fact as i looked at when i made those decisions focused on two things, first, the interests of the United States and second what is our best understanding of the law and we have a wellestablished process and associated generals office, so sitting views far and wide to form judgments. Luckily i did not have to sit there on my own and try to figure it out. We go to every federal agency that has equity in the subject matter, solicit recommendations from the litigating components of the department, whether that is similar civil rights or tax or criminal and we also go to career officials in the office of the Solicitor General, and as a deputy Solicitor General and i was one of those in a Career Spot in the office. I have a very healthy respect for that process and only after that time of extent of deliberation did i make any of those situations to Change Position and the vast majority of cases we stayed the course with prior positions but in the limited number of cases where i determined it was necessary those were the fact as i looked at the process that iran. My last question to you would be your heavily involved in the special counsels investigation, investigation the Demands Transparency and accountability so i have two questions, do you know federal criminal cases are routinely dismissed because Law Enforcement officials withhold evidence . Yes, i believe that that refers to the grady doctrine as a general matter and the requirement to turn over evidence including exculpatory evidence to the accused in a criminal case. You are significant member of the special counsel team, please explain to me why the Cell Phone given you during the duration of the investigation only contained 250 personal photos and why that should not qualify as withholding evidence . Are you talking about the phone, whitehead 250 photos . I do not remember the number of photos, there were a few shots of my kids. The answer to that is i had a personal Cell Phone at the time and my special counsel to for work but sometimes im surprised there were that many. Mustve been the kids were doing something cute. One question for rahul gupta, thank you for the time you spent in my office yesterday. Your agency is tasked with making and coordinating our nationwide Drug Control Strategy. The agency released a statement of Drug Policy priorities earlier this year but a number of important issues were noticeably absent. Of the Agencys Invitation i sent a letter outlining what i think should be included in the national Drug Control Strategy which includes permanently scheduling fentanyl related substances dealing with increased Methamphetamine Threat and addressing Drug Trafficking and use. If confirmed will you commit to reviewing these suggestions and considering their inclusion in the national Drug Control Strategy . Thank you for spending time with me the last afternoon as well. If confirmed i do commit to having in the presence of the Drug Policy these aspects included in a robust manner. Thank you very much, Senator Cotton . I want to continue the question about position changes in the Solicitor General office. I want to speak about a specific case, terry versus the United States, the Crack Cocaine Sentencing reduction. The United States had been defending the senate which is typical in criminal cases even if it is close called and might be overturned but when you are acting Solicitor General you waited until the last moment, back the very day the brief was due and sent a letter to the court saying the court will change its mind following change in administration not only that you wouldnt defend sentence but confessed error saying the department had been wrong all along. This required to reschedule oral arguments, that is what the court said in its opinion, on the day the Governments Brief was to the United States informed the court that after the change in administration it was no longer in the judgment because of timeline the court reschedule argument to compress the Briefing Schedule and appoint adam debited he able he discharged his responsibilities. That sounds to me like a court that is displeased in the Governments Position at the very last moment in a way that caused them to reschedule their briefings. Here is the thing. Once the government switches position in the case was argued it wasnt a close call but it wasnt 5numfour in some anguished majority opinion, it was a close judgment, we understand the point. The government lost 90 and the only reason was 920 is there are 11 supreme Court Justices. The government or the court said the government was engaged in sleightofhand. How to your office get it so wrong, you said you went through evaluating us interests and whats the best understanding of the law and weeks later the Supreme Court will not 5numfour 63, 90 that you were wrong, how did your office get it so wrong . Thank you for that question. I appreciate having the chance to talk about that case. I found that to be a difficult decision, making the decision that we should confess error in that case which is a longstanding tradition in the Solicitor Generals office and we determined that is appropriate in the interests of justice. I focused on the legal issues involved and ultimately the interests of the United States. The question in that case is whether the lowest Level Crack Cocaine offenders could be eligible for resentencing under the first step back and it was a given that the individuals who were responsible for greater quantities of Crack Cocaine for with a provision in the only question was whether the lowest level offenders also could get that kind of Sentencing Release under the first step ask. That was a question that had the Circuit Court, circuit Court Judges had disagreed on that issue. And ultimately after looking at all the tools of statutory construction, the text of the provision, the context it was my Judgment Congress had intended to extend the Sentencing Relief to the lowlevel offenders. Our time is limited here but do you think having switch the Governments Position and being rejected 50, do you think you got the Decision Wrong . I certainly respect the Supreme Courts decision and the fact the justices disagreed with our position in the case. Ultimately i wish we could persuade the court of our position in each and every Case And I cant as Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the ball is in congresss court, to extended Sentencing Relief to lowlevel offenders. After joining the majority 90 opinion it was not a close call at all. It was committed on march 15th. Are you the one who personally made the decision in that case . I am. I was acting Solicitor General. I was responsible for those cases. Did they direct you to make that switch . Know. Did you consult a Highranking Official in the permit of justice . I dont think it would be appropriate of me to discuss internal deliberations to the terms of justice. I can tell you as a general matter the Solicitor Generals offices viewpoints and perspectives from all interested components including the leadership offices, federal agencies and litigating component. You said to Senator Grassley one of the things you do is equities. The acting Attorney General for the office of legal counsel when you testified a few months ago, was not insulted in this case. Would it be the Solicitor General abnormal practice for the office of legal Counsel Question like this, thinking about switching the legal position . As a general matter know. When it is in active litigation, they office of legal counsel doesnt handle that. This is part of a pattern. The government switched from its previous position and lost 90 in the Supreme Court. I could keep going. I can keep going if he doesnt have anyone else to ask questions. We certainly enjoyed the questions, thank you, senator. Senator trues Datacenter Cruz said hes returning but any indication where he is . Now, Senator Cotton, you see my dilemma. Witnesses are here in the senator is not. I to accommodate him if i can. I am sorry. Senator klobuchar trying to ask questions. There we go. Senator klobuchar virtually. I will try to be very quick knowing we are trying to wind up. I will thank all of our nominees and rahul gupta, your nomination is supported by Senator Manchin anditon West Virginia as Republican Governor who said i believe there is no one better suited to this important job than someone representing a state and people where the opioid crisis hits close to home. In your view how is the support from across the political spectrum going to help you in this job . It was indeed a pleasure to speak with you. I believe it is important when dealing with an epidemic that is claimed 95,000 lives as of january of this year, work in a manner that helps to address the public Health Crisis, it is a complex and difficult situation and americans need our help but it will involve entire village to help and it is going to be important, looking at supplyside issues or demandside issues, we need to have a lot more effort moving forward, the President S budget proposes significant and historic funding levels to support that work and i believe the support that has been demonstrated of my record reflects my ability to work across lines and across communities and stakeholders. One last question. In 2018 editorial in the journal of medicine, you discussed over Incarceration Addiction related issues, how complicated some of the issues about responding to the epidemic. Im a longtime supporter in my time as prosecutor and well aware of how treatment can change someones life. If you could address drug courts and how you would champion them on the state and federal level in this job. Thank you, senator. I for closely with State Drug courts and system. There is clear evidence to demonstrate the 4000 treatment courts across the nation that are looking at 150,000 americans to help have demonstrated clear benefits, that includes reducing crime, saving 6,000 a person and also disproportionate impact benefiting employment, schooling and other societal and community impact. I hope continuing to advance and part for this crisis in this epidemic. Thank you. I will not put my questions for you on the record but congratulations on receiving letters of support from several former Solicitor Generals including every Solicitor General who served in republican administrations in the last 3 decades. That is very impressive. Thank you very much, chairman. Thank you. Letters in support of all four of the witnesses this morning will be placed in the record without objection and questions for the record i do to the nominees by 5 00 pm tuesday september 21st, the record will remain open until time to submit letters and similar materials, thank you to the witnesses for your Patience Today and with that the hearing stands adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] thank you so much for all your help. It was the pleasure. Welcome to the new event for clean energy jobs and community from Arlington Virginia and those clean energy jobs possible as a kick off the programming Youtube Twitter and linkedin please join the conversation t