a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. lee: mr. president, justice >> mr. president justice's draft opinion. the massive proof of jurisprudence. it's a long overdue victory. it's a vindication of nearly 50 years of tireless efforts by the pro-life, movement and conservative legal movement. theyan are originalist. president trump's resent things. people like my father. it was in that context. counter with individuals. onos the opposite side of the issue. i was 11 years old when my father submitted the brief while severing as president reagan's solicitor general. protesters showed up outside my home. my p parents and siblings and i found myself alone that area. you spoke to the people that have shown uphe in the quiet suburbant neighborhood. they were shouting slogans of one sort or another. i introduced myself to the woman that appeared to be in charge. her first words startled me. she said, well, hello, little boy. we aretl not here to help you. it's alarming when that's the first thing someone said to you. i asked what she was doing. they were there because they disagreed with some things my father had submitted to the supreme court and the brief i referred. i asked the question why do you have to h do it on my lawn. she responded in a way that was, curious. she said well, we are trying not to step-on your lawn. we are staying on the sidewalk. id didn't understand the difference between an easement and walkway or if they entered on the cartilage of the home. in front of a private residence withc officials lived and slept and raised his children. people like my late father stand up to the rights of ongoing human beings. the injustice brought about. this is byy the supreme court. power away from the american people.ak their opportunity to make decisions regarding abortion at the appropriate level. you have those decisions made by the own elected lawmakers. this is unelected justice. thee almost exclusive prerogative. we decide how, when, and to what extentns abortions might be regulated. >> well, before the supreme court is the test of weathering the storm of political opinion. the line has been drawn and roe v. wade appears to be on the verge of overturned. should this draft opinion be the official holding of the court. americanse would once again to have the opportunity the debate to discuss these issues. with the american people that was within the respective state. what terms and conditions ought to apply and restrictions ought to be imposed to protect humane life. this should give us all hope that america is not doomed to decline. even in the face of daunting odds. men and women didn't do nothing in the evil triumph. it was placed on the mall and up on the hill and washington monument stance. a few months ago people placed white flag each memorializing those who had died with covid-19. i believe at the time there were 6 or 700,000 people in america who had died with this illness. there weree 6 or 700,000 little white flags standing a few inches tall on that hill on the washington monument. from a distance it looked like a snowstorm in washington d.c. they hadn't. it was b beautiful. irt started thinking and wonderg it was similar memorial and it's only temporary. honoring, memorializing, they had been aborted since it was decided in 1973. taking away from the american people have the ability to make their own laws in their own states. pursuant to authority that belong to the american people of the constitutional government. 63 million babies, a portion of this came out of my generation. they were ed 1/4 of generation b x that were never born because they were aborted. 63 million. what if we had small red flags, each representing one of those babies. it occurred to me and it wouldn't want that on the hill. it's room enough for the entire mall between the capitol building to the east. to accommodate all of the red flags and what will that look like. the m covid-19 memorial looked like a snowstorm. this sea of o red flags would lk like something else. when i d saw the draft of the supreme court opinion that had been leaked to the news opinion there was a wave of emotions. it's encouraged as i am by what appears to be soon to come and the opinion of the court. i was deeply up by the united states to betray there trust. the time i spent and working for the a justice. the congratulations the court went to protect the internal deliberations of the justice with drafted opinions on separate computers. separate computers had a computer system that allow us to correspond between the chambers. they can transfer draft opinions between the various chambers. thatom computer system is completely walled out from the outside world. it was b connected by our area localha network. anything that requires internet access we had to go to a separate computer. we couldn't use it and it was walled off completely and for good o reason. the court operates in such a way it ultimate work product in any case will consist of a ruling. , you've got to make sure that >> in fairness to the justices you have to make sure everything isac in order. if they decided how they would vote and which opinion. what that opinion will say before they release their opinions. those go out too early and they areth not ready. that does a grave injustice to litigants and american people, generally. that's why the court goes through great lengths. they are not being secretive aboutr it. it's a matter of public record what documents they review. likewise ate matter of public record and documents they produce have legal operation are also public documents. they are very open and transparentbu process. during the time period between when argument is heard and opinion is rendered the court needs to be able to deliberate and consider it's options confidentally. that's what the security system does. it's theret to make sure opinios are being drafted and seventh back and fourth didn't leak out. many circumstances, the editing ofk opinions took place on the same computer system. drafts are going back and forth and proposed edits between them. in the moments you need to print them out. you neededut a hard copy. there were conditions attached and understanding they shouldn't leave the building and you can't take them home with you. you put them in a burn bag. this is a brown paper bag. it collects the contents of the burnur bag and they thread them. they thread them a few times. the documents were reduced and long thin ribbons of paper that were cut apart and cut multiple times. it's a fine mist of confetti. it's my understanding and was at the time before any of that left the building. you take it to an insenniater. they would burn it and grind it up to an ashy pulp with water in their. no one could look at what drafted the opinion and see what would happen. lives are at stake. all of these things matter and the court wants to make sure the opinions go out only when they are ready. everyday wash filled with the sense in the sense of duty. the ability to deliberate complicated legal principals through the process of riding. we share opinions and what their colleagues. we were able to distill legal principals. they arrive at proper legal conclusions. a this is a way that is respectful of litigants and of each member of the court. that's whyde their work is guard from public scrutiny and breech of confidentiality. what we witnessed this week is damaging. there is another instance is happening over the course of the entire history. all of history and this happens. the court and personal had a long history and tradition of taking great care in these matters. yet, while i'm convinced this leak may have been an attempt to intimidate the justices or majority. perhaps an effort to try to get you to change their position. i'm also confident and it will not succeed. must not succeed. this very thing. this is an official statement. they announce and investigate into the league. i trust o him into the other justices. the marshall of the supreme court and steer them through the storm and oversee the investigation. the overwhelming feeling i have today of joy. joy in the case. pride in the former law clerk of justice east side oof it must be overruled and must be returned to the people and representatives. noting correctly theli constitution neither explicitly protects the right to abortion. every human life born and unborn hasni irmeasurable dignity. the lives of unborn baby and her mother. and her father. the court overve turning prior precedence such and row and casey. a lotau of decisions over turned prior rulings. the justice compared damage to that of the separate and equal doctrine. thankfully. this is in brown verses board of education and racially segregated schools. just asse it appears and overtun the decisions in row and casey. the opinion is it's well reasonedgr and grounded. it also mean in states across the country including in my state of utah. hundreds of thousands of unborn children. children who could not be protected by state law due to restrictions placed on them by an invented nonexsissant constitutional doctrine. i have the chance of being protected. this is on the course of which states make w which decisions regarding the protections of human life. as americans we must not and we forget what is at stake. we recognize the sanctionty of human life-like myself and majority of utah. we mustls also recognize. this is not the end of the chapter in american history. it has not been done to overturn roe. getting, to this point. the point that the court apparently reached this miens this discussion can finally begin. it's been closed out and debatable matters have been rendered beyond debate. this is a post roe america. this is why overturning row matters. the returning of this to the 50 states as the constitutional demand of federalism. some states like utah have laws to protect the most venerable among us the moment that roe and casey are overturned. i hope and pray many innocent lives will be saved. not just in my state but throughout the country. i pray for all of my justice's safety and for the country. we all know, we have to remember that the laws adopted in one state will be different than another. part of living in our constitutional republic. people have different opinions and views. regional difference i predict that the lawtions of massachusetts might differ in many ways. overturning row verses wade and casey doesn't do any of the things on the parade of pleurallables. those a condemning the decision have recited among the more frequent and proplexing argument the overturning of roe v. wade somehow signals the demise of democracy. t it's difficult to understand how they can make this argument with a straight face. i don't mean here. not referring to their underline position. according to the specific argument that t this representsa threat to democracy. overturning and the supreme court the very thing it will be allowing before the democratic process notoh prohibited by the constitution to states they remaven to be made with the states or with the people themselves. so, if we want to talk about democratic principals this will farther democratic principals. it will advance democracy and not undermined it another things i find proplexing is this somehow amounts to women across america. decisionssi regarding abortions. that's not true. they real estate quire that anyone doth anything beyond the factt' that it's lifting previously recognized and nonexistent to state governments to protect unborn human life. those who disagree with my views on the tangentties of human life. i recognize there are those who do. many of them in fact. i true and correct them toci thr state legislatures. this is where this decision should be made. it's not within their power.'t they are just deciding who gets to decide what. that's part of the entire constitutional design. what justice alito wrote in this draft opinion, something that i hope will stand it's absolutely right it's a absolutely essentil to restoreca the american people that's theirs. those who appear by leaking this opinion and characterizing it in ways thatte are unfair. passing legislation. we talk about passing legislation that would increase the number of seats. these are all efforts designed to degrade, demgrade and dela legitimize the unitedth states. those who have any inclination to do such a thing, i'd say this roe v. wadede has stood in place nearly my entire life since i was old enough to understand it i regarded it as a really bad decision and wrong decision. i always regarded despite it's flaws. there was a human that sometimes make mistake. despite the flaw it's the greatest tribunal we don't want to substitute it we must not risk what would come if we la legitimize the courts. i'm grateful the court appears to finally be on the verge of correcting this great unjust tis. this will occur once and for all. these decisions will be by the peoplesy elected lawmakers thank you. >> mr. president we witnessed a unprecedented attack wrong the independence and integrity of the united states supreme court. a third branch of government. when some reporters got their hands on a