Worlds are not too big of a dream end quote and hes taking a step by making sure that nasa remains a leader in spacex plor ration. Including supporting nasas plan to explore deep space and sending astronauts to mars, including the launching of the mars 2020 rover, seeking signs of past life, and testing samples, an vetch human exploration of mars, it remains a multimission agency with a balanced set of core situations in space science, space technology, human space flight, and education, and towalaunchine james web telescope and establishing a Astronaut Health care occupation program, after the bill signing the Vice President also announced the president will be taking action shortly to relaunch the Space Council which the Vice President will chair, he was happy to sign this new bill into law to continue to working towards america being the leader in space science. He met with the Prime Minister of iraq. We lined out the meeting from yesterday and i believe theres a read outof the Vice President as well. This evening the president will speak at the National Republican congressional march dinner. On the senate side of the hill the president s pick for the Supreme Court judge neil gorsuch has done a phenomenal day in the first day of questioning, it was widely praised by both sides of the aisle and clear that everyone agrees that judge gorsuch is a very qualified person to sitting the Supreme Court. A judge is there to make sure that every person poor or rich mighty or meek gets equal protection under the law end quote. His record show hes lived up to this commitment throughout his career, and the type of justice we need today is National Agriculture day, the world needs americas farmers and ranches to lead just as the world needs america the lead. Expect today grow 50 . The world cant afford for farmers and ranchers to retreat. While our farms are the most efficient in the world regulations have been tightening and one fifth of farm production have been declining due to unwise trade policis. The president promised many in the agriculture industry and throughout Rural America he would not allow this to continue and continue to implement policies to change this. North korea, the United States with our allies is exploring diplomatic posed by north careers ballistic missiles. A scheduling updates tomorrow the president will stop by the women and health care panel. They will be a series of meetings with members of congress, the president will meet with members to discuss the American Health care act and meet with the member tofs congressional black caucus. And will have lunch with secretary mnuchin before meeting with officials from trucking companies. Trucking happens to be one of the largest employers and its important to understand the impact of Health Care Legislation on this important industry. Ill have updates on the weekend schedule for you hopefully tomorrow and finally yesterday pursuant to the president s executive order on interior enforcement signed january 25, the u. S. Immigration and Customs Agency i. C. E. Released a weekly list, which a number of Law Enforcement agencies have fail today comply with, where individuals who have arrested for violent crimes, in many case local Law Enforcement agencies are refusing to on our website theres a list of where the municipalities that are not cooperating. And since were talking Supreme Court, john roberts. Come on, that was good. Not bad. On health care the president came away from capitol hill sounding pretty positive about where he was going to go on thursday. At the same time Heritage Action came out and said it was going to encourage members to vote no. Attacking the bill, jim jordan said its still a bad bill. This is going to vote day after tomorrow. What gives the president the sense of optimism he can get this through and might he request more changes from speaker ryan before it goes to a vote . Weve talked about this for days, theres been a lot of input by members of congress and i think there was a huge sign of support and there was a lot of enthusiasm and optimism, from a lot of conservatives and democrats, for a more sen trick Health Care System. He will continue to meet all the way through thursday. But also as noted there were a lot of changes made by the speaker last night. Additional legislation, has been put forward to make sure that members understood the comprehensive nature of this. This is one vehicle. Theres a huge administrative piece that secretary price willster through administrative action that w will administer through administrative action. We can now unwind a lot of that and add a lot of consumer based and competition measures, but the third prong all the other stuff we talked about for years as republicans buying across state lines, expanding Health Savings accounts all that has been introduced as well and i think he continues to meet with members and walk away with a very, very optimistic view of where the bill is headed. I think a lot of the measures that you have been changed, tweaked and updated and concerns of members who wanted to see some additional tightening, but if you have been a conservative fighting for repeal and replace, this is your chance. If you are a conservative looking to address out of control entitlement spending, this is the first reform of an Entitlement Program in terms of medicaid in 30 years. These are truly a conservative set of principals we are fighting for. The competition thats in the bill. The ability to allow prices to come down and choice to go up. Theres nothing more conservative than in this bill and as members continue to talk about ideas included the bill and the principals of it we feel very good going into the final stretch. May he seek more changes . Very possible, but have made positive steps forward so i dont want to rule anything out but will say i feel very good about this where it stand now and i think the more an more members meet with the president they understand how important this is to the overall agenda, if you can repeal obamacare, replace it with a Health Care System that does what conservative, independents and frankly democrats have talked about for years, instill choice, drive down cost, actually get care promised and get on things like tax reform, it will be an amazing first year in office, and this is an amazing agenda he set forth that we can working to on. The stock market as a real time barometer, this afternoon its been off as much as 200 point ons t points on the dow, its because worried he might not be able to accomplish everybody he set out to do. Does the president believe todays dip in the dow is the result of his performance as president of the United States . I think to look at one day is nothing we have always cautioned. When you look at not just that one indicator. You probably know better than anybody in terms of what you cover that you cant look at one indices and say thats a benchmark, you look at surveys that show theres continued confidence in the market and apt mic optimism. Major ceos and small businesses, talk about job growth. I think the numbers we saw last month again one month doesnt make a record but it was very promising not because what the number was but what it forecasted to be, it came in at 235, so when youre overperforming i think that shows a sign of optimism and confidence in the market. Again, i want to make sure were clear before as we continue through the months one report does not make something to base an entire record off of but we feel good about the direction not just in terms of indices in ups and downs of the market, but restating commitment to grow jobs. Is that confidence to get a tax cut done, do you think we are well underway to seeing this agenda done, it reaffirmed his commitment and the priorities he set out making this country the increases in National Defense and Homeland Security that he promised prioritizing other things in the budget. Weve got obamacare, immigration executive order wise an i think when youre doing big thing, Obamacare Tax reform, its no small feat and what you have seen so far, moving along the senate ready to picket up. The nomination of neil gorsuch. The agenda is moving very brisk in terms of what his priorities were and where were headed. Consideration for carbon tax which was discussed at a meeting at the white house, were hearing theres a pretty lively internal debate. Gary comb might be more prone than that, is the president considering a carbon tax . I can theres a robust debate going on with respect to comprehensive tax reform and as we mentioned our goal right now is to get through thursday and what the president has talked about very publicly, we need to get obamacare repealed and replaced and move on to tax reform and some of the other trade reviews, im not going to comment on specific prongs of that but will tell you theres a lot of people who recognize we havent had comprehensive tax reform since 1986. Theres a lot of voices and opinions that get shared with him so im not going to get into a discussion commenting on piecemeal of this. When you look at the week ahead real quick, glen, in terms of this the repeal and replace from the legislative impact, i think its a pretty big week for the white house seeing this done. Hunter. President trump has previously indicated he wanted to appoint prolife judges who would be willing to overturn roe v. Wade though gorsuch said he would have walked out the door if he had this position. Is the president still confident that gorsuch would be willing to overturn roe v. Wade . I think both the federal side deem to be people who interpret the constitution as originalist, and im not going take the bait on a live hearing, but appreciate the comment. Recently a 14yearold girl was raped in the boys bathroom of her high school. A 17 and 18yearold boy have been charged one of the boys unlawfully entered the country, both out Standing Orders with i. C. E. , does the president hear a story like that and think it should be changed in a future executive order . I think first, let me just say that this is a tragic event, horrendous, horrible and disgusting what this young woman in rockville went through. I cant possibly imagine, so first of all lets remember the human side of this that this is a tragic event that no child, no person, no parent should ever have to deal with. School should be a place where their parent puts their child on a bus or sees them off and knows that theyre safe. And the idea that this occurred is shocking, disturbing, horrific, and whatever other words that come to mind that someone can think of because this is not school should be a safe place where children are there to learn and to feel safe in that kind of environment. To know this happened in the circumstances that this young woman in particular fought to come to this country because of the freedoms and treasures of this nation and to think this kind of tragedy would occur to someone who personally endured that type of struggle to come to this nation is reprehensible, it is not who we are as a country, it is troubling and further to your question, the president recognizes education is a state run and local issue, but it is pause for concern, i think the city should look at its policies and i think that this is something that authorities are going to have to look at. I think from an immigration standpoint clearly there are so in facets that deserve question, 17 or 18 years old 18, thank you, how does that person get put into the ninth grade . There so many issues that come up in this case i will leave it to authorities, but we are in the early stages and theres a lot to address. I hear about it being a state issue, lets talk about something that the president has introduced v. O. I. C. E. Is that enough . No, its one piece. The president understands that victims need a voice which is why he brought it into help them when theyre specifically targeted or victims of a crime by people here illegally, but part of the reason the president has made illegal immigration and crack down such a big deal is because of tragedies like this. We act so many times like why is the president dealing with this because of this priority, part of the reason is because of the tragedy that this young girl dealt with. Had inflicted upon her, whatever the word is. But this is why hes passionate about this because people are victims of these crimes in terms of them theyre victims the economic piece, a National Security piece, but immigration plays its toll on our people and this is an example and why the president is so passionate but recognizes why its multifaceted why i just read off this exec fi exective order and state in my opinion municipalities are not for whatever reason in some cases are prohibited but for whatever reason are not enforcing the law and turning the individuals over to be deported and i think is another reason why this issue needs to be address. John. Is the president going to hold accountable are they going to pay a price . I think they will probably pay a price at home. Meaning that you cant go promise over and over again lon and even the new ones this was a major component of the last election and probably was not a single republican member itself who went out and talked to this and i think when you realize the component of the bill and that the president worked with the house and the senate to achieve a promise made to voters. Yeah, i think theres going to be a price to be paid but its going to be with their own voters an theyre going to have to explain why they made a commitment to them and didnt follow through, people who agree or dont agree with the agenda at least give him high marks for keeping his word and promises and thats one thing hes made very clear this morning, we pledged to the American People at the congressional level, senate level president ial level to go do something and this bill while probably not everybody gets everybody they wanted does exactly what he said repealing and replacing all the aspects we discussed in a lot of cases back to 2010. One things he made clear this morning is he was going to make sure that the people who did support this, he would be out there supporting them and so im not goupg ing to focus on the negative as the positive, for those of you who go out there and keep your word, were going to gave to their voters. Margaret. That was the one i was going to ask. Its okay ive got another one. The other one is on the laptop restrictions by the u. S. And now the u. K. It certainly sounds like that might have been in response to some kind of specific security threat. What can you talk about from the podium in as much specificity as you can and if you cant do specifics help us understand are there multiple threats, one threat, like what is going on . Yesterday the tsa announced enhanced measures from the more 250 countries that have flights come sbo coming into the United States that serve as last points of departure, even adam schiff agreed saying these steps are both necessary and proportional to the threat. Elevated intelligence cates that terrorist groups continue to target commercial aviation and to under take their attacks to include smuggling explosive devices and based on this, they have determined its necessary to enhance security procedures for passengers at certain last point of departure airports. That being said, im not going to go any further than that. I would defer any further comment to the tsa. Mark meadows the president seemed like hechs ki was kind o joking but has the president decided whether it would be appropriate potentially to mount primary Opposition Campaign primary opposition in the midterm . Mark meadows was a long time early supporter of the president. He had some fun at his expense this morning during the Conference Meeting and he continue tod continued to express hope that head of Freedom Caucus would continue to see efforts to make this better, address a lot of the concerns out there, but he has made it very clear he was having fun with him. The president is committed to making sure this gets passed. Vivian. A followup to margarets question why wait for the aviations regulation 96 hours to wait, isnt the president s mantra that we have to kind of sneak up on our enemies, not let them know our tactics . I will ultimately refer you back to the tsa, but these are ten airports last point of departure of the 250 that come here. You have to provide opportunity to get those procedures in place, im not going to comment any further about the security measures that have been taking place or are taking place just continue to refer you back to tsa but will tell you implementing something over this nature in that timeframe is pretty darn quick. Something totally unrelated. Has the white House Counsel approved ivanka trump getting a west wing office and what is the administrations thinking behind this. I dont think council actually approves office space but i get your question, she continues to promote high measures of professional conduct. Shes taken advice of counsel. Health care to followup on the followups, you made it clear the president was going to be supporting those who supported the bill but when he talked this morning in the closed door meeting about people paying the price, is that an implied threat by the president for those who dont back the bill . No, i think its a reality. If you dont go out and back your people, there have been members there have been there one, two, three, terms, but has been clear if you give this to the American People we will get the done and to make a pledge of this magnitude and not follow it through im sure voters will be upset and have seen it in the past and its something that i think the president as i mentioned earlier has staked earned high marks for is keeping his word an i think the president was stating a political reality and if we dont go out there and make good on these promises will he remember the names of those who dont back the bill . Well see. John. I love your counting its like cbo. Sorry. Come on. That was do you want to elaborate on that one . No, i dont. The Russian Commission testimony, there was this interesting moment after the briefing where director comey was asked about live tweets coming from the president at the same time and james comey was Fact Checking, is he concerned about his own director is Fact Checking and correcting. Well, it was not like he was out there, he was responding to a question. I think its important to note with respect to this, i saw a couple comments yesterday, senator coons took issue with a couple comments we made. I know you guys love this when i do this, senator coons, this is his quote direct quote quote i have no hard evidence of collusion end quote director clapper quote not to my knowledge, end quote, tom cotton not that ive seen and not that im aware with this is in relation to any type of collusion, theres smoke with you but no fire, no evidence of trump collusion. So you know, we have now gone over this on multiple occasions but at spoiome point theres a distinction and this comparative narrative that falsely tries to link the president or the white house into any of it. They continue to see theres nothing there. Every Single Person briefed has come out and talked about it. Former cia directors obama appoint eees have said no evidence. But thats not my question. But my point is that was one of the tweets former dni continues to know and that actually was true, these are their quotes what they have said so its not a question at some point the question has to be to whether its chris coons from delaware, or clapper, or morale, theyre the ones who have said these things on the record, been briefed by the intersection communi intersecti intelligence community, so the question should be directed at them not us but over and over again its come to the same conclusion. John. Kaelin john, its national ag day. Thank you, caitlyn. Two questions first the author david harowits calls a deep state hold overs in government trying to under ccut the president s agenda, widely repeated on social media. Does the president himself believe in this deep state . Well, ive been asked this question before and ill give you the same answer, i think there are people that burrow into the government since the beginning of time called ram specking suddenly no longer permit. But this has been going on since the country came to be where people burrow into a Civil Servant job, but sure theres people after eight years of obama that found their way into government so it should be no huge secret. My other question ram specking. Google it. I remember ram specking. Have you ever seen any spelling come on. Ram specking. Were going to go through a History Lesson here, guys. My other question was over the weekend governor guaco ramirez, in a much publicized statement said that mexico had scored its first victory over the proposed wall. He said that in the president s budget theres a line item for 2. 6 billion. In fy 18. And no mention of mexico paying for the wall in any way, and hes claiming victory. Your response . I think its pretty early to claim victory, the president made it clear he was going to Start Construction of the wall and there would be ways which that fulfillment of that pledge would come through. Caitlyn. The president repeatedly said they will present evidence they were wiretapped an last week he said may be coming this week and speak this week, can we expect the president to bring evidence or speak and it that he was wiretapped by president obama. Lets see how the week goes, margaret. The talk about the need for the Health Care Plan to pass, tax reform and the rest, at what point do you think this agenda could be im perilled, because you are going to have further fights to get through the senate. So at what point will the vote count . It seems to be the center piece of the president s agenda so given that theres no certainty in terms of passage at this point how concerned are you that thursday could imperil the president s agenda . I think the president s visit this morning was very well received. We continued on the path to get to the vote we have to get to the senate next, but i think members understand this is something thats been at the heart of what republicans have campaigned on and i feel very good head into this. The president continues to talk to members and make sure we grow the vote as much as we can. But with respect to the rest of the agenda i think all the issue that is the president campaigned on are things that the house and senate look forward to taking up, whether its trade, immigration, comprehensive tax reform. All these issues are stuff that many republicans have campaigned on a long time and eager to get going. The president made clear part of the weve got to keep moving along if we want to get things done. Theres a lot to get done during the first term and so the quicker we get repeal and replace done and put the American Health care act in place the better. Thats just the nature of what it is, but when you look at to the speed of which we have moved its been very responsible, allowed the committees to do their work well, the house has taken up the amendments. Its been online. Theres always a balance between jamming it down which is how the democrats when they finally moved on their bill, but i think we have struck a very nice balance on this. The president said today it could happen when we asked well have to see, right now its the American Health care act and trying to get it done. First the Kansas Legislature is on the verge of possibly passing a Medicaid Expansion and the current version does not allow states to pass that so im wondering, as you know most legislatures are meeting across the country, will there be a meeting it would have to be addressed legislation, i dont believe theres an exception clause but far be it for me to say. The bill is getting ready to move to the house the legislature is meeting. I dont want to prejudge the outcome yet but i dont believe from my understanding theres any kind of clause that says if. Secondly, tomorrow you mentioned the congressional black caucus, is there a specific topic health care . What can you tell us the p president s message; and i know theres been back and forth about that meeting april is about dont drag april into this. This has been something that the president has talked about for a while. He met with congressman elijah cummings, started off in a phone call probably a month or so ago where they discussed prescription drugs and our legislative affairs team early on went to some of their meetings and started having a dialogue with them. And that dialogue continued and there was a desire to have a meeting. The president wanted to have them down. I think there was going to be a range of issues that get discussed that range from drug prices to infrastructure investment, education, hbcus, there will be a range, thats part of it, theres no set agenda, and obviously i think health care is going to come up too. The president wants to before april jumps out of her seat. Thank you, with the cbc, you say you went through all of this prior to reach out to the cbc, so with all of this understanding that they are a Important Group to deal with handling some of the urban issues or issues that pertain to their community, how does the president plan to move forward in working with them particularly those who just dont see eye to eye with him . I think part of it continues to have a dialogue, april, its simply sitting down with people talking about issues, talking about Common Ground if you look at the conversation and with congressman eli i can congressman elijah comumming maybe theres 15 or 20 of the issues they agree on, maybe theres one bill they can work on but theres a willingness to sit down and talk and i think thats fist step in the propces, and the president has brought in union leaders, he had dr. Zeke emmanuel, its not just bringing in people who agree with you, its about bringing in people across the spectrum, i get it that innercities rebuilding isnt the only issue. Hes talked about rebuilding the innercities, law and order, health care and theres issues that impact urban areas, whether they live in rural areas, urban areas but i think that dialogue needs to continue because it can only help and what we look forward to tomorrow. The second subject as touk talking about bringing in groups, trucking, something called elogs thats going to happen at the end of the year where truckers with commercial trucks or mom and pop businesses all are going to have to have computers to log in to monitor the time you drive, stop and speed et cetera and many people say it cuts into their income. Where does the president stand on that . Thats more of a d. O. T. Issue. If they were very concerned about it would he at least i understand and i hope that comes up. T on the airline issue, if theres a danger to americans or flyers having laptops things bigger than cell phones in those ten countries, why would it not be a danger in the other countries. I cant talk more, i can refer you to the department of Homeland Security and specifically the security administration. President s traditional issue a greeting for the new year will the president be doing that. Ive got check on that, we may have something for you, thanks. Lets get back to watching neil gorsuch. I will have a week full of announcements and im excited to announce that the press core who stole tom bradys jersey, we righted that wrong. Lets go back to the judiciary committee. Answering republicans from republican senator mike lee. When you say fair, youre not talking about fairness in some abstract solomonic way where you are being wise in your own mind. You are being fair in a manner consistent dictated by your judicial oath and your oath to uphold and protect and constrain within the United States constitution, the power to prescribe laws with prospective general applicableability in the legislative branch and executive branch, as far as making the law making, and the Judicial Branch is there to give effect and meaning to those words not just based on what is fair in some abstract sense but also what is fair in the sense that you have got to decide who the Decision Maker is, who makes the law and how to give affect to those words. One of the many cases that comes up from time to time is one called trans am trucking versus administrative review board. You wrote in that case it might be fair to ask whether trans ams decision meaning the decision to fire the driver in question, was a wise or a kind one but then you say its not our job to answer questions like that, so you dont have to respond to this, but let me tell you how i interpret the language at issue in that case. As someone who has served as a law clerk in the federal judiciary and litigated cases. If i were involved in that case, a case in which the judge wrote those words, i might think to myself regardless of whether i like the law and regardless of whether i like the decision made by the employer in that case, this is a judge who is bound by the law and is acknowledging as much in his opinion. So i would like to ask about the law in that case in the trans am trucking case. The applicable statute said you cannot fire someone for quote refusing to operate a vehicle, is that consistent with your recollection . Sitting here, thats my recollection. In that case, the trucker was fired because he operated his vehicle, a vehicle that he was assigned to against company orders, is that a fair summary based on what you remember from this case . Yes, senator. So, one could argue and i think one could argue conclusively and i think it was argued and decided in that case that this was a fairly clear application of the law because if what the law said that the person couldnt be fired for refusing to operate a vehicle and that statute were being invoked not on a context where the person was fired for refusing to operate a vehicle but where the person in fact operated a vehicle, those are two different things, arent they . I thought so, senator. That was my judgment in that case. Dickens wrote the laws amass, and sometimes you might encounter cases where thats true. Sometimes you can look at those who make the laws and say exhibit a your honor as to why this is amass, its not your job to write the law, or rewrite it after the fact is it . Nobody else, senator. You had another case under the same statute that was involved in the trans am case its a 2007 case. Called copark versus administrative review board. A trucker had been fired refusing to drive a truck he considered unsafe. You wrote an opinion in favor of the trucker and awarding attorneys fees sthais that righ . Senator, your recollection is better than mine on attorneys fees. As i recall the court did award attorneys fees in that case. So, i dont really understand the argument that some are making or the implications some are trying to raise that you were somehow unfair in the trans am case. Because after all, in the trans am case, you applied the law, it didnt apply in the way the terminated employee wanted it to apply in that case but you applied it fairly in the other case. Also wanted to bring your attention to another case mentioned by some of my colleagues and thats the wong case. Case where a professor with cancer wanted to extend her leave, the University Said no, and the professor sued. The panel ultimately concluded that the law required her to show that she could continue to perform her job if the university provided an accommodation and all the parties in that case agreed she could not. That she couldnt continue to perform it. That as i recall was a unanimous opinion, is that correct . Senator, that was another very hard case to go home after. The individual there had was sick, very sick, and had given i think six months off i think already if i remember correctly and i dont remember if it was university of kansas or kansas state. And then she was asking for another six months off and the University Said no. And she sued under the rehabilitation act which prescribes that reasonable accommodations must be provided to workers to perform their essential Job Functions but to prevail they have to prove they can perform their essential Job Functions and it was undisputed she just couldnt to no fault of her own and the District Court said thats just not a claim, maybe for contract but not under federal statutory law. Thats my recollection sitting here and my panel, three judges, unanimously agreed that was the correct application of law and those facts. No one is here to say that love the law in every case and the results it yields. I am here to say that i promise to apply the law faithfully and i can guarantee you no more and promise you no less than that, senator in every case. If im remembering that case correctly, judge lusara was on that panel with you, is that right . I dont recall. I will check to make sure, i think he was. And judge lusara was not nominated by a republican president. He was one of my dear friends and colleagues and appointed by president clinton. Thats true. An excellent judge. So if you were wrong in this case then so was he. You did write in that case also something that i thought showed a fair amount of reflection the plite of the plaintiff. By all account the teacher was a good feature indicating you were aware of her plite, rare statement made by a judge unsynthetic, it was made by a judge who understands the deeply human context of every case and also understands the deeply sacred nature of the oath you took to uphold and protect and defend the constitution of the United States and operate within the constraints of the constitution for that i thank you and i respect you. Thank you, senator. Thank you, senator lee. I want to make announcement that we would take a tenminute break after senator klobuchar, i hope it would be more than 12 minutes. I said yesterday your nomination comes before us during an unprecedented time in our nations history. In recent months elements of our democracy have been challenged, questioned and under minmined a for that reason i cant look at your nomination in the comfort of a legal cocoon and believe we should evaluate it against the backdrop of the real world, so starting with something easy, senator grassley and i are leading a bill for cameras in the courtroom, a number of your fellow people who are sitting at that table years past including judge sotomayer said they were open to it and positive about bringing cameras into the Supreme Court, only a few people can get in there yet the decisions affect every american. 1. 5 million americans tuned into cnns broadcast, so what is your opinion on having cameras in the Supreme Court senator thats a very important question and i appreciate the opportunity to discuss it with you. I come to it with an open mind. Its not a question of that i confess ive given a great deal of thought to. Ive experienced more cameras in the last few weeks than i have in a lifetime by a long long way, and i have to admit the lights in my eyes are a bit blinding at times so i would have to get used to that. But would you favor it or not . Senator, i would treat it like any other case or controversy, i would want to hear the arguments. I know there are justices on both sides of the issue. I think justice suter said over his dead body with cameras, but i was hoping that things have changed, i was hoping that things have changed sin then and we see more an more interest in these decisions and hope that you will remain open to it and will favor it. My second question which also pertains to transparency is a discussion you had with senator whitehouse about the federal rules for federal judges in terms of disclosing trips and things like that and you said you had not taken those trips and if you had you would disclose them, do you think there should be that same kind of ethic standards for Supreme Court justices. Senator, i said i disclosed every trip thats reportable. Yes, but the specific question is on Supreme Court justices. Yeah, i know that the rules are different. I dont know how different they are. I havent studied that, senator. Would you favor them having the same set of rules thatply to you right now . Senator, i would say two things first i have no problem living under the rules i live under. Im quite comfortable with them and i had no problem reporting every year to my aabilities everything i can, so i can tell you that. It doesnt bother me what ive had to do i consider it the price of service and its a fair one, i can say i dont know what the arguments are, i would want to study them and kbhcommit to i would give it fair consideration. Its pretty straight forward to me because it applies to the other federal judges, i dont think this is matter of precedent or whats happened you are going to be in the words of hamilton in the room where it happens if you get confirmed, and all were try dog is make this as transparent as possible of what peoples interests are and so i hope you will consider that of course i will. I pledge to you i will consider both of those things carefully. Thank you. On the issue of precedent. I think this idea of an independent judiciary is important now more than ever, so i want to start with that. When you accepted the president s nomination you said a judge who likes every outcome he reaches is very likely a bad judge. And in your book you said good judges often in ways to their own policy preferences when the law so requires. So i want to ask, can you give me an example of a Supreme Court case that you believe was wrongly decided under the law but that you will continue to follow if you are confirmed because the precedent is so strong . Senator, i think thats just another way honestly of trying to get at which Supreme Court precedence i agree with and disagree with. I dont think it is. I think its about something that you actually said when the president nominated you and you sa said it in public, you said this is a definition of a judge someone who respects precedent so much that theyre still going to enforce the law i thought there could be one kpmple even if its a really old one senator lee and i were just talking about where the results wither not attractive to me as a person where i follow the law to the best of my aabilities. Several past nominees have made this promise about respecting precedent before this committee and these are people that you respect justices and admire, at the same time they said they would respect precedent and later became justices with lifetime appointment and overturns, one is Citizens United, two announced they would honor precedent but then joined an opinion that not only broke from press dont but got a law passed by Congress Releasing this unprecedented wave of money, do you consider it as a departure from precedent . It did overrule austin, so in that respect its example of a court that in part overruled a precedent and thats part of the law of precedent too as we have talked about that you start with the strong presumption in favor of precedent, thats the anchor of the law, a starting point, but there are instances when a court may appropriately over rule precedent, im happy to discuss them again with you if you like, but i dont want to waste your time either so you tell me. So you see this as something where there was precedent you go back to buckley it overturned parts of that, austin, mcconnell. There was a number of cases that it overturned. To us up here, it was a major overturning of precedent so thats why were so concerned when people say oh, were going to respect precedent and then come in and do that and you have suggested that you would go further than Citizens United in riddle v hickenhickenlooper, wh was on caps on individual contributions to Major Political candidates the outcome isnt what i want to talk about. It was all the judges i think there was an agreement on the case but you alone wrote a concurring opinion. Thats what i want to focus on suggesting making a political contribution was a fund mental right that should be affordd the highest level of constitutional protection, if the Supreme Court docadopts the standard you suggested, the few we have left in place on the books could fall so do you believe strict scrutiny i would like to clarify riddle versus hicken looplooper. In that case the law in colorado allowed individuals to contribute more money to Major Party Candidates than to minor party candidates. And i really do, i read the case, i understand that but with my limited time want to focus on the opinion, but then you took it a step further, you commented by justice thomas, all should be subject to strict scrutiny, could you clarify for us, do you think theres any basis to applying strict scrutiny, that apply across the board, why else would you have cited that opinion . The facts of the case, thats what i was deciding were uneven contribution limits. It was permissible to give more to Major Party Candidates than to minor party candidates. And the law as i know you are well aware, senator under buckley says the contribution to cant