tv Neil Gorsuch A Republic If You Can Keep It CSPAN September 16, 2019 7:00pm-8:06pm EDT
they were both initiated and surrounding states. so what we see here, is it when we started 2011, we only followw the rates, they're pretty similar. there continues until we get to about the middle of 2014. in this sort of work the questions happen here. >> the increase was most pronounced in the most for success of 2014. have left so in 2015. it's not clear why. since flint was still on river water and. s >> right when the epidemic starts, the pneumonia rate starts and jesse goes up while the other counties is going down. so if that is veryge clear divergence. me about that over time. . .
>> and to sign the document establishing a new government for the united states of america go at the national archives we have celebrated constitution day since 1956, four years after the original document in its place of honor in the rotunda go over the decades we have celebrated in many ways. the naturalization to money for new citizens of the united states it is always a moving experience to witness people
from all parts of the world to stand in front of the parchment signed by our founders 232 years ago to swear to support and defend the constitution. we also invade one - - inviter speakers to understand the constitution and the central place in the nation's history. today we are honored to have with us this evening the sitting justice of the supreme court of united states associate justice gorsuch who has recently brought together his thoughts on the constitution and separation of powers into one volume we are pleased to welcome him here born in denver colorado got his ba from columbia jp from harvard and served as a law
clerk to judge sentelle united states court of appeals and the clerk to justice white and justice kennedy of the supreme court of the united states he was in private practice and principal deputy associate attorney from the department of justice and with the tenth circuit he served with the rules of practice and procedure of the us judicial conference and as chairman on the advisory committee and donald trump named him as associate justice of the supreme court april 102017 please welcome associate justice neil gore's itch of
the supreme court of the united states. [applause] >> thank you. >> it is wonderful to have you back just after you were seated we are glad to have you back with us. >> it's a wonderful place i encourage our younger people to come visit it's not that far. and if you're really lucky kids can spend the night camping out with the constitution. how cool is that? i have a lot of friends whose kids have done that.
>> take us back september 2016 to colorado. what happened. >> my life more left change in every conceivable way overnight. i was living a very happy life outside of boulder colorado where i had been a judge for a decade on the tenth circuit then all of a sudden everything changed. to give you one story that is emblematic, we had to sneak out of our home in boulder and sneak into the white house. [laughter] they were very committed to be surprised if we wanted to honor his wishes. how do you get into the white house unnoticed? it's pretty tricky.
you have to go through the kitchen we went to the kitchen of the white house. that turned out to be really neat because i am a history buff and you can still see the scar marks from the fires from the war of 1812. and the bullet indentations from the bullets as well. we snuck in through the kitchen and the president very graciously allowed me to use the lincoln bedroom as the office for the day. that's where i wrote my remarks for the evening for the announcement on the desk the same that had the gettysburg address written in lincoln's hand. wow. the president knew that my wife was british originally and gave her use of the queen's bedroom for the day right across the hall. where churchill stays the queen stays.
before the announcement they asked us not to make any phone calls but they had no problem with her calling her parents back in england and they figured five hours ahead, middle of the night, they won't tell anybody any way. so she calls her father and says dad you will never believe it. it's going to be neil. he had stayed up to watch the news and he said i am watching your american news and there is another fellow and he is driving to the gas station on his way to washington and i'm pretty sure it's going to be him. [laughter] in-laws. and then she said no data pretty sure it's neil i'm sitting in the lincoln bedroom. [laughter] he quickly replied yes honey
but president trump the other guy may be down the hall. [laughter] that's when everything changed. another story the marshals were guarding our home and our family they give their lives to serve our country and the courts. very briefly. but one night apparently a truck came up and sped up to the house a man jumped out and started running to the house with containers of white substance inside of it. we got a call the next morning and it's a company that delivers our milk. [laughter] they informed us that her usual milkman would no longer
be coming to the house who had served us for years. somebody else had done the job. did something happen? the terse reply there was an incident. it took some cross-examination before it came out what happene happened. the final answer was yes. he ended in the prone position. then louise took over a chocolate tower as an apology i'm not sure he ever got over it. [laughter] >> so with that station identification let me remind you in your confirmation process. with the senate judiciary committee to deliver everything they could of you which has turned out to be
13285 electronic assets to the request we used 2700 specifically to your nomination of the court of appeals and those contained 19000 pages and the excel spreadsheets one alone had 156 attachments. >> my apologies. [laughter] and to all my friends and family and coworkers through this process the law firm had to produce every document that i think i had signed or filed my eighth grade teacher was assaulted coming out of school. on and on it went.
thank you. to my friends and my family just emerged from the word - - from the woodwork. >> talk about your loss of anonymity. one day living quietly in colorado then the next day everybody in colorado. i was photographed more in that one minute than my whole life. that is a little disconcerting at first you are at a restaurant and somebody videos you at the other end. that takes some getting used to. but then i realized when god takes something away he usually give something in return. so what i got in retur
return, david, the opportunity to see firsthand how much the american people love this country. how much they love our constitution. how good and kind they are with a deep reservoir. i got letters of support all over the country and even a package of socks from someone who saw me on television and thought my socks had fallen down too often. [laughter] people come up to me in a coffee shop early in the morning and say i thank you need a joke and they tell me a joke. people say have a huge supporter and i don't support this president but i wish you well and pray for your family. during that crazy process, i was on a flight between denver and washington.
one of those moments i was feeling frazzled. i was seated next to a little girl who was probably six. the plane encountered some turbulence and she leaned over and said would you mind if i held your hand quick so we held hands for about 20 minutes and at the end she said now would you like to draw? [laughter] we spent the next two and a half hours with a coloring book. in that was a wonderful moment of me to just be normal. of course at the end of the flight the mother who sat behind us recognize me in two weeks later i got my favorite thank you note ever. it was a drawing of a little girl had done on the airplane is to stick figure standing in front to say thank you for
holding my hand. and they were holding hands. that is the american people to me. that's what i got to see i see this day in and day out and it's a humbling approach. >> my predecessor scalia smoked a pipe at his confirmation hearing for quite think were likely to see that again. my old boss byron white his whole confirmation hearing lasted 15 minutes. so did mine for the tenth circuit. [laughter] things were a little different the next time around. during the confirmation process i was truly surprised at how many people thought a
judge really is a politician who wears a robe and should promise to do certain things. they always say you must abide by precedent and then over here they tell you what they don't like that then the other is the exact opposite. and i came to think it's one thing the judges are mistakenly error and follow personal preferences versus the honest view of the law and it's another thing entirely to think that's the way it should be. and that's the way it is routinely and there is no difference between a politician and a judge. but then i got to think about this subject more on
separation of powers in the constitution and a civics education and i was truly shocked. only one third of americans can name the three branches of our government. another third can only name one branch. 10 percent apparently believe judge judy serves on the united states up in court. [laughter] you know that i happen to like judge judy but she is not one of me - - one of my colleagues. [laughter] the archives does wonderful work all sorts of wonderful organizations in this area. but i hold something back and they wanted to put that on pape paper.
>> so let's get to the meat of the book you describe as wonky but it is so well written and written for the general public for separation of powers. >> that can sound pretty dry. everyone understands that the first amendment contributes to your liberty we all get that. we understand that. we don't understand or appreciate every day is how the separation of power contributes to her liberty and the genius of it. madison wrote the constitution we got the structure right and thought the bill of rights at the end of the day was promises that were only as
good as the enforcement mechanism. now to test madison in the real world, which is your favorite? my favorite is north korea's. it promises everything our bill of rights promises and more. free education, free healthcare and the right to relaxation. my favorite. [laughter] that sounds pretty good. not sure how that fairs with the political prisoners but there you are. but the truth is that bill of rights is not worth the paper it is written on because all power is concentrated in the hands of one person. that was madison's genius and recognize that i am one ninth of one third of the federal government which is one half
of the government of our federal system divide power. that was the wisdom. that all sounds pretty academic and i can fence one - - confess when i learned that and yes i am old enough i had to take civics. but the judge i came to realize the real world impact of the separation of powers has on your liberty. i will give you a few examples. what happens when justice one - - judges act as legislators? and then they begin to make things up? maybe the first real departure of united states supreme court was dred scott. the supreme court held that white persons have the right
to own a black person in the territories of the united states. they said that could be found in the fifth amendment due process clause which guarantees due process now scowl at that as long as you want but it is not there. dred scott made it up. the judges who did that thought it was for good reason for more important they thought they were helping to
avert civil war and thought it was worthwhile and acted as a legislator. judges make run politicians. they guessed wrong instead of averting the civil war they hope to contribute to it. okay. one angle of separation of powers. what happens when the legislature assigns the powers to the executive branch? madison knew that would be the greatest potential threat to liberty so he wanted it to be hard to be slow and careful and involve all the people with two houses of congress he must sign or veto override involvement of the people's representatives represented by different constituencies at different times. modern science as established minorities at the fulcrums of power because they are essential in the process to get legislation enacted. we have a super majority acquire religious requirement that is what madison thought would protect her rights.
what happens when you take that process in the executive branch? that would be a lot faster and get a lot more of it and minorities play a very small role so you let yourself a king for four years or maybe worse. some of the agencies don't respond to the president to have a law made by bureaucracy unless you think i'm exaggerating here's a case to show a need rather than academic theory a company
called kerry hearts - - caring hearts. they provide home nursing care for medicare. they were accused of medicare fraud by the government and find a hundred thousand dollars. imagine being accused of fraud by the government. that is a business ending proposition. years of litigation go by and what do we find out? they had abided all the rules. all of them the executive branch agency made at the time the rendered services the government was accusing them of violating rules that were not created at the time. even the government became
confused they were making up these rules. what happens when the executive branch plays judge? i have seen veterans and immigrants and have a winning legal argument on this argument and with lawful admission and i as an independent judge say they have a winning argument under the law. there are doctrines now that the independent judges cannot interpret the law. a bureaucrat does. and i-letter, supreme court justice have to defer to a bureaucrat interpretation of the law. you are supposed to have a right to an independent judge with your rights under the
law. that is lost. so separation of powers. there are three examples and like the rest of the constitution separation of powers is only as good as the people and the people have to want it and protect it. reagan used to say we are only one generation away from tyranny. >> so would you say the three branches are equal and in balance quick. >> i like to say yes. they are supposed to be. but i think some of the examples i gave you make me wonder sometimes if we transfer legislative and judicial power to the executive. >> so to be familiar with that data point but to add to that
three quarters of americans can't name the three stooges. [laughter] that's true. so you talk about original is him and with that interpretatio interpretation. >> start with what the heck is original is him? judges can interpret written laws according to their meaning but those terms should be respected as written if you look at the supreme court's jurisprudence you will see 100 faces if you see one that when it comes to a statute or
contract we interpret the document to its original public meeting so the question is why would it be any different with a written constitution? our founders rejected the idea of the unwritten constitution. they came from an english system with no written constitution the framers decided instead to put certain things down. not many things it is a short document. they put down what was vitally important and left the rest for us to decide. and original is him - - originalism tries to honor that. as people are taking away from the constitution that is what originalism is i haven't heard
that school doesn't phrase from a professor when i was in law school that is shocking the first time is when justice scalia came to visit my law school he was a young justice and gave a speech that open my mind. of course harvard law review did not publish the speech. had to be published by another school. now why does originalism matter? like separation of powers that sounds academic to me at the time but as a judge i have come to see how it affects your rights. let me give you some examples. what departs from the original
public meaning? that people like to call a living constitution. that sounds pretty good. who was a dead constitution? what about the enduring constitution? i like that. lasting constitution. your constitution. not mine. who does living? here's what happened when judges do the living they take all of your rights they go away in some new ones appear. now take the sixth amendment it says you have a right to a trial by jury of your peers if you are accused by a crime and a right to confront the witnesses against you in that proceeding. if the supreme court and living constitution decisions said sometimes you don't have a right to a jury sometimes other things are more
important than your rights are balanced away with a confrontation you usually get it but sometimes there is other pressing business and we need to move on so that piece of paper written by a police officer out-of-court, you cannot cross-examine could be sufficient evidence to send you away 20 years or more. your rights are taken away. the most infamous decisions of the united states supreme court japanese american citizens rounded up and detained. how do you square that with the original meaning of due process? that is due process. before your life liberty or property may be taken you go before a judge of some kind.
for somebody but none of that was provided. they thought something else is more important, the war effort. equal protection clause guarantee? they ignored that to. to help the war effort. something else we think is more important. so your rights getting taken away and there is more. they add stuff that is not there. but that's my example where do you find the right to own persons in the due process clause? it's not there. so when it comes to originalism it's not political or conservative they are constitutional. as originalist it's all about
preserving the constitution as written and if you want to change it, we can and we have not say it can't stand improvement we have through the amendment process we don't need judges to make it up. you can fix it and you have. you have been given women the right to vote. you enacted the 13th and 14th and 15th amendments of the constitution ending slavery. judges did not do that. so why ask somebody else to do what you can do for yourself? the constitution starts with three words and it is not we the judges but we the people. madison did not intend and you should not want nine older, i can't say that i just had a birthday.
[laughter] people sitting in washington dc trying to rule the country of 330 million people. >> so what is your assessment quick. >> if you cannot tell i am an optimist. [laughter] and i want to share a few facts and figures. bear with me. i meet pessimistic people all the time and they say the court this or the supreme court that i say yes we can quibble about a case. but let's step back for just a moment and look at the forest. i will get to the tree i promised to look at the forest. in this country every year 50 million lawsuits are filed.
we are a litigious bunch. i am not counting your parking tickets. [laughter] for your traffic speeding tickets. that is another 50 million. 50million lawsuits every year. now i'll move to the federal court system because i know that better numbers in the states are more impressive so out of all these cases , 95 percent are resolved by a trial court of a judge and a jury. that's the end of the case if anybody who is a lawyer will tell you. they are not happy with the decision of the court they are upset but they accepted 95 percent of the time because
they knew it was reasonable and they were heard and they could accept it. that's pretty powerful evidence by rule of law. i served on the tenth circuit which oversees 20 percent of the continental united states, two time zones i served with the judges who are appointed from johnson through obama. the tenth circuit is a diverse group of judges you'll ever encounter from whatever metrics you assess. actually it is a model of collegiality we share across the country for that. so we had panels of three so
we have to convince our colleagues on the income one - - outcomes it's 5 percent we agree 95 percent of the time. now were moving from the forest to the cove and now the tree is the united states supreme court it here 70 cases per year. seventy i have colleagues at west who here 70 cases in the morning. [laughter] and another 70 after lunch. that is an easy day for them. these are the hardest countries - - cases in the country. now there is a disagreement between the circuit for the state supreme court to make sure the law is the same
across the country the same provision should not be interpreted to give different rights to one part of the country over the other. there are only 70 of those every year? think about that. that is incredible. that's incredible. only 70. now we are down to the branch. seventy cases per year. there are nine of us prick or not three. not 20 percent of the country that all of the country five different presidents over the course of 25 years. i have to admit new york city may be heavily represented. [laughter] but that's another discussion.
i ask people how do you think we are doing? 70 percent we have unanimous agreement that doesn't happen by magic. that is hard work and collegiality and mutual respect. try to get nine people to agree on where to go to lunch. now we get to the five / four decisions. they represent 25 percent of the docket. that's it. but now more than they used to be. no. those percentages those unanimity has remained the same since 1945 more or less.
back then you history buffs will remember fdr had appointed eight of the nine justices of the supreme court of the united states and if we are doing as well as they did, eight appointed by the same presiden president, then we are doing okay. the truth is only thing that has changed is that nothing has changed. in those five / four decisions in the last year, there were ten different combination of justices on those decisions. the rule of law in this country is one of the wonders of the world. i'm not here to tell you it's perfect but i am here to tell you you have a wonderful inheritance and we should appreciate that. >> here here.
etched over the entrance of the supreme court equal justice under law. and you say in your book few americans can afford a lawyer. i cannot afford my services when i was in private practice. >> and i really cannot now. [laughter] i am not pollyanna about america there is a lot of good reason to be optimistic. i do have discussions of access to justice issues we should look with clear eyes where we can prove. i worry when nobody can afford a lawyer. it takes way too long to get to trial if you're lucky enough to get into court then
you don't get a jury and look at how many things are now criminalized. i asked my law clerks how many laws are there? they came back told the 4500 federal statutes that's on top of everything in the states but all of those delegated legislative authority now they make criminal law. like caring hearts. how many of those are there? they scratch their head. i have asked them for a few times for an answer i finally got we stopped counting. they stopped counting i think in the 19 nineties even academics cannot keep up. that is over 300,000 federal
criminal laws created by agencies. some of those are vitally important. but some of them? i give a couple of examples in the book if your catch-up flows through too quickly and you do not label that as substandard then that's a problem. if you sell mattresses and tear off the tag. [laughter] you are a federal criminal. [laughter] i have one professor friend who says pretty much everybody over the age of 18 has probably committed a federal crime. i worry about access to justice. i worry about over criminalization i worry that a prosecutor can pick his victim rather than pursue crime.
what do we do about it? that's a long discussion but i will rattle off a couple of ideas. i don't have the answers but this is something to think abou about. do you need a lawyer to do every little thing? help with an uncontested divorc divorce? with the only profession i can regulate themselves to all regulations really help clients or do they only help us? doesn't really take three years of law school to become competent to buy legal advice? in england you get a law degree in three years as an undergraduate to we really
need three years on top of four years? a lot of young people come out with debt so high they cannot afford to be main street lawyers they have to work for the big firms even though they don't want to. us judges should look to ourselves and our rules. we have something called discovery. which is supposed to help people to figure out what the case is about before trial. turns out civil discovery often yields very little discovery and is anything but civil and it takes a long time and cost a lot for quite people who call themselves trial lawyers who haven't tried a case in 20 years but they give an interrogatory instead of discovery they can write that in iambic pentameter in a very good about it we have to ask ourselves why can't you get to trial within six months?
these are just some of the things i think about. >> it sounds like a very serious environment. >> i know we live in a world where we have enemies and divides and we are all subject to click bait. but the truth is that the supreme court like most courts in america is collegial in a warm place to come to work. it's a tiny little place only a couple hundred people work there. may be a few hundred. you get to know people. kids trick-or-treat in your office. we flip hamburgers at a cookout.
even let the law clerks make fun of us in the skit at the end of the year. [laughter] and boy do they. [laughter] that's a whole other story. of course we disagree. yes this is the federally hardest cases in america of course we will disagree sometimes. but we do it civilly and collegially and we have fun doing it we sing happy birthday to one another. poorly but enthusiastically. we sing together at the holidays we eat lunch together. a lot. lunch is available at the justices interim. and justice breyer, we don't talk shop at lunch his
grandchildren are an endless reservoir of knock knock jokes. i don't thinks sonja would mind me telling this. we were lining up in robes to go out to the court and we shake hands every time we gather, 36 handshakes no matter what is going on that has been going on for over a hundred years. monday we are lining up after handshakes in just a soda mayor comes in and is not wearing her rope but has pinstripes and new york yankees across the chest. [laughter] obviously the yankees had done well and she was excited but a few of my colleagues were nervous and we are lining up to go out and they said are you really going to wear that on the bench? she said no but i was waiting for someone to ask.
[laughter] when a new justice arrives the most junior justice everything is done by seniority the most junior has to throw a party when we arrived just as kagan through the most wonderful evening she made sure we had indian food because she knew that louise loves indian food and she had a chef she knew here in washington to cook for us that it was magnificent. when justice kavanaugh arrived i knew he was a meat and potatoes kind of guy and dinner would be boring so i had to come up with something to liven up the evening. so after dinner everybody follow me we went down to the great hall of the supreme court the big marble hall i handed him a checkered flag.
is a big baseball fan we have the nationals and the mascots are the presidents with giant foam heads. and jessica, my assistant and your friend came up with the idea she found out you can rent them. [laughter] so we rented two of the presidents and we had a race in the great hall of the supreme court of the united states. [laughter] i thought maybe that would be better to ask for forgiveness than for fit - - permission but it went pretty well. we were in the rotunda running around. [laughter] and i have a wonderful photograph of abraham lincoln looking at the autopsy
report. [laughter] >> we are just people. >> for me the best part of the book is the citizenship and fidelity. talk to us about that issue. >> so civility and citizenship. i don't know when civility became a bad word or manners became a word we don't use anymore. is the public supposed to be a little raucous? you bet and an elbow thrown here and there is part of the game.
the whole point of a republic everybody can feel free to speak his or her mind so yes it should be a little raucous. that everybody involved in the process as a human being and that recognition the quality of another person 67 percent of the young kids don't want to get in the nature of civil discourse today. that 25 percent of errant mom - - parents remove children
limited government. and that we need to think about these things. with 110 rules of civility and decent behavior by the jesuits in 1595. and he had to copy them out and then to teach civility. >> and then to keep alive of celestial conscience. >> that's a good one. they are not all quite that good. [laughter] another one, do not speak so vehemently or approach your point in debate so closely that you could do the other man's face with your spittle. [laughter]
or say it don't spray it. [laughter] i don't know if we need those rules. that louise's grandmother taught us a long and eventful life to say you can have many regrets in life there will be things you say or do and things you left unsaid but the one thing in life you'll never regret is being kind. >> you have a wonderful chapter on the art of judging that you pay homage to your mentors.
talk about what it was like to clerk for and be appear. >> pick your words carefully. use to teach ethics for many years your professionalism and your ethics so pick them carefully you choose them to be careful who you choose i was very blessed that justice kennedy was one of my first mentors i cannot be like here this is what he means to me
the first time a justice in his lock clerk were sitting together i got that for one year. and when i wrote my very first opinion for the supreme court of the united states, a not very important case. [laughter] the new guy usually doesn't get anything. i circulated it late in the day at five or 6:00 o'clock in the justices had gone home and he works from home late. he found out i circulated my opinion it would be likely to be joined up pretty quickly by our colleagues but he wanted to be the first. so he said to his lock clerk please fax, yes, fax over the justice gorsuch opinion. for whatever reason i think it was the same fax machine from
when i clicked but it was not working. [laughter] but he wanted to join quickly that even before anybody else could so he have the lock clerk drive it out to his house he read it and sent it back with hand signed i joined your memo. that is anthony kennedy. that is who he is as a model of civility and respect for each people. >> byron white quick. >> my other boss the first justice from colorado byron white was my hero. p-letter grew up on a sugar beet farm poor small town in
colorado and worked hard as a kid graduated first in his class he also led the ncaa in rushing and took the buffaloes and yes they do have a live buffalo mascot to this day it is awesome. only on occasion gets loose. a rogue scholar at oxford, top of his classy law school in leading rusher in jack kennedy's friend and help bobby kennedy desegregate the south all while 31 years on the united states supreme court.
well. you can see why he was my hero. so one day we were walking along the hallways of the supreme court that feels like a basement and that's where the portraits of the justices are found and he leans over to me and says justice gorsuch little did we know. [laughter] how many of these old dogs can you name? and and honestly i had to tell him about half. and then he said something to me that shark one --dash shocked me and he said me to. and that's how it should be.
and i will prove to be forgotten soon enough. ten years nobody will know who i am. something like that. that shot me down. i thought nobody would ever forget byron white. i wonder how many of you remember him. remember him. . . . . we will all be forgotten soon enough. what really matters is this great country and our constitution. those things into her. the joy in life comes from serving something greater than yourself.
that. >> which is why in your ethics course you have a very interesting assignment that you give your students to write their own obituaries. >> guess. yeah. before i leave he was trying to tell me what webster said. that miracles don't come in clusters. what happened here for the first time in 6000 years of human civilized history a written constitution, by the people, of the people, for the people isn't something we can take for granted will happen very often. so yeah, toward the end of the semester in my professionalism and ethics class i would ask the students to do and to spend five minutes writing their obituary. they usually start off with a
corny exercise and maybe it was a little bit but after about five minutes things got pretty quiet in that room always. they got serious about it. then i would ask a few brave souls that they would not mind reading out what they had written. i will tell you not want to the ever right about how much money they made or what car they drove and how many clients they brought in whether they were a rainmaker in their law firm or what their hourly rate was as a lawyer in the always wrote about being kind to their family, their friends and maybe leaving the place a little better or at least no worse off than they found it. i tell at the end of the semester, do me a favor. to me one favor. keep that document.
stick it in your desk drawer and every so often when you're wondering what's it all about or feeling a little blue take that out and assess how you are doing on the metric system that really matters. i do something similar. i have a obituary and epitaph from a tombstone of a lawyer in the early republic that i found in law school in the old burial ground. >> when you read it to ischemic. [laughter] >> it's in being a friend that i can. thank you. he was forgotten. he was forgotten. as we all will be and should be. as a judge. that's what i always wanted to try the president should be remembered and maybe even the occasional senator or congressman but judges our job is to make sure the rule of law is passed down from one generation to the next to hand you your constitution carry the
baton for the day. as a lawyer he was faithful and able and as a judge, patient, impartial and decisive. as a chief magistrate acceptable, frank and decisive. in private life he was affectionate in mild. in public life he was dignified in firm. parting feuds relayed by the correctness of his conduct. [inaudible] was silenced by the weight of his virtues and rancor softened by the amenity of his manners. >> thank you for being on our state this evening. [applause] [applause]
[inaudible conversations] >> during a senate floor speech today majority leader mcconnell defended a colleague of justice gorsuch. justice bret cannot over the latest actual assault allegations made in "the new york times" over the weekend. >> now onto a completely different matter but for anyone reading the news the past few days probably felt like groundhog day. because over the last couple of days leading democrats have tried to grab onto yet another poorly sourced reported, unsubstantiated allegation against justice brett kavanaugh.
IN COLLECTIONSCSPAN2 Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on