Roe v. Wade is firmly ensconced as the law of the land, and I do not know if we would see a change in that.

I do believe you have to put the law first, Senator Crapo, and I have tried to do that.

Well, immigration has been a high priority for the United States.

Senator Lee, that office is important.

I believed these crack cocaine laws were too harsh and particularly it was disadvantageous to the African-American community.

I will honor and maintain those procedures at the Department of Justice.

I do not favor personally this kind of work. I think it should be more productive work.

But the Attorney General's duty is to give the best judgment that the Attorney General can give.

The first and foremost goal, I think, of law enforcement would be to identify persons who are dangerous, who have a tendency or have been proven to be lawbreakers and been convicted.

I have not said that the woman's right to choose or that Roe v. Wade and its progeny is not the law of the land.

The Obama administration has failed to protect American workers here.

Yes, I do believe that I have conducted myself according to principles that I think are valid and try to be consistent and honest in my evaluation.

I would be surprised if it is not public, and it should be available to the public.

I have no hesitation to enforce antitrust law. I have no hesitation, if the finding justifies it, to say that certain mergers should not occur, and there will not be political influence in that process.

I am a pro-life advocate.

Mr. Chairman, fundamentally, I believe that it would not end the lawlessness, and it would grant amnesty.

I think that is a very dubious practice. I would be cautious about it, and we would have to make sure it is justified.

I believe the proper thing for me to do would be to recuse myself from any questions involving those kinds of investigations that involve Secretary Clinton.

I would like to see it more skill-based, and I think that would be helpful.

It would be a very high priority of mine.

I believe Americans overwhelmingly honor that and should continue to honor it, and it would include Muslims for sure.

You speak for the legal interests of the State.

Those are the kinds of things that we do need to guard against.

We could work out a lot more of these issues rather than having the heavy hand of the Federal litigation system come to play into forcing compliance by States.

It would raise serious constitutional problems because the Constitution explicitly guarantees the right to free exercise of religion.