Chuck Grassley

But since the United Nations doesn't share all those norms, importing that single legal proposition into our nation can have very bad consequences for us.

If Judge Sotomayor were a white man who suggested that whites or males made better judges, we would not be having this discussion because the nominee would have been forced to withdraw once those words became public.

I understand, at this hearing, Judge Sotomayor disavowed the use of such materials to have any influence on jurisprudence, and I welcome that disavowal.

As an undergraduate, she actively pushed for race-based goals and time tables for faculty hiring.

Judge Sotomayor's words weren't uttered off the cuff. They were carefully crafted, repeated not just once or twice, but at least seven times over several years.

The use of the word 'overhaul' does not in any way imply usurpation of legislative power by the courts?

So do you agree that marriage is a question reserved for the States to decide based on Baker v. Nelson?

I want to say to you that there's a Supreme Court decision called Baker v. Nelson, 1972.

I assume that I get the time that he didn't use?

I thought I was asking a very simple question based upon a precedent that Baker v. Nelson is.

Identity politics involves a sense of grievance against the majority, a feeling that racism permeates American society and its institutions.

Now, I believe that I'm going to ask you something you've never been asked before during this hearing, I hope.

People always say I have the ability to turn people on.

Do you believe that the Supreme Court overstepped their constitutional authorities when they went beyond the words of the Constitution?

It seems to me like you're saying, in ignoring the expertise of the statute, that the agency was being arbitrary and capricious in----

Well, since Mr. Didden's claim was based on conduct of the developer, how could he ever have filed a successful claim under the standard that you just mentioned?

It is my opinion that over time the Supreme Court has often veered off the course established by the Framers.

My opinion is that as the Supreme Court has invented new rights, it has often neglected others.

I respectfully submit that President Obama is simply outside the mainstream in his statements about how judges should decide cases.

There must be a vigorous debate about the kind of judge America needs because nothing less than our liberty is at stake.

The confirmation process in general, and this hearing in particular, must be both dignified and thorough.

You have a distinguished legal and judicial record.

I expect every judge to see all the facts.

I will not vote for--and no senator should vote for--an individual nominated by any President who is not fully committed to fairness and impartiality toward every person who appears before them.

The Supreme Court could demonstrate renewed respect for our original plan of Government and return us slowly but surely to a written Constitution.