Hope springs eternal, but do not hope too much. He might.

I think it is kind of easy. The clause prohibits receipt of any emolument without the consent of the Congress.

If you guarantee all that, you guarantee diversity. If you guarantee diversity, you guarantee a democracy.

If somebody were to out and out buy a vote or buy a favor, we would all agree that is corruption, is it not?

It was not two nominees. It was three. The third one was not heard because for the first time in the history of the United States, the Senate refused to hold a hearing.

The Supreme Court is the guarantor of the liberties of all Americans.

I believe that ultimately we are a country of laws, and we should follow them.

But nothing in the Federalist Papers that talked about corporate money going into campaigns. Is that correct?

Presidents make all sorts of arguments about inherent authority.

I can honestly say I have yet to decide how I am going to vote on this nomination.

Well then, let me ask you this. Does the President have the right to authorize torture if it violates the laws that have been passed by Congress and any other ones you cited?

I think Citizens United made clear that quid pro quo corruption remains a vital concern and is subject for potential legislation.

If he had a case before the U.S. Supreme Court, would not the facts be the same?

I disagree when they say that.

The Federal recusal standards apply to both Supreme Court Justices and other judges.

Shouldn't Congress, not the courts, make the determination about the potential for corruption, especially if we are talking about quid pro quos?

You said judges should, I quote, 'should strive to apply the law as it is, focusing backward, not forward.'

Well, it was a great expansion of Executive power that many of us questioned.

If confirmed, you have to be a Justice for all Americans, not for the special interests of a few.

I think the record should show President Obama nominated three Supreme Court Justices, one of whom was Merrick Garland.

no man is above the law.

nobody is above the law in this country, and that includes the President of the United States.

The United States must not bar individuals from entering into the United States based on their religion.

It appears the President outsourced your selection to the far right, big money, special interest groups.

I applaud the senior Senator from California for raising the issue she did.