Bottom the plaintiffs objectives reflect disagreement with the policy choice and even self,atutory exclusion litigation is not the vehicle for solving policy disputes because i think the dhss definition is a rational definition of public charge. But you were saying to her which i found compelling that you were still believing leaving the door open for it to be capricious. Was that the word used . Judge barrett yes. Under the administrative procedure act paradise said at the conclusion of the dissent because the majority breached both, i said i was not dissolving that issue resolving that issue because it had not been briefed before us expressing an opinion. I did leave open the possibility that the rule be arbitrary and capricious. Sen. Booker i am trying to read all of your cases has been a herculean task. Just gomaybe i can back to asking a simple question that i hope you feel comfortable answering. What i think is an obvious answer. You think it is wrong to separate children from the parents to deter immigrants from coming to the United States . Judge barrett senator booker, that has been a matter of policy debate and obviously thats a matter of hot political debate in which i cannot express a view or be drawn into as a judge. Sen. Booker so, i respect that a lot but i think the underlying question is actually not hotly debated and just maybe i will answer, ask it one more time. Do you think it is wrong to separate their child from the parent not for the safety of the child or parent but to send a message . As a human being do believe that that is wrong . Judge barrett senator i think youre trying to engage me on the administrations order and separation policies border separation policies and i cannot express a view on that. I am not expressing ascent or descent with the morality of that position i cannot be drawn into a debate about the administrations immigration policy. Sen. Booker of course, the question does have implications but a very simple, as i said yesterday that we are debating yesterday that, basic question is of human rights, even decency and human dignity. Am sorry that we cant have simple affirmation of what i think most americans would agree on. But maybe i can jump back to something you began yesterday. I asked you whether your fruit were familiar with studies conducted by the Sentencing Commission. Do you remember . Judge barrett yes. I said i was generally aware, we talked about systemic racism. Im generally aware that there have been studies done. Sen. Booker the u. S. Sentencing commission provides nonbinding federal guidelines to federal judges which show that some of the Racial Disparities on the criminal Justice System, they talk about that considerably. My colleagues and i am both sides of the are worked on criminal Justice Reform discussed a lot of them and some of those, is i discussed yesterday, were examples of federal prosecutors are more likely to charge black defendants who carry with offenses that carry harsh mandatory minimum sentences. They are more likely to charge black students, black defendants that white defendants and black defendants were subject to three strikes laws. Sentencing enhancements. As significantly higher rate than white defendants. Which on average added 10 years to their sentence. A significant surrender or seizing of liberty. And you said you are not familiar with that particular study. You just reaffirmed or the facts that they cite in the study showing the into racial bias is present in our system. And you know, in our discussion it came out that you know these issues of bias in our criminal Justice System are manifested in many different aspects of the system. From police misconduct, unlawful use of force. To prosecutorial bias, sentencing disparities. These are wide and vast areas that have been shown to have such implicit racial bias evident in them. Ar clearly this ye we have been grappling as a nation with a lot of these issues. And it is a part of our longstanding history. You cannot divorce the role of judges in our history over these some 200 years and how race has been a persistent part of the national narrative, grappling with deep issues of bigotry and bias overt as well as the biases that exist. Of the that many unjust death of unarmed africanamericans at the hand of Law Enforcement have brought this more into the public concern. And so i just want to ask you and maybe give you more of a chance to discuss, i understand you are not aware of specific studies i cited which is central to the u. S. Sentencing commission that advises federal judges. So, i just want to give you an opportunity today to share what studies, articles, books, law review articles or commentary you have read regarding Racial Disparities present in our criminal Justice System. Judge barrett well, senator, as you know, the sentencing guidelines do give judges guidance on imposing sentences. So i am familiar with the sentencing guidelines because when we review sentences, it is something we need to draw on and apply. In addition to the sentencing guidelines, the Sentencing Commission, as you say, does, a few studies and sometimes we get things from the federal Judicial Center that talk about it. I am certainly aware but i think it is an obvious point sen. Booker forgive me for interrupting. Judge barrett thats fine. Sen. Booker joni ernst has been teaching about iowa. But i was actually asking specifically any books you can name that you have read on this subject or law review articles, anything you specifically read outside of the sentencing guidelines. Judge barrett senator booker, i would say that what i have learned about has mostly been in conversations with people. Dame, as at many other universities, a topic of conversation in classrooms but it is not something i can say, done research on this and read. Sen. Booker i respect you have answered the question. One of the greatest drivers of disparities has been the war on drugs which really is a war of black and brown people because of the outrageous disparities. There are no difference between blacks and whites for using drugs. Our multiple time more likely to be arrested. While i was at stanford, lots of drug use, very little rest but in low income communities like the one i lived in, equal drug use but much more arrests. Partnership on both sides of the eye was about the crack and powder cocaine disparities that imposed harsh in ballast penalties for cocaine knowledge of the powder cocaine. Someone caught with the amount of crack cocaine the side of the candy bar the size of a candy bar would get the same sentence as someone caught with a briefcase full of roderick okd. This is full of powdered cocaine. When the Sentencing Commission wrote, you wrote a law review article, one of the legal academics, not law review article, blog post in a wellknown legal academic that cited this decision, and you questioned whether that was a wise call. In ferris as i in fairness, you raise the it administrative hurdles and retroactively imposing sentences that would provide relief to 20,000 americans who had their liberty taken away from them. But never in the blog article that you mentioned this was unjust. There was no deference to how serious this is for the 20,000 americans, 98 of them who are black and brown. You just question why are we doing this . Could you tell me why . Judge barrett sure. Senator booker, i think what you are referring to is a short blog post on the law blog and it wasnt an indepth exploration of the crack cocaine disparity or anything like that. It was simply pointing out the administrative person because my husband was a federal prosecutor at the time, and that had been table talk at our house, the complexities of retroactively going back. It wasnt a policy statement and was not a statement i dont think it was more than a paragraph and simply identifying the administrative hurdles youuse, cleary, whenever provide retroactive reforms, there are administrative hurdles going forward. Sen. Booker your law professor and assigned a lot of syllabus to a guy like me. To a guy that played football. This is a long article. A couple of pages worth. I have it here. My old eyes cannot read without glasses judge barrett my old eyes cannot see it from here. I do not have a memory of how long it was. Sen. Booker you are not citing articles or research you read on this issue yet you have written here about it. To me that speaks, it makes me wonder and want to talk to a little bit about your preparedness and priorities taking the highest office in the judicial world that deals with such longstanding issues of race and, in a way, that affects the totality of the lives of americans in every aspect of their life, their Financial Wellbeing to their rights to vote. And i would like to go through as quickly as i can in my remaining 10 minutes a little bit about the vastness of this problem and why im very concerned you have not even cited anything that you have read that would speak to this, or the only writings i could find in it do not talk about the injustice of it all. So you had a conversation with senator klobuchar about voting. I just want to know, have you ever waited five hours to vote . Judge barrett i have not. Sen. Booker have you ever waited over an hour . Judge barrett i have not. Sen. Booker in wisconsin, state and your circuit we saw the travesty during the primary early this year, during a pandemic that many polling places were closed and lines ewewere incredibly long. In milwaukee, city of half a Million People located in the county with 70 of that states black population, we literally saw out of the citys 180 polling places, only five were open. Pushing people into hours and hours longs waits. Comparably 66 polling places were open in madison, predominately white city half the size of milwaukee. The Supreme Court made this worse with a ruling that voting duringl in a pandemic where black americans are dying twice the rate avoid american spirit lets be clear. This is part of a nationwide problem with the Racial Disparities in voting. A recent study found that residents of entirely black neighborhoods wait almost 30 longer in lines to vote. And they were 74 more likely to spend more than half an hour at a polling place. Siadyour descent, you something of said something about virtuebased restrictions that raised my concern and that virtuebased restrictions apply to civic rights like voting and jury service. Not individual rights to possess a gun. This approach to the franchise sort of pulls up a lot of history where people used virtuebased restrictions in the past. It has been very well documented in our history. Ideas that you can disenfranchise people if they do not meet certain virtue tests. And many of these test, i know you are aware of, are you worthy enough if you cannot say the whole declaration of independence . These are tests that john lewis used to talk about. Can you count the bubbles and a bar of soap . You are familiar with that. Judge barrett senator, i want to be very clear. I tried to clear this up yesterday. This concept of virtue i think especially for people who are watching this who do not know about the law does not mean that i think that peoples Voting Rights can be taken away because they are not good people or a think literacy ties are ok or anything like that. It is a concept that cantor v. Barr was not about Voting Rights and i clearly said that voting is an individual and fundamental right that is critical. Sen. Booker unconstitutional . Judge barrett voting isnt fundamental right that is critical to our democracy care at the point i was making is that the 14th him, does express that states rights to private fellows of Voting Rights because it is in the text. Sen. Booker you are jumping to felonies. I asked about poll taxes. I tried to point out with a picture one place africanamericans as a whole waiting so much longer than you and i mightve ever waited in lines. Im trying to draw something here for you. I asked about poll taxes. Did not get to felony disenfranchise is. Judge barrett the point i was making in cantor versus barr. I was saying that was a concept in which i discussed it. Subject to the Voting Rights act that prohibits procedures and practices. Poll taxes. Sen. Booker thank you. You are jumping ahead. I spent so much tom on my question. Still have so much tom on my question. [laughter] lets jump ahead to this. Sixagine where we had significant felony disenfranchisement, i write about the history going back to the post civil war period, the fall of reconstruction, thousands of blacks being lynched. Massacre to the greenwood massacre. To try to make it harder for blacks to votes, designing disenfranchisement loss and toting easy disenfranchise africanamericans. This is a lot of historical origins. Now we have places like florida, and by the way there are levels of disenfranchisement for africanamericans. In america one in every 17 blacks are unable to vote because of felony disenfranchisement. I can see by your expression it is surprising data point. I hope that you would look at that. 4,000 peoplebout 77 have completed their sentences and are being prevented from voting because they still owe fines and fees. These are the americans, just purportedly black, subject to modernday tax. If i am wealthy enough, i can pay that. If im africanamerican, disproportionately poor, i can i do that. One in five in florida could not vote because of felony disenfranchise. I have gone through some of the history. But as you are seeking this highest office in the land, i bring this full circle in our conversation because another a study by the american bar association, which i recommend to you shows that a person with a felony commitment in america is subject to 40,000 collateral consequences. In other words we now have an more marijuana has affected, and 2017 there is more possession of marijuana arrests in america than all of the arrest combined. Disproportionately africanamerican people. And stanford and not notre dame, aside from football, but my point is, as you see that if a black person is not more likely to use marijuana but they are more likely to be convicted of a felony fort, some three to four times the rate, i hope you can see that that means that they are going to be more likely to lose other liberties, other rights that so deeply affects their lives. There voting life, their ability to raise their children when a parent has been put in a position where because of that felony conviction, doing things that two of the last three president s admitted to doing they now cannot vote, cannot get jobs, they cannot get business licenses. This is such a deeply affecting system that is, is disproportionately harming one class of citizens based upon race. And so, here we are in the midst of, i returned to the not normalcy of this moment in american history. Where, you canturn on the tv and watch basketballt without courageous athletes trying to talk to the heart of america to say please listen, please listen. The system is endangering lives. Taking away liberty, taking away your felony initial your Financial Wellbeing and taking you away from your children. There are people marching in all 50 states, 18 other countries because africanamericans when t heyre jogging or sleeping in their home are being killed. And we have a nation now where we are doing a Supreme Court justice hearing. To a president that cannot even condemn white supremacy. White supremacist groups, stand by. Where they are menacing and literally recruiting people to do some poll watching which many people have sounded the alarm. In africanamerican communities. Dredging up memories of the past of people intimidating people at polling places. People protesting in our country, all leading into election where this issue and roe v. Wade and Peoples Health care, alls going to be on the bell and yet we are sitting here acting like this is normal. And i have a great deal of respect for my colleagues because, some of my colleagues had courageously have stepped up calling out studies from, and articles and writings from the heritage foundation, from the cato foundation, from aie ei who all spoke to the pervasiveness of Racial Disparities. The american, something is going on where the times bestseller list, they amazon bestseller list had books the color of law. Just mercy, the new jim crow. As people are seeking to know what the facts are. You understand my heart when i look at a justice who it seems that the fix is i n, is going to serve on the snt takenurt and ha steps to understand the pervasiveness, the facts, the truth about cases of race that are going to come before you in a system right now that so many people feel like is unjust. The words written on the building of the Supreme Court, equal justice under law doesnt apply to them. Because they see, as Brian Stevenson says, that we still live in a country where you get better treatment if youre rich and guilty than if you are poor and innocent. So, i appreciate the conversation that we have had. And i wish we had more time. Fear as is a flood of talked to you about yesterday. There is a great deal of concern about the way this is being done. Am deeply, deeply worried about the implications to our, the fabric of our nation as i said to you on a phone conversation with the way this is being handled. Im very grateful with the decorum and candor in which you have answered my questions. I hope you feel like ive treated you in the same way. Judge barrett yes, thank you, senator. My staff was just telling me i should have said this. Sen. Graham without objection. Whatever it is. You in the justice are both trying to jump ahead. Sen. Graham whatever it is. I appreciate you, mr. Senator and the work that you and i have done. I would like to ask unanimous consent to enter into the record the following three letters into the record. A letter from the Leadership Conference on civil and human rights opposing justice barretts nomination. A letter from 83 Young People Organization opposing the nomination of judge barrett. A letter from lgbtq ever see groups opposing any nomination where reasonable doubts exist on her ability to administer fair and impartial justice for mr. C. Judge barrett, good to see you again. Judge barrett likewise