Host andy host live coverage of senator Patrick Leahy, hell talk about his agenda, the committees agenda for the 113th congress. Introducing him is Georgetown University law Center Professor excuse me, law center dean, william trainor. Thanks for watching. Issues like immigration and gun control and whats done with it particularly now in the wake of the terrible murders of children in newtown, connecticut, and privacy and Civil Liberties and judicial nominations. A couple years ago i had the privilege to introduce senator leahy as he spoke at the new see yum newseum, that was a fascinating speech and i know today will be a very important speech on a very important series of topics. After the senator speaks well then have question and answer period. Let me present to you senator leahy. [applause] thank you very, very much. They were fortunate when they had you down there, but my alma mater is fortunate to have you here now. You said about making the choice of georgetown. I was saying to my wife and others, that as i was preparing for this speech i thought, again, just how pleased i made the choice i did on committee assignments. I actually look forward to being back here at georgetown to talk about my agenda. I have done this before. Also in the Senate Judiciary committee when we come into session, the first meeting in the new congress there will be three Georgetown Law Center graduates on the Senate Judiciary committee. Myself, of course senator durbin who is the majority, deputy majority leader in the senate, and senator hirono from hawaii. Its going to be i enjoy that committee the most of any committee i have served on because every day its like going back to school. Something i enjoyed immensely. This here at georgetown, i brag about you, where i was taught in great elaborate detail i might add, about the values embodying the constitution, rule of law, but also about the majesty of our legal traditions. And i say to the students, there is majesty in americas legal traditions. This is where i learned to argue. But i also learned to appreciate different sides of complicated issues, and then to search for solutions. I never imagined then i was going to be able to work on the area of broad legal constitutional issues that come before the Senate Judiciary committee. In my years there i think i have seen just about every kind of legal or constitutional issue there is. So i look forward to chairing it again. We touch the lives in that committee, we touch the lives of 300 million americans, we are going to talk about issues ranging from the freedom of the press to the right to bear arms. We consider legislation and nominations affecting many of our pressing challenges, as well as our fundamental rights and our most basic freedoms. Every single lifetime judge, federal judge goes through that committee. I expect the Judiciary Committees going to devote most of our time this spring working on comprehensive Immigration Reform. Two topics are more fundamental to who we are as a nation than immigration. Immigration throughout our o history has been an ongoing source of the renewal of our spirit and our creativity, our vitality from the Young Students who were brought to this country by their parents seeking a better life for themselves, the hardworking men and women who play vital roles supporting our farmers, innovating for our technology companies, creating businesses on their own all of them, our nation relies on immigrants. We have to find a way through the partisan gridlock to enact meaningful change to immigration laws, and that should include a path to citizenship. Tackling this complex issue lets get away from partisan symbolism. Lets uphold the fundamental values of family, hard work, and fairness. So next month we are going to begin this national discussion, the full Judiciary Committee, with public hearings. I know im going to hear a lot of different views on this, but i hope in the end we can honor those who came before us from distant lands in search of freedom and opportunity. I wonder with the attitude of some today if when my grandparents came to vermont from italy, whether they would have been allowed to become citizens, or my great grandparents when they came from ireland to vermont, whether they would have been allowed to become citizens. Or my wifes parents when he they came to vermont from canada whether they could become citizens. We have to remember, we all came in our ancestors for ourselves from somewhere else. And then on an issue that is before the nation, improperly so, and i applaud the president for doing this, is the issue of gun violence. Two weeks from today the Senate Judiciary committee will begin examining possible remedies for tragedies like last months shootings in newtown. I believe these will be the first congressional hearings since that happened. The questions we face about our National Gun Policy extend beyond the tragic issues of mass murder. They extend to how we care for those with Mental Illness. How we manage the exposure of children to violence in proper media, and Simple Matters of gun safety. I hope its going to be an open forum for constructive discussion. Again, spare me symbolic arguments. Lets have a constructive discussion about how better to protect our communities from Mass Shootings, or respecting fundamental rights guaranteed by our Supreme Court. Now, like many other gun owners i believe that we should strengthen our federal laws to combat gun trafficking. We should ensure that those seeking to purchase guns do so with real background checks. But thats only a part of whats needed. As president obamas made clear, no single step can end this kind of violence. But the fact that we cannot do everything that could help should not paralyze us from doing anything that can help. Ill go to the white house when i leave here. Im looking forward to reviewing the proposals the president is announcing today. Of course the Judiciary Committee will consider those proposals as we begin will be the first of several hearings on this topic. Then we have the question of First Responders. Im going to keep the committees focus and partnerships to protect our First Responders like the Public Safety officers benefits act. Im going to reauthorize the lifesaving Bulletproof Vest Partnership grant program. Was proud to author that bipartisan in 1998 with senator Ben Nighthorse campbell. We recently provided the one millionth bulletproof vest to a state Law Enforcement agency. These are not abstract things. First responders are flesh and blood lifelines to each and every one of us. They ran to buildings like sandy hook out of a sense of duty even though they knew they were going to put their lives on the line. Had they not responded as quickly as they d. That tragedy would have been even worse. Had they not been there immediately, more children would have died. We count on them. We ought to let them count on us. We have some who argue that federal assistance to First Responders is somewhat unconstitutional. Balleder dash. They are wrong. They should stop stalling these important initiatives. In the coming months we are going to continue to examine our criminal justice system, promote National Standards and oversight for forensic labs and practitioners. We are going to have improvements far more effectively identify and convict people guilty of crimes, but avoiding the all too common tragedy of convicting the inknow isnt. If you have innocent. If you have labs that do not give you right results, and you think you can close a case by sending the wrong person to prison, you have done nothing for the safety of people. You have won the tragedy of having an innocent person in prison, but at the same time you have loose on the streets the person who committed the crime. We all suffer from that. I think we have to also examine the issues related to our high rate of imprisonment, including the fiscal issues. And mandatory minimum sentences. To make sure we have approaches that effectively reduce crime and target havent offend violent offenders. I say this as a former prosecutor and i say this as a chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee. I think our reliance at the state and federal level on mandatory minimums has been a great mistake. Im not convinced it has lowered crime. We have imprisoned people who should not be there, and we have wasted money better spent on other things. I think at the federal level and at the state level get rid of these mandatory minimum sentences. Let judges, let judges act as judges and make up their own mind what should be done. The idea that we protect society by onesizefits all or the idea that we can do this kind of symbolism to make us safer, it just does not work in the real world. There are too many people, too many young people, too many minorities, too many from the inner city who are serving time in jail for people who might have done the same thing but had the money to stay out, are not there. What i say is if you have, the inner city buying 100 worth of cocaine, for example, could end up going to prison for years. If you have somebody on wall street buying the same 100 from their local dealer, if they are caught, theyll be reprimanded and may even have to do on park avenue a week of public service. Thats not right. Thats not ry. Right. And the first legislation i plan to move in the new congress is the violence against women act. Last year the Senate Passed my bipartisan bill, but house leaders refused to agree to protect some of the most vulnerable victims of Domestic Violence and rape. Like so many of the worthy efforts, renewing vawa has suffered from obstructionism. It has seeped too much into our legislative process. Each of us probably know victims of domestic or sexual violence. I still have nightmares from some of the Domestic Violence crime scenes i saw when i was a prosecutor in vermont. And today as we struggle to overcome these unprecedented obstacles to renewing and improvement vawa, i think of victims like carmen from vermont. Let me tell you this story. Its a very small town, as two vermonters here in the front row know. Its a very safe town. Very quiet town. But five years ago, carmens estranged husband broke into her home, beat her with a baseball bat, threw industrial strength lye into her face and across her body. Her doctors said that she had suffered the most horrific injury a human being could suffer. It nearly blinded her. Today shes disfigured and still in pain. Yet shes courageously sharing her experience to help others. Stories like hers remind me every day we do not pass the vawa, violence against women act, bill comes at a human cost. I have one message. For those who say we should not pass it because we included others, we included members of the lgbt community, we included native americans, we included immigrants so thus we should not pass it, i have never seen a Police Officer at a crime scene say, well, before we can do anything about this person who has been beaten, perhaps to death, we must make sure the person is straight or the person is american or not native american. No, a victim is a victim is a victim. And we should stop setting up standards that say well have one standard of Law Enforcement for one group of victims but not for another. I thank you. [applause] so this is going to be a First Priority this year. Well again try to reauthorize our trafficking victims protect act to counter moudern day slavery, which is shockingly common around the world and even here in the United States. We could have passed it last year. He we had republicans and democrats we had republicans and democrats, not a single senator blocked that passage. I hope we canover come the obstruction. This is a blight on the world community. Its a blight on the United States. We should be taking steps to stop it. We also have to in the Judiciary Committee continue to exercise oversight when it comes to our nations counterterrorism efforts to protect the Civil Liberties of all americans. Well examine the constitutional and legal issues implicated by the administrations use of droughns abroad. My concern goes beyond the legal force used against suspected terrorists. I am concerned about the growing use of drones by federal and local authorities to spy on americans here at home. This vast emerging technology is cheap, but i think just because its available doesnt even it helps us. I think there could be a significant threat to the privacy and Civil Liberties of millions of americans. So just because we have the technology that allows us to spy on each other, lets not forget we have certain basic Constitutional Rights as americans. And in a fast changing, technologyly changing world, lets not lose technologically changing world, lets not lose sight of the plan we should follow. Its not a plan of cold or written into a computer program. Its a plan that is written in our constitution. And that should be the one thing we follow. We make a tragic mistake we think that merely giving up more and more of our privacy is going to make us safer. It will not. Security and liberty are both essential in a free society. You cant foresake one for the other. And then lastly, ill continue to fight for transparency that keeps the government accountable to the people. Few of us agree with everything that is done or spoken under protection of our First Amendment rights, our freedom of the press. But as a son of vermont printers and publishers, you can bet that i have very serious concerns about the press being shut out. Of course i oppose the disclosure of properly classified government information, but i think we have to make sure that legislative efforts to protect or prevent classified leaks dont ink fringe upon our fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of the press. And there i might say to the administration as i have said to past administrations, dont overclassify things. Dont put a classification on everything that you do, including those things where you want to cover your mistakes. This is an open and free country. Lets keep it that way. So ill keep pushing to update our privacy laws, to address emerging technology and the internet, including the Electronic Communications privacy act. We have to reauthorize satellite, tv licenses. We have to make most accessible for those with visual disabilities. We have to create incentives for innovation. And like chief justice roberts, i believe the extraordinary high number of extended judicial vacancies has to end. Well continue to work to do that, but those who would block judges from coming up for even a vote, ill say this, vote yes or vote no. But when you block them you are voting maybe. What an irresponsible, lazy thing to do. Vote yes. Vote no. Dont vote maybe. So anyway, i tell you some of these things, i tell you why i enjoy being a lawyer, why i enjoy being a graduate of your school, dean. I also tell you i enjoy being chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee. So my friends i see here in the audience remember me telling the story that when i first came to the senate i was told, i believe then chairman of the Judiciary Committee, because i was a junior most member, he said, boy, around here its based on seniority. Boy, you dont have any, you hear me . Yes, sir. I went home and said to my wife, terrible, terrible program they have in the u. S. Senate basing things on seniority. We should change that. Having studied it for 38 years i now fully understand it. Dean, i thank you very, very much. [applause] thank you very much, senator. That was an extraordinary talk. Now we have some time for questions. Id like to start first with students. If there are any students who have questions, please come forward. We have two microphones on either side. Not going to be shy, are they . Good morning, senator. Thank you for coming to give this talk. My question centers around Supreme Court justices. Justice kagen has broken the recent and longstanding trend of Supreme Court justices who have first served as federal judges on the court of appeals. My question is, what do you believe to be the ideal qualifications of a Supreme Court justice . And will we return to a time when the average congressman or governor has a chance to serve on the Supreme Court . I love that question. Thank you very much. I have thought about this and i have spoken about this. I believe weve got to get out of the judicial monastery to pick our Supreme Court justices. Obviously we have had some wonderful Supreme Court justices who have served first in circuit judges or elsewhere, but id like to see them from a broader way. Somebody with more those who havent just been a judicial monastery, people who have been out and have had all kinds of other experiences. One example, the man when i was a law student here, i was privileged to sit with him one time when our Honor Society was inviting all the Supreme