1
00:00:00,667 --> 00:00:01,001
Let's start with your

2
00:00:01,068 --> 00:00:02,402
judicial philosophy.

3
00:00:02,469 --> 00:00:03,537
Tell me how you came by it

4
00:00:03,604 --> 00:00:04,638
and how it impacts you

5
00:00:04,705 --> 00:00:05,606
when you're on the bench.

6
00:00:05,672 --> 00:00:06,707
Well, in every case

7
00:00:06,773 --> 00:00:08,742
I'm guided by the same things.

8
00:00:08,809 --> 00:00:10,811
I'm guided by a desire

9
00:00:11,545 --> 00:00:13,313
to do justice for the people

10
00:00:13,380 --> 00:00:14,781
who are in front of me.

11
00:00:14,848 --> 00:00:17,317
I'm guided by a obligation

12
00:00:17,818 --> 00:00:18,952
to apply the law

13
00:00:19,019 --> 00:00:20,354
as fairly

14
00:00:20,420 --> 00:00:21,321
and as

15
00:00:21,388 --> 00:00:23,390
consistently as possible.

16
00:00:23,457 --> 00:00:25,058
And then I'm also obligated

17
00:00:25,125 --> 00:00:25,959
to hold those

18
00:00:26,026 --> 00:00:26,593
who violate

19
00:00:26,660 --> 00:00:27,728
the law accountable

20
00:00:27,794 --> 00:00:29,463
regardless of who they are

21
00:00:29,530 --> 00:00:31,665
or how powerful they are.

22
00:00:31,932 --> 00:00:32,799
So those are really

23
00:00:32,866 --> 00:00:34,134
the three principles

24
00:00:34,201 --> 00:00:35,869
that guide

25
00:00:36,603 --> 00:00:38,805
my decisions in cases.

26
00:00:38,872 --> 00:00:39,406
How do you

27
00:00:39,473 --> 00:00:40,240
approach precedent?

28
00:00:40,307 --> 00:00:41,008
Because we've seen

29
00:00:41,074 --> 00:00:42,075
as the court shifted

30
00:00:42,142 --> 00:00:42,776
majorities over

31
00:00:42,843 --> 00:00:43,744
the last few years

32
00:00:43,810 --> 00:00:45,212
a number of cases

33
00:00:45,279 --> 00:00:46,747
looking at old cases

34
00:00:46,813 --> 00:00:47,514
that have been settled

35
00:00:47,581 --> 00:00:48,248
in the past

36
00:00:48,315 --> 00:00:49,616
"Marklein" being one of those.

37
00:00:49,683 --> 00:00:51,018
But in that category

38
00:00:51,084 --> 00:00:51,885
what would you do to

39
00:00:51,952 --> 00:00:52,519
when you approach

40
00:00:52,586 --> 00:00:53,554
a precedent decision?

41
00:00:53,620 --> 00:00:54,588
Well, first of all

42
00:00:54,655 --> 00:00:56,156
you have to look at does

43
00:00:56,223 --> 00:00:58,392
the precedential case

44
00:00:58,458 --> 00:01:00,060
violate the Constitution?

45
00:01:00,127 --> 00:01:00,627
Does it

46
00:01:00,694 --> 00:01:02,429
protect or take away

47
00:01:02,496 --> 00:01:03,664
people's rights?

48
00:01:03,730 --> 00:01:04,865
So that is the first thing

49
00:01:04,932 --> 00:01:05,966
that I would look at.

50
00:01:06,033 --> 00:01:06,667
Secondly

51
00:01:06,733 --> 00:01:07,868
I think if it is an issue

52
00:01:07,935 --> 00:01:08,502
that involves

53
00:01:08,569 --> 00:01:09,970
constitutional rights

54
00:01:10,037 --> 00:01:10,971
you look at

55
00:01:11,038 --> 00:01:13,841
well, has this been in place

56
00:01:13,907 --> 00:01:15,075
for a long period of time

57
00:01:15,142 --> 00:01:16,610
such that people have relied

58
00:01:16,677 --> 00:01:17,778
on these protections

59
00:01:17,845 --> 00:01:19,313
like "Roe versus Wade"?

60
00:01:19,379 --> 00:01:21,615
It's a perfect example.