Blumenthal: I was disappointed in Judge Gorsuch's response to these questions
Blumenthal: No matter how impartial a judge may be, every judge is a human being, not an automaton. I was trying to look into his heart.
Blumenthal to Miller: Thank you for your work at WWH
Blumenthal: Yesterday Gorsuch said Brown v. Board had been correctly reached, but he was not willing to say the same about the cases underlying the constitutional right to privacy
Blumenthal: Why is the right to privacy so important for people facing the decisions they do in coming to your clinic, and why is apprehension about that so hurtful?
Miller: Trump has been very clear that there was a litmus test for this nomination. We have to be able to control our reproduction.
Grassley now yields a few seconds to Kennedy from his time.
To Jaffer: Did you mean to speak for anybody today?
Jaffer: No, thank you for the opportunity to clarify, and I apologize to Ms. Phillips.
Grassley to Kirsanow: What conclusions can you draw from his record on discrimination on the basis of race?
Kirsanow: He is precise. He is not outcome-driven, but he applies the statutory text.
Grassley to Smith: Could you tell us a bit about Caldone? Has he protected Americans of all faiths?
Smith: I think that case demonstrates just what a fair judge Gorsuch is. In a case about a diet for a Muslim prisoner, the panel appointed him counsel and gave an extended briefing schedule.
Smith: Ultimately the panel ruled for the prisoner
Smith: In Yellowbear, involving a Native American prisoner denied access to a sweatlodge, Gorsuch in a unanimous opinion wrote that prisoners denied many liberties, but not religious exercise. The government had not shown a compelling reason to deny him access to the sweat lodge.
Grassley to Meyer: What does Gorsuch look to get out of advocates during oral argument and has he ever changed his mind?
Meyer: Oral argument is very important to the judge, and yes, I have seen him change his mind. Briefs are the fullest presentation, but oral argument gives opportunity to interact with counsel.
His preparation for oral argument is incredible
Blumenthal has one more question
To Marshall: I was struck in your testimony by reference to Brown, just mentioned in my discussion with Miller.
Blumenthal: Gorsuch said the privacy cases were decisions of the court, but did not say if he thought it was correct -- unlike what he said for Brown. Is Brown v. Board somehow distinguishable as an originalist case?
Marshall: No. The drafters of the amendment (14) supported segregation in public schools in the District of COlumbia.
Marshall: Some originalists try to defend Brown, but that's only because they recognize how hard it would be to have a constitutional theory that does not uphold Brown
Blumenthal: Chief Justice Warren asked Frankfurter to find an originalist justification for Brown, went to law clerk -- Alexander Bickel -- nothing found, so Warren reached decision anyway.
Marshall: That is absolutely correct.
Grassley: Gorsuch had not called it originalist yesterday
Grassley is now thanking the third panel
Grassley: Questions for the record are due by Friday at 5pm
Grassley: The hearing is now adjourned.
Okay, we've been going since Monday morning. Thank you to everyone for joining us.
Grasley had said earlier in the week that he wanted to have a committee vote this Monday. He did not say one way or the other just now whether that was still true.
I'm going to shut down the live blog now. Thank you for joining us, and we will of course continue to report any developments in the nomination.