[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 36, Number 52 (Monday, January 1, 2001)]
[Pages 3180-3184]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks on the Recess Appointment of Roger L. Gregory to the United 
States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and an Exchange With 
Reporters

December 27, 2000

    The President. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Thirty-nine 
years ago the great grandson of a slave became the first African-
American to serve on the United States Court of Appeals for the Second 
Circuit. In 1961, amidst fierce opposition, President John F. Kennedy 
appointed Thurgood Marshall as only the second African-American to fill 
a vacancy on the U.S. Court of Appeals. In doing so, President Kennedy 
not only ensured that the people of the Second Circuit would be served 
by an excellent jurist; he also took a big step forward in America's 
ongoing efforts for equal opportunity in every aspect of our life, 
including our courts.
    Judge Marshall went on to become one of our Nation's most 
distinguished jurists, highlighted by his 1967 appointment by President 
Johnson as the first African-American Justice of the United States 
Supreme Court.
    President Kennedy's action was in the grand tradition of Presidents 
of both parties, dating all the way back to George Washington, who have 
used their constitutional authority to bring much needed balance and 
excellence to our Nation's courts.
    Four of the first five African-Americans to ascend to the appellate 
bench were initially appointed in the same fashion that I employ today. 
To fill a similar gap in our judicial system, I am honored today to 
announce my appointment of Roger Gregory, one of Richmond's most 
respected trial lawyers, to fill an emergency vacancy on the United 
States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. I will renominate him 
when Congress returns in January, and I urge the Senate to confirm him.
    I take this extraordinary step for extraordinary reasons. First, the 
people of the fourth circuit are not receiving the judicial 
representation they deserve. The U.S. Judicial Conference has declared 
this seat a judicial emergency. It has been vacant for more than a 
decade. In the last 5 years alone, fourth circuit caseloads have 
increased more than 15 percent; yet one-third of its judgeships are 
vacant. This has left too many citizens waiting in line for justice. It 
is a travesty in a nation that prides itself in the fair and expeditious 
rule of law.
    Second, it is unconscionable that the fourth circuit, with the 
largest African-American population of any circuit in our Nation, has 
never had an African-American appellate judge. As I said when I first 
nominated Roger Gregory, it is long past time to right that wrong. 
Justice may be blind, but we all know that diversity in the courts, as 
in all aspects of society, sharpens our vision and makes us a stronger 
nation.
    Time and again, for 5 years now, I have tried and tried to fill 
these gaps in justice and equality. And time and again, for 5 years now, 
the Senate majority has stood in the way.
    Third, and perhaps most important, Roger Gregory is the right man at 
the right time to fulfill this historic role. His life is a testament to 
the power and promise of the American dream.
    The son of factory workers, he's the first in his family to graduate 
from high school, let alone college and law school. He graduated summa 
cum laude from Virginia State University and went on to earn his law 
degree from the University of Michigan Law School.

[[Page 3181]]

He returned to teach at Virginia State, where his mother had once worked 
as a dormitory maid.
    He is now one of Virginia's leading litigators and one of its most 
civic-minded citizens. He's earned high praise from all quarters, 
including the American Bar Association, religious leaders, and both of 
Virginia's Senators, Republican Senator John Warner and Democratic 
Senator Chuck Robb.
    I want especially to thank Senator Robb for all he has done to make 
this day possible, for his tireless leadership in the Senate on this and 
so many other issues. He worked very hard to get back here today, but 
the bad weather down in Texas made it impossible. But I do want to thank 
him. He convinced me, and when I looked into the record I saw that it 
was absolutely true, that Roger Gregory would make an excellent judge 
for all the people of the fourth circuit.
    In closing, let me say I have not come to this decision lightly. I 
have always respected the Senate's role in the appointment process. 
Indeed, I have made far fewer recess appointments than President Reagan 
did in his 8 years, and I believe that the record on that is perfectly 
clear. On the other hand, I am compelled by the facts and history to do 
what I can to remedy an injustice that for too long has plagued the 
fourth circuit, and that I have tried for too long to remedy in the 
established way.
    As President, it is my constitutional responsibility to see that 
justice for all is not just what we promise; it's what we practice. That 
is the principle behind my appointment of this distinguished American 
today.
    Mr. Gregory, congratulations.

[At this point, Judge Gregory made brief remarks.]

    The President. Thank you.
    I'll answer your questions--I can't resist injecting just a little 
bit of levity here. One of the things you want in a judge is someone who 
is well-organized and has a good sense of timing. His children are 18, 
12, and 6. [Laughter] I think that ought to be evidence in the hearing 
on his appointment. [Laughter]

Middle East Peace Process

    Q. Mr. President, has the Mideast peace process been set back by the 
Palestinian reluctance to accept your proposals for an agreement with 
Israel? And do you have any indication of whether Thursday's summit is 
going to go forward?
    The President. Well, let me say first, this is the first chance I've 
had to comment on the substance here, so--the parties are engaged in a 
renewed effort to reach an agreement. Based on the months and months of 
discussion I've had on these final status issues, we have attempted to 
narrow the range of outstanding matters in a way that meets the 
essential needs of both sides.
    The whole question now is whether they agree to continue the 
negotiation on the basis of these ideas. We've got to bring this to a 
conclusion if we're going to continue. The issues are extremely 
difficult, but they are closer than they have ever been before. And I 
hope and pray they will seize this opportunity. And I think that is all 
I should say at this time. The less I say, the better.
    Q. Is that right--you haven't heard from them? It sounds like you 
have not. The Palestinian officials have been saying they cannot accept 
your proposals.
    The President. Well, we'll see what happens. Prime Minister Barak 
has said that he would accept and continue the negotiations if the 
Palestinians would, and we'll see what happens. There's a lot of things 
going on now, and will be in the next several days, and I think, as I 
said, the less I say about them all, the better.
    Q. Have you received a response, an actual response from the 
Palestinians yet?
    The President. I've said all I'm going to say about this today.

Shootings in Wakefield, Massachusetts

    Q. Mr. President, what were your first thoughts when you saw the 
news of the shootings up in Massachusetts?
    The President. Excuse me?
    Q. The shootings in Massachusetts--I'm wondering what your first 
thoughts were and what you would say to the Nation in this holiday 
season with that happening.
    The President. Well, I feel what I always feel when tragedy befalls 
Americans. And I

[[Page 3182]]

hope that they will remember that this holiday season--interestingly 
enough in this season is not only the Christian season of Christmas but 
the great Jewish and Muslim holy days happen to coincide in the same 
week this year. So I hope that we will remember, amidst our celebration, 
to pray for all the people involved.

Gregory Appointment

    Q. Mr. President, do you think the issue of minority judgeships 
should be brought up in the Ashcroft confirmation hearings? And was this 
appointment in part aimed at highlighting that issue and could, in fact, 
those hearings increase Mr. Gregory's chances of a confirmation?
    The President. Well, I think I should answer the second question 
clearly. This is unrelated. I have tried for 5 years to put an African-
American on the fourth circuit--for 5 years. Now--and for all the 
reasons that I made in my--stated in my remarks, I think it is most 
unfortunate that it has not been done, and I just determined to do it. 
It's just time to do it.
    On the other question, that is something that the Senate will have 
to deal with. I'll be--it's not my appointment, and I won't be 
President, and I don't think I should say any more about it. The Senate 
will do what it thinks is proper there.

Possible Visit to North Korea

    Q. The President of South Korea says he thinks it is unlikely you'll 
visit North Korea before January 20th. Have you moved any further toward 
a decision, whether to send an envoy there to see if North Korea is 
ready to reduce its missile program?
    The President. We have been in touch with the North Koreans, and I 
may have some more to say about that. You know I just have a limited 
number of days here before I leave office, and I'm trying to get as much 
done as I can, including on that. I may have some more to say in the 
next few days about it.

Pharmaceuticals Legislation

    Q. Mr. President, the reimportation of drugs law that you signed and 
which today you received the letter from Secretary Shalala--some folks 
are wondering why you would sign a law that contained such supposed 
flaws as were identified by the Secretary. Do you have any plan to 
negate, circumvent, or seek to counteract or overturn her ruling?
    The President. Well, what she--I said when I signed the law that it 
was deeply flawed. She is required by law to make a determination that--
two things--one, that the reimportation would not weaken the safety 
standards that we have for Americans and their pharmaceuticals. I think 
she could do that. But the second was, she had to make a determination 
by law that this would lower prices for American consumers. And the law 
was so different from the one we proposed and is so full of loopholes 
that she could not say in good conscience that she believed that the 
prices for consumers would go down, which is exactly what I warned when 
I asked them not to do this.
    So what we'd like to see is a law that protects safety that will 
lower consumer prices. I do think that people ought to be able to do 
this, and--I did before, but I will again, as soon as the Congress comes 
back--I'll send them a statement of the things that I believe would meet 
the standard of the law. I think that Secretary Shalala did what she 
thought the law required her to do, and since she couldn't certify that 
American consumers wouldn't get lower prices, she didn't want to hold 
out false hope and be involved in something she thought was not 
legitimate.
    So I hope we can work this out. I do think there was in the last 
Congress, and I think there will be in this one, a majority for allowing 
Americans to reimport drugs under strict safety standards at lower 
prices. But I think we have to do it in a way where we don't promise 
something that doesn't materialize. That's all, really, that was at 
issue here. And I think--we'll send something up in the way of 
clarifying language as soon as they come back next week and see what we 
can do.

Incoming Bush Administration

    Q. Mr. President, the Bush team has said that they're going through 
all of your Executive orders and your administration's regulations with 
a fine-tooth comb, and they may undo them. Are you concerned about this,

[[Page 3183]]

and do you think that this recess appointment could go the way some of 
your Executive orders might?
    The President. Well, they have very different views on the 
environment, particularly, and on some other issues. And when they take 
office, you have to expect them to do what they think is right. And you 
have to expect the people who disagree to disagree. And democracy will 
work its will, and then the citizens of the country will make their 
judgments.
    All I can do is to do what I think is right. And these things that 
we've been doing lately are things that we've been working on for years. 
For example, the--let me just use one example--the medical privacy 
regulations, which I think are profoundly important, we tried to do that 
through legislation, and the Congress--to be fair to the Congress--
adopted a bill which said, okay, we've got to get this work done by a 
certain date, but if we can't get it done, then the administration can 
take action. So when it became obvious that because of all the 
conflicting interest groups that it wouldn't be possible for them to do 
that, when the date elapsed, passed, we decided that we would take 
action, as the Congress had explicitly authorized us to do.
    In terms of Secretary Browner's order regarding the trucks and the 
fuel, diesel fuel--which I think is a very, very important part of our 
clean air efforts, when asthma is the number one health problem among 
children in our country today--we've been working on that for years. 
That's not some sort of eleventh-hour thing. It's just that we didn't--
this is when we finished, and so we did it.
    And I think we should just do what we think is right, and then when 
they get in, they'll do what they think is right. That's what democracy 
is all about. And they'll either--if they want to undo these things, 
then they'll either be able to do it or they won't, as the process plays 
itself out. That's the way the system works. And I have no problem with 
that. They have to do what they think is right, just like we do.

Presidential Pardons

    Q. Mr. President, are you still considering providing pardons for 
some of the Whitewater figures?
    The President. I expect to do another round of pardons, but I 
haven't had any meetings or made any decisions about any others yet. I 
just expect to do some. I have done--I haven't seen the final numbers, 
but before the last batch at least, I had done fewer than any President 
in almost 30 years. And part of that, frankly, is the way the system 
works, something I'm not entirely satisfied with. But I think that it is 
appropriate for the President to do them where circumstances are 
appropriate.
    I have always thought that Presidents and Governors, when I was a 
Governor, should be quite conservative on commutations--that is, there 
needs to be a very specific reason if you reduce someone's sentence or 
let them out--but more broadminded about pardons because, in so many 
States in America, pardons are necessary to restore people's rights of 
citizenship. Particularly if they committed relatively minor offenses, 
or if some years have elapsed and they've been good citizens and there's 
no reason to believe they won't be good citizens in the future, I think 
we ought to give them a chance, having paid the price, to be restored to 
full citizenship.
    And in that sense, I think that the word is almost misused, because 
it's not like you--you can't erase the fact that someone has been 
convicted and served his sentence, in the case of those who have. But 
there are many people, including more people than I get their 
applications to my desk--many people don't have lawyers; they don't even 
know to ask for a pardon--but they'd like to vote at election time; 
they'd like to be full citizens. And they're out there working hard and 
paying taxes, and they have paid the price.
    So I would like to be in a position to do that. A lot of the folks--
virtually all of them on the first list I released, 58, I think, were 
people that are unknown to most Americans. They're not people with money 
or power or influence. And I wish I could do some more of them--I'm 
going to try. I'm trying to get it out of the system that exists, that 
existed before I got here, and I'm doing the best I can.

Summation Speeches

    Q. You gave wrap-up foreign policy speeches in London and in 
Nebraska. Do you

[[Page 3184]]

have any other speeches, summation speeches planned for other policy 
areas?
    The President. I expect I'll do one on domestic policy; I'm trying. 
We're looking for a venue, and after the first of the year I'll probably 
do at least one more.
    Thank you all very much.
    Q. What about Gray Davis?
    Q. Are you going to take reporters on your next househunting trip, 
Mr. President?
    The President. [Laughter] I hope I don't have to do any more.
    Thank you.

 Note:  The President spoke at 3 p.m. in the Oval Office at the White 
House. In his remarks, he referred to Prime Minister Ehud Barak of 
Israel. Reporters referred to outgoing Senator John Ashcroft, the 
incoming Bush administration nominee for Attorney General; and Gov. Gray 
Davis of California. The transcript released by the Office of the Press 
Secretary also included the remarks of Judge Gregory.