1. Do you think that judges have an obligation to overturn "uncommonly silly" laws?

2. Modern judicial confirmation hearings have been described as an intricate dance between nominees and senators, with the nominees giving broad scripted answers that reveal little about their actual judicial philosophy. Do you agree with this characterization? Do you think any changes should be made to the confirmation process?

3. If you were president, what characteristics would you look for in nominating federal judges?

4. If an elected legislature refuses to grant citizens a right to privacy, do you believe it is appropriate for the courts to do so? Why or why not?

5. If a president believes that the Court has reached the wrong result, should the president be able to change the Court by increasing its numbers or forcing early retirement?

6. What might the consequences be to having a Supreme Court comprised entirely of originalist judges or entirely of activist judges? Is that ever likely to happen? Why or why not?