CNN Inside Politics - Transcript
CNN Inside Politics - Transcript
Friday, July 1, 2005
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
MALVEAUX: For Republican response, we are joined now by another member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, John Cornyn of Texas.
Thank you very much, Mr. Senator, for joining us.
SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R), TEXAS: Thank you.
MALVEAUX: Now, of course, you have been critical of some of the Supreme Court's recent decisions. You were one who opposed the court's 5-4 eminent domain ruling. And in many big cases, we know that Sandra Day O'Connor has been the swing vote, the pivotal vote here. What do you believe her resignation means?
CORNYN: Well, she's had a long distinguished record of service on the Supreme Court. And I think, you know, today is her day. And she deserves the honor and respect that we can give her for that distinguished service.
But I also hope that we can bring honor to the Senate by conducting the sort of confirmation process that is reflective of our best and does not overly politicize this choice for the Supreme Court.
MALVEAUX: And even before O'Connor announced her resignation, you had said that the White House is considering putting off an announcement of a replacement until perhaps later in the summer to relay delay the amount of time that, of course, that liberal activists, activists would have time to attack the nomination.
And we have seen that in the past that happened. Has the White House spoken with you about this possible option here? Do they plan on perhaps waiting until late August, even early September?
CORNYN: My understanding is that the president is likely to make his nomination after July the 8th when he returns from the G-8. But honestly, I think we're all speculating. And there's only one person who really knows for sure.
But now that the president has a vacant seat to fill, the Senate's got a job to do once the president makes his choice. And my only hope is that we can conduct a fair process, do our job, ask hard questions, do a thorough investigation, but ultimately, conduct an up- or-down vote on the Senate floor as we have for 214 years and not have a repeat of some of the bad behavior that I think has not brought the Senate great honor in the last few years by filibustering the president's nominees.
MALVEAUX: I'm going to join in the speculation, if you'll indulge me, for just a little bit, because your name has been mentioned as a possible Supreme Court nominee. Have to ask you this question, of course, because of your own legal and political background. Have you been approached by anyone in the administration?
CORNYN: Well, I'll make it easy. I have not. I love my job in the Senate. I'm honored to be here. And I think the president has got a large range of potential choices he can make.
And it's likely that he will get more than one vacancy to fill on the Supreme Court. So I'm sure they have a list. I'm not privy to that list, but I'm sure it's a list of highly qualified nominees who will do a good job serving on the court. MALVEAUX: And Senator, also, of course, the group of 14 who came up with a compromise when it came over, the judicial nominees and using that filibuster, they said that, of course, they would be free to use it under only extraordinary circumstances, that particular clause.
Of course, the president has to be careful not to pick someone who might be supremely conservative and fall into that category. What is your sense, in terms of just how willing they would be used to -- they would be willing to actually interpret that and use that clause, as someone that they could vote against? Or does the president have to be careful not to -- he's walking a fine line here.
CORNYN: Well, I think the president will pick a highly qualified nominee. That's his job. Nobody can do it for him. And the Senate is not empowered to make that choice, but rather to do our job and conduct a searching investigation into the background of these nominees to make sure that we perform our constitutional duty.
But I think one of the things that we have seen is that extraordinary circumstance cannot mean a disagreement over judicial philosophy. Otherwise, Janice Rogers Brown and Priscilla Owen would not have gotten an up-or-down vote in the United States Senate, which they did get, and which I think all of these nominees should likely get, whoever they are.
MALVEAUX: Senator John Cornyn, thank you very much for your time. Of course, you're going to be extraordinarily busy over the next couple of months. Thanks again.
CORNYN: Thanks, Suzanne.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0507/01/ip.01.html