Executive Calendar - Continued

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee heard testimony from Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Judge Brett Kavanaugh about Dr. Ford's account of an attack on her by Judge Kavanaugh and a friend when they were all teenagers.

Dr. Ford acquitted herself with grace and courage in her recounting of the terrifying experience that has had a lasting effect on her life.

In his own testimony, Judge Kavanaugh dropped the polite veneer he presented at his confirmation hearing when he complimented all of the Senators he had met with and had told the committee ``the Supreme Court must never be viewed as a partisan institution.'' That was then. Last Thursday, he launched into a partisan political screed that contradicted everything he had ever professed to believe about the way judges should behave. He said: ``This whole two-week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election, a fear that has been unfairly stoked about my judicial record, revenge on behalf of the Clintons, and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups.''

It reads like a fever dream, a paranoid fantasy. It is simply not true. It arguably violated the Code of Conduct for United States Judges that binds him as a sitting judge on the Federal appeals court for the DC Circuit.

Dr. Ford's own words undercut Judge Kavanaugh's assertion that a vast leftwing conspiracy is out to get him. In her deeply moving testimony, Dr. Ford said: ``I thought it was my civic duty to relay the information I had about Mr. Kavanaugh's conduct so that those considering his nomination would know about this assault.''

She went on: ``My hope was that providing the information confidentially would be sufficient to allow the Senate to consider Mr. Kavanaugh's serious misconduct without having to make myself, my family, or anyone's family vulnerable to the personal attacks and invasions of privacy we have faced since my name became public.''

Dr. Ford was trying to do her civic duty. She was not motivated by revenge on anyone's behalf. She had no part in any organized opposition. She was not fueled by pent-up anger or resentment. In deciding to come forward, Dr. Ford was just a person who thought that if she could only let the President know what Brett Kavanaugh did to her, he would choose someone else.

Yet Kavanaugh attacked and tried to turn Dr. Ford's honest effort into some sort of a dark, ugly ambush. At least he didn't accuse Dr. Ford of being part of the alleged conspiracy that sought to derail his nomination. In fact, when Senator Booker asked Judge Kavanaugh if he blamed Dr. Ford for a coordinated effort against him, Judge Kavanaugh said he bore Dr. Ford no ill will and that people in the hearing room, not Dr. Ford, were against him.

We all saw something about Judge Kavanaugh's temperament and character that day that should disqualify him from serving on the Supreme Court of the United States. He was angry. He was belligerent. He was partisan. He went on the attack against the Senators who were questioning him.

These are not qualities we look for in a Supreme Court Justice or in a judge for that matter. But don't take it from me; listen to Judge Kavanaugh himself. In 2016, in the Catholic University Law Review, he wrote about the importance of judges steering clear of politics. He told his readers that ``a good judge, like a good umpire, cannot act as a partisan.'' He said that while it is good for some judges to come with a background in politics or policy, ``federal judges have to check any prior political allegiances at the door. You have to shed them.'' Based on Judge Kavanaugh's testimony last week, it certainly doesn't sound like he has shed his partisan convictions and connections.

In the same law review article, Judge Kavanaugh wrote:

To be a good judge and a good umpire, it's critical to have the proper demeanor. It's important to . . . keep our emotions in check and be calm amidst the storm.

He is not wrong. Indeed, the Code of Conduct for United States Judges backs him up.

Canon 2 of the code reads:

A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All Activities. . . . A judge should respect and comply with the law and should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

It further explains in commentary:

An appearance of impropriety occurs when reasonable minds . . . would conclude that the judge's honesty, integrity, impartiality, temperament, or fitness to serve as a judge is impaired. Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges.

Canon 3 explains that ``a judge should be faithful to, and maintain professional competence in, the law and should not be swayed by partisan interests, public clamor, or fear of criticism.''

We need to consider the rules and norms that argue against the kind of intemperate behavior we saw from Judge Kavanaugh because of the allegations brought against him by several sources, all of which deserve a full and fair investigation by the FBI.

I was heartened to see Senators Flake and Coons both in agreement to hold off on a floor vote for at least a week while the supplemental background investigation can be completed to look into these allegations. Since the agreement, questions have arisen about the exact nature of that investigation. Is it limited? If so, how? Will all leads be followed, or will the FBI be hamstrung in some way by instructions from the White House?

In the ensuing firestorm, there has been a lot of debate about whether the FBI investigation will be credible and professional and not a perfunctory effort. There are some indications now that the FBI will be allowed to do its job. I hope that will be the case. I expect the FBI to exhaust all possible avenues of investigation that are relevant as to whether Judge Kavanaugh had a pattern of drinking that resulted in aggression and belligerence toward women.

Some have said that Judge Kavanaugh deserves the benefit of the doubt and that unless Dr. Ford's account can be proven, he should be confirmed, but that confuses the issue. No one is entitled to be on the Supreme Court. The burden should be on Judge Kavanaugh to show he is fit for the job.

Now the Republicans' hired gun prosecutor, whom they hid behind while Dr. Ford was questioned, has published a memo in which she concludes that she could not bring a case based on the evidence heard at the second hearing. Frankly, this conclusion is meaningless. I am sure that in her previous job as a specialist in sex crimes, she would never have proceeded to a trial before an investigation, and she would not have excluded key witnesses. There was no investigation. Key witnesses were not called. I hope this is not the way she would prepare a case.

I have said many times that Democrats didn't need to manufacture reasons to oppose Judge Kavanaugh's elevation to the Supreme Court. Based on his record, his opinions and dissents, his academic writings, and his speeches, I have concluded that he will not be a fair and objective Justice of the Supreme Court. His views on reproductive rights, Native rights, on legal protections for workers, consumers, and the environment, not to mention his very broad views of Presidential protections, are all of deep concern to me.

Now that we have heard Dr. Ford's account and have seen Judge Kavanaugh's angry and combative reaction, it is evident that he should not serve and should not be confirmed to the Supreme Court. We can do better, and the American people deserve better.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source