Nomination of Amy Coney Barrett

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I thank my staff, Elliott--who is on the floor--Brad, Cirilo, Seth, and Brad for all the work that they have done as we have gone through the nomination process.

I was reviewing my prepared remarks this morning, and then I reflected back on a very important moment during the Judiciary Committee hearing where Senator Cornyn asked--he said: You can see, among all of us, we have three-ring binders; we have staff behind us; we have taken weeks to prepare; and you are about to go through some 20 hours of questions, would you mind sharing with us your notes? She looked at a blank notepad that was given to her by the chairman. It had nothing on it.

She came to that committee fully prepared to answer any question from the 22 members of the Judiciary Committee purely from what is up there, and she did an extraordinary job.

The reason she did an extraordinary job is because she has had an extraordinary career, beginning as a student, then going to Rhodes College, where she was magna cum laude, then going to Notre Dame School of Law, where she graduated first in her class.

She went on to be a professor at Notre Dame, and she was, multiple times, voted the Distinguished Professor by a broad spectrum of liberal and conservative students.

She has also proven as a judge, with some 600 cases going through the Seventh Circuit, that she has an encyclopedic knowledge of that law. There were so many times when members on the other side of the aisle would try to trip her up or ask her a question. She had no notes to refer to. She got the specifics of the case right.

What she demonstrated throughout the entire hearing process, which I attended, was that she interprets--she does her job by doing two things: looking at the plain letter of the Constitution, understanding the limits that the laws can have within the bounds of the Constitution, and rule accordingly.

Now, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle of the Judiciary Committee were constantly--it was clear to me, after weeks of attacking Amy Coney Barrett, not directly but through surrogates, that they were trying to demonize this person before she ever came before the committee, like they did with Justice Kavanaugh. But each and every time they asked her a question, she brought them back to the boundaries of the Constitution and the question of law before, in her case, the circuit court, and there was just no way to trip her up.

So then what happened? Then they started talking about how you are going to go to the Supreme Court, and you are going to overturn the Affordable Care Act. They asked her questions that they knew she couldn't answer. Justice Ginsburg, pursuant to the Ginsburg rule--they had no intention--no responsible judge would go before the Judiciary Committee and tell you how they are going to rule on a future case. It is actually a violation of their code of conduct.

So she told them in so many instances--and what was interesting with some of the members on the other side of the aisle was, on the one hand, they would say: You cannot overturn this precedent or that precedent, and in the same breath, they would say: But we want to make sure you overturn this precedent or that precedent. And every time, Amy Coney Barrett was calm and composed and demonstrated to everybody in that committee that she is going to be objective; she is going to be fair; and she is going to stay within the lines of the Constitution and the matter of law that is before her.

Now, I think that it is very important to have a judge like that on the Supreme Court. Our religious freedoms are at stake. Our Second Amendment rights are at stake. We do have people who want activist judges. I don't want an activist judge, period--not for a conservative cause or a liberal cause. I want a judge whom I know that if I someday go before the Supreme Court--or any American--that I have a judge there who is going to be fair, who is going to be thoughtful, who is going to be impartial, and who will always have a concern for both sides of the argument, but at the end of the day, know that they have a responsibility to judge objectively.

I have had a couple of opportunities to meet with Amy Coney Barrett. In the last meeting that I had with her in the Capitol, just a few steps away from where we are right now, I brought two pocket Constitutions with me. I said: I have two granddaughters--one will be 3 next week; the other one is a little over 2 months old. I said: Would you mind signing these Constitutions for Sawyer and Willow, my granddaughters? She said: Certainly. She opened it up, she signed her name and just said: ``Dream big.''

When they get a little bit older--they are not old enough yet--I am going to get them to understand the significance of that quick note from an incredible jurist, somebody who dreamed big and realized her American dream--a mother of seven school-aged children, two adopted from Haiti, one with special needs

She is going to be the first Supreme Court Justice female on the Supreme Court with school-age children. She has seven of them. She is able to manage the stresses and the challenges of being a working mom while she served with distinction on the Seventh Circuit and while her husband worked as well. She has realized her American dream. I believe that she is going to make sure that everybody else has the freedoms to do the same thing.

I think Judge Amy Coney Barrett is going to go down in history as one of the great Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court.

It is a shame, as the Presiding Officer just said in his comments a moment ago, that this is even a divided decision. In a less political time than we find ourselves today, I suspect that she would have the unanimous support of this body, much the same way that Justice Ginsburg did when she came before the Senate.

But, today, I am looking forward to voting for Judge Amy Coney Barrett. I am looking forward to watching her build on what is already a very strong legacy. I am looking forward to making sure that we continue to have a Court that is independent, impartial, focuses on protecting all of our constitutional rights and freedoms. And I know, without a doubt, Amy Coney Barrett is going to be one of those stewards in the U.S. Supreme Court

I rise today to express my strong support for the confirmation of our next Supreme Court Justice, Judge Amy Coney Barrett. Over the last few weeks, I have heard from thousands of North Carolinians asking me to vote to confirm Judge Barrett to the Supreme Court.

Judge Barrett is an incredibly qualified nominee.

She is a top-notch legal scholar and jurist. She is widely respected within the legal community, and after three days of intense questioning by the Senate Judiciary Committee, I can see why she is so widely respected and why all of her former law school colleagues at Notre Dame Law School support her nomination.

I was especially impressed with her composure and impressive knowledge of the law as she answered unfounded allegations about her judicial record from Democratic members of the committee, and shameful smears radical liberals. The way she handled this process I am more convinced than ever that she clearly has the judicial temperament required to serve as a Justice on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Her answers made clear that she will be unbiased and fair to every party that comes before her. She made clear that she will interpret the law as written, without regard for her personal views or feeling, and will not be a legislator from the bench. Legislating is our job, not hers.

She is truly a textualist in the mold of Justice Scalia.

Her commitment to applying the law as written, and not legislating from the Bench, should be the standard for every nominee. I am confident that with Judge Barrett on the Court, Americans can rest easy knowing their religious liberty and second amendment rights are secure.

Soon, I will cast my vote to confirm Judge Barrett, as Justice Barrett. But first, I must also address the dangerous rhetoric from my Democratic colleagues.

First, they claim this nomination is somehow illegitimate. That is false. If the media wasn't so biased this claim would be dismissed outright. As Justice Ginsburg said, a President is elected for 4 years, not 3. President Trump fulfilled the duty he owes to the millions of Americans who elected him in 2016.

Similarly, voters elected a Republican majority to the U.S. Senate.

Voters expanded that majority in 2018, and now we are fulfilling the duty we owe to those voters by voting on Judge Barrett's nomination.

My Democratic colleagues are also threatening to pack the Court if they take control of the Senate and White House. Just as Democrats misrepresented Judge Barrett's record, they are misrepresenting what it means to pack the Court.

Packing the Court means adding more seats to the Supreme Court and then immediately nominating and filling these new seats with radical liberal activists. They would add seats until there is an activist liberal majority on the court. And the reason is simple: they want the Court to legislate from the Bench and impose their socialist agenda on the country through fiat, instead of working through the Democratic process.

This would wholly undermine and delegitimize the Court. Justice Ginsburg agreed. She said that ``nine is a good number'' and that packing the Court is a bad idea.

Democrats need to be honest with the American people. The American people deserve to know where they stand on Court packing, and they deserve to know what liberal activist judges Joe Biden would nominate if he were President.

Personally, I am thankful Judge Barrett was willing to answer the call to serve our country. Just like Justice Ginsburg was an inspiration to so many, Justice Barrett will be a role model for young women, like my two granddaughters, who may one day aspire to go to law school or serve their country.

I look forward to voting soon to confirm her, and I would ask all my colleagues to join me and do the same.

Thank you. I yield back.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source