-9999

Floor Speech

I gave a speech on the Senate floor just about an hour ago, talking about a remarkable breach of Senate protocol, where the White House won't let certain Senators from the Court of Appeals of the Ninth Circuit States to meet with the nominees for the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

That is an outrage. In my entire time in the U.S. Senate, every time I have requested to meet with a judge who is going for confirmation to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, I have had the opportunity to meet with that judge, and it is really important.

I am not going to repeat the argument I made just an hour ago, but there is a simple solution here: We get to meet with the nominees whom we are debating on the Senate floor this week, and I certainly will lift the objection that I am about to make on these two nominees for the Court of Federal Claims.

But I do want to just push back on my good friend from Rhode Island a little bit. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle forced votes on the Court of Federal Claims nominees during the Trump administration, including Judge Solomon, who literally wrote the book on the Court of Federal Claims.

So here is the thing. What often happens in the Senate is that what goes around comes around. But what happened today, when I was requesting what I have always been requesting--what my constituents in Alaska expect me to do is to interview, meet, discuss issues with the judge who is going to get life tenure, who is going to have enormous power over my constituents--Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals judges.

I don't know anybody who has heard this--that the White House Counsel says: No, you are a Senator doing advice and consent, a constitutional duty, and we are forbidding you to meet with a judge going through the confirmation process who is going to have enormous power over your constituents. That is unheard of since I have been here. And, by the way, I talked to the Trump administration's White House Counsel, and they said they never did that.

But here is the point. This could be easily solved. I am sure Mr. Bonilla and Ms. Lerner are qualified. All I need is a call from the White House Counsel's office saying: You know what, Senator, you can meet with the nominees for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. We are going to let you do your constitutional duty.

Well, thank you--pretty simple.

And I think working closely with my colleague from Rhode Island, as I have done throughout my career--and he is on the Judiciary Committee. So maybe he can help convince the White House to take a bit of a different stand when a Senator wants to meet with a judge who is going to have enormous power over his constituents and have lifetime tenure. And they can't take an hour out of their time? Heck, in my speech just an hour ago, I put out my office's phone number and said to these judges: Look, you don't have to have permission from the White House Counsel. Just call me. Let's have a discussion.

I am trying to do my constitutional duty here.

I have a simpler solution here, and I have already mentioned it.

The White House has denied my ability to meet with one Ninth Circuit judge who just got confirmed. Let me meet with the next two, and then we will UC these. We will UC these nominees whom Senator Whitehouse has been trying to move forward tonight.

I also want to mention to my colleague from Rhode Island that I am certainly more than amenable to working with him on a principle that, I think, all Senators should agree on--all of us--to strengthen this institution, whether you are a Democrat, a Republican. That is this simple idea, which I thought existed here because I have certainly been able to do it: If a judge is up for confirmation, a circuit judge, and if you are a Senator representing one of the States in the circuit and that judge is going to have enormous power over your constituents for life, we should, as a general rule, as a general principle, say always: Of course, you get to meet with that judge. Of course, you can do your constitutional advice and consent duty.

I would be for it for any Democrat who wants it if there is a Republican. Again, I talked to some folks from the Trump administration today. They said that they always offered that. So maybe there is a misunderstanding. I don't want to say that my Senate colleague from Rhode Island is not right or those guys. I don't know. That is what they mentioned to me.

I just think, as a principle, every Senator here should agree with it. Why wouldn't you want to do that?

Like I said, until today, I have met with every single Ninth Circuit judge whom we voted on in my entire career here. Now, it has been a relatively short career, but this is really important to the people I represent because that court is really important to the people I represent. The Ninth Circuit so frequently gets the law wrong as it relates to Alaska, and it negatively impacts my constituents. This is important.

It is a real simple ask.

And the fact that the White House Counsel hasn't even called me back--a U.S. Senator trying to do his constitutional duty, advice and consent of the Senate? The Senator from Rhode Island and I are of the Senate.

So why don't we work on this principle that, if there is a nominee, a circuit judge nominee, and if a Senator from a State in that circuit wants to meet with that nominee--to do his constitutional duty--that we should all agree to do that no matter who is in the White House. I would agree to that principle in a heartbeat.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source