Judicial Understaffing Delays Getting Emergencies Solved Act of 2024

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding me the time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to S. 4199.

You don't get to pick the horse after that horse has already won the race, but that is exactly what my Republican colleagues are seeking to do today.

S. 4199 was bipartisan until just over a month ago. It was a bill that I was proud to support, and it is one that I have been fighting for because there is no question that we need more Federal judgeships. We have been fighting this battle for years.

We haven't been able to pass a comprehensive bill on judgeships in over three decades because my friends on the other side of the aisle want to strangle the judicial system and privatize it, want to do forced arbitration, and want to clog up the courts. Then, when my colleagues do get a chance to appoint judges to the court, and Justices, Republicans appoint rightwing extreme ideologues to the bench.

When we look at the appointments that Donald Trump has announced so far, people like Stephen Miller, Matt Gaetz, Robert Kennedy, Pam Bondi, and Kash Patel, it is clear that Trump has said and has acted in ways to pervert the justice system.

Mr. Speaker, S. 4199 would give this incoming President 25 appointments to the Federal judiciary of extreme rightwing ideologues. It is just not something that is appropriate for us to support at this particular time, given his track record.

Mr. Speaker, we could have passed this bill before the lameduck session. In fact, that was what the intent was. It was to pass this legislation before the next President was known. That was why the bill passed the Senate by unanimous consent.

Since the Senate passed the bill before the election, they adhered to the precept that we would pass this without knowing who the incoming President would be. The Senate did its job. It held up to its end of the bargain and sent this bill to us way back in August, before the election.

When S. 4199 arrived in the House, Republican leadership injected politics right back into the bill. The majority tried to do a McConnell-type move here. My colleagues refused to bring the bill up before the election, despite our pleadings that this bill must pass in September to avoid politics and honor the agreement on the unknown next President, just as the Senate did.

Mr. Speaker, it is not about honoring the agreement or fairness, but it is about guaranteeing an outcome that will be in the majority's favor.

We stand here today knowing who the next President will be. That means that one party now will have a significant advantage under this bill. This is the exact outcome we intended to avoid. It is because of that broken promise that I can no longer support this bill.

I do not take this position lightly. Our judiciary is in dire need of independent judges who will make reasoned decisions based on the law, but if Republicans think giving 25 more district court seats to Trump is going to fix the problem, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are sadly mistaken.

Bringing this bill to the floor after the election isn't fair and is not right, and this is rigging the game in the majority's favor. It makes it political. It brings McConnell into the House.

I can't, in good conscience, support this bill, so I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source