Nomination of William H. Pryor, Jr., to be United States Circuit Judge

EXECUTIVE SESSION

NOMINATION OF WILLIAM H. PRYOR, JR., TO BE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE

Mr. DURBIN. In the absence of the chairman, I will say a word or two about the nomination.

At the outset, I will say this may be the toughest part of this job-standing in judgment of other people. It is easy to deal with issues and abstractions and numbers and policy. But when you stand in judgment of another person, I think it is one of our most solemn responsibilities, complicated even more by the fact that many of the people who are in controversy here have very close friends in the Senate among my colleagues. In this case, my friend and colleague, Senator Sessions of Alabama, I believe counts William Pryor as one of his close friends. They have worked together for many years.

I can tell you, from his statements in committee and on the floor, he is totally committed to him and believes he would be a fine circuit court judge. That is why opposition to his nomination is all that much more difficult.

I come here today to oppose his nomination because, frankly, as I listened carefully to Attorney General Pryor's positions on the issues in the Judiciary Committee, it struck me that on issue after issue he has not only taken an extreme position but has been unashamed, unabashed, and unembarrassed to express it in some of the clearest language we have had before us. You have to ask yourself, if he is that strident, if he is that committed to these extreme positions, can he possibly perform his responsibilities as a member of the circuit court of appeals-a lifetime appointment-in the way that we expect?

We don't want judges to make laws but, rather, to interpret them. When somebody comes to this position with a long history and pedigree of taking these strongly held, extreme positions on the law, is it reasonable for us to believe they will cast them aside once taking the oath of office and then be dispassionate in the way they rule? I think that really strains credulity.

There are some who believe that if a nominee comes before us and says, "I will just apply the law," that is all we need to hear; that we can ignore what they have done beforehand. You cannot do that. You have to make an honest assessment.

We find time and again that nominees for the Federal circuit court-the second level before the Supreme Court-are those nominees with the strong ideological backgrounds. They are the ones who have run into controversy and trouble on the Senate floor.

I believe that this White House, if it wanted to, could focus more on finding common ground between Republicans and Democrats. We expect to receive conservative Republican nominees for all of these vacancies. That is a reflection of the President's philosophy.

In the case of Attorney General William Pryor, this goes beyond mainstream conservatism. Some of the things he has said relative to issues relating to judicial activism and the like are difficult for us to reconcile with the person who we want to be fair and dispassionate in his rulings.

Mr. Pryor stated:

Our real last hope for federalism is the election of Governor George W. Bush as President of the United States, who has said his favorite justices are Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

He went on to say:

Although the ACLU would argue that it is unconstitutional for me as a public official to do this in a Government building, let alone a football game, I will end my prayer for the next administration, "Please, God, no more Souters."

That is a reference to Supreme Court Justice Souter. These remarks don't lend themselves to the argument that Attorney General Pryor is going to be measured and moderate and fair if he is given this lifetime appointment to the circuit bench.

I have looked at his record on a variety of issues and I can tell you that, time and time again, what I have seen is a position that is hard to reconcile with the standard we should set for all judges to this position.

I yield the floor.