Executive Session

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
SENATE
PAGE S14683
Nov. 12, 2003
[Page S14683]

Executive Session

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I yield myself such time as I might consume.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry: Can the distinguished Senator from Iowa-we were told to come here at certain times, and if he were to take as much as he wishes, that would preclude any other Senator speaking in the time period.

Mr. GRASSLEY. I yield to the Senator whatever time he needs.

Mr. WARNER. I withdraw my parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. GRASSLEY. I yield the Senator whatever time he wants.

Mr. WARNER. I will sit down. The Senator may go ahead.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the Democrats' filibuster of President Bush's judicial nominees. The Senate Democrats still think it is Halloween and are trying to spook us into believing that President Bush has nominated a bunch of extremist individuals that cannot be good judges. The Democrats are claiming that these nominees are "outside of the mainstream". The truth is that these individuals will not implement a liberal agenda on the bench. The truth is that these individuals will follow the law, rather than bend to the will of the political left. But these inside the Beltway, left wing groups have gotten the Democrats to do their bidding. They have hijacked the judicial confirmation process in an unprecedented filibuster of judicial nominees, and they are denying these good men and women an up or down vote. Federal judicial seats will remain unfilled, and litigants seeking justice from those courts can expect further delays.

The reality is that the Constitution of the United States gives the President the power to appoint individuals to seats on the Federal judiciary. The Constitution gives the Senate the responsibility to advise the President in this process. And the Constitution requires the Senate, by a simple majority

[Page S14684]

vote, to give its consent to the President's choices for Federal judgeships, or to withhold that consent. But through an unjust abuse of the filibuster, a minority of Senators is preventing the majority of the Senate from taking an up or down vote on President Bush's judicial nominee. That is not right.

I have always been of the position that judicial nominees should be carefully scrutinized by the Judiciary Committee because they are life-time appointments. It is my opinion that judicial nominees should have intellect, experience, character and integrity. They should also have the right judgment and temperament for the job. But most importantly, they should understand their role on the bench, which is to interpret the law and to follow the law, not to make the law and legislate from the bench. That is the most important credential in my book. And I take that job of looking at judicial nominees very seriously.

However, once the Senate Judiciary Committee has had the opportunity to review these candidates and to approve them, these individuals should get an up or down vote by the full Senate. This is the right process. This is a fair process. During my tenure with the United States Senate, I haven't always agreed with a sitting President's choices for the Federal bench. I have voted against a number of judicial nominees because I didn't believe they were qualified to be a judge, or because I didn't believe that a seat needed to be filled. But I have never filibustered a judicial nominee.

But that is just what is happening right now. We are seeing the unprecedented use of the filibuster rule to stop judicial nominees from being confirmed. An exceptional group of men and women are being used for political gain by this minority group of Senators. The nominees that the Senate is considering right now, Janice Rogers Brown, Carolyn Kuhl, and Priscilla Owen, as well as Bill Pryor and Charles Pickering, two nominees that have been filibustered, they all are distinguished individuals that deserve an up or down vote. They all deserve to be confirmed.

Let me say a few words about the men and woman that are being filibustered. These men and women are being characterized as outside of the mainstream, extremist people. They are being characterized as "bad judges" that have to be stopped. Nothing is further than the truth. The reality is that some left-wing interest groups are skewering these nominees' reputations with baseless allegations because they don't have a liberal ideology. And the Senate Democrats are more than happy to do the bidding of these racial outside groups. And our nation will suffer dearly for it.

Priscilla Owen is currently a judge on the Texas Supreme Court. She was unanimously rated well qualified by the ABA and enjoys a steller reputation in her home state. She's been repeatedly reelected to the Texas Supreme Court by wide margins and has served that court admirably. Judge Owen enjoys the support of her two home state Senators and has been endorsed over and over again by elected officials, fellow jurists, and attorneys alike.

Janice Rogers Brown, the daughter of a share cropper who attended segregated schools, put herself through California State University and eventually law school at UCLA. She did all this while raising two children as a single mother. She served her state in a variety of legal roles, including Deputy Attorney General and then later as a legal affairs secretary to the Governor. Judge Brown has served on the California Supreme Court since 1996.

Carolyn Kuhl has been a judge on the Los Angeles County Superior Court since 1995. She served in a variety of positions in the Justice Department, and then was a partner at a prominent Los Angeles law firm. Judge Kurl received a well qualified rating by the ABA, and enjoys bipartisan support.

Three other highly respectable nominees have already been filibustered. Bill Pryor has earned the reputation as one of the most experienced states attorneys general in the country. He graduated from law school magna cum laude, and clerked for Fifth Circuit Judge Wisdom. We have seen that he enforces the law regardless of his personal convictions. General Pryor also has overwhelming support from across the political spectrum.

Judge Charles Pickering has been a lawyer and county prosecutor, and has served as a distinguished federal district court judge for the past 11 years. He received the ABA's highest rating, "well qualified." He stood up against the Ku Klux Klan, and has been a leader for equal rights, integration and inclusion in his community. The people that know Judge Pickering best support him without hesitation.

Finally we have Miguel Estrada, who was nominated to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. He become so frustrated with the process that he withdrew his nomination after waiting over 2 years for an up of down vote. Yet he is the true American inspiration story. Born in Honduras, he came to America as a young boy and through determination and hard work, elevated to the top echelons of the law profession. He was an Assistant Solicitor General of the United States in the Clinton Administration, and was a partner in a prominent law firm. Mr. Estrada received the highest rating from the American Bar Association, and is well respected by colleagues and friends alike.

It is a real shame that this fine man felt he had to withdraw his nomination from consideration because of the guerilla smear tactics of the far left and because of the guerilla smear tactics of the far left and because of the Democrats' unprecedented filibuster tactic. And it is a real shame that these other fine men and women, and their families, have to go through this same miserable saga. As I think about these nominees with their stellar reputations, outstanding intellects, and their compelling life stories, it saddens me to know that the Democrats have been so ready and willing to stomp all over their good names and to deny the American people quality jurists-all this in the name of carrying the sword for special left wing interest groups.

I have served in this body for many years. And I have seen the filibuster used to leverage a better bargaining position on legislative matters. But it hasn't been used to block a judicial nominee, and especially not where that nominee enjoys majority support by the Senate. This is the first time in history that the filibuster has been used to prevent a judicial confirmation, even though my colleagues on the other aisle say that isn't the case. It is wrong and probably unconstitional. It is an abuse of the process. The Senate is supposed to provide advice and consent. The Democrats are denying the rest of the Senate our responsibility under the Constitution to give our consent-or even to withhold our consent. It is a terrible disgrace and ought not to continue.

The Democrats are leading us down a path that is just going to make matters worse. The judicial confirmation process is already in an unhealthy state of repair-we don't need to destroy it altogether. The Democrats need to stop playing politics with the judiciary. They need to stop spooking people about the qualifications and ability of these nominees to be good federal judges. They need to stop spooking away qualified nominees like Miguel Estrada. We need to stop this unjust filibuster and give these worthy nominees what they deserve-an up or down vote.

I yield the floor. I yield whatever time the Senator from Virginia needs.