Executive Session

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PAUL. Madam President, I rise to oppose the nomination of anyone who advocates for the executive branch killing American citizens not involved in combat without trial. I strongly believe any nominee who rubberstamps and grants such power to a President is not worthy of being placed one step away from the Supreme Court. It isn't about seeing the memos, it is about what they say and how they disrespect the Bill of Rights.

Due process can't exist in secret. Checks and balances can't exist in one branch of government. Whether it be upon the advice of one lawyer or 10,000 lawyers, if they all work for one man, the President, how can there be anything but a verdict outside the law, a verdict that could conceivably be subject to the emotions of prejudice and fear, a verdict that could be wrong?

The nomination before us is about a nominee who supports killing American citizens not engaged in combat without a trial. These memos don't limit drone executions to one individual, they become historic precedent for killing citizens abroad.

Barron's arguments for extrajudicial killing of American citizens challenges over 1,000 years of jurisprudence. It is quite simple; an accusation is different from a conviction, and due process is different from internal deliberations. The executive can accuse, but it cannot try and it cannot convict someone.

Critics will argue, but these are evil people who plot against and plan to kill Americans. I understand that. My first instinct is--similar to most Americans--to immediately want to punish these traitors. The question is, How do we decide guilt? Aren't we, in a way, betraying our country's principles when we relinquish the right to trial by jury?

Due process can't exist in secret. Checks and balances can't exist within one branch of government. If we can't defend the right to a trial for the most heinous crimes, then where will the slippery slope lead us?

Critics ask how we will try these people overseas. The Constitution holds the answer. They should be tried for treason. If they refuse to return home, they should be tried in absentia and provided a legal defense. If they are found guilty, the method of punishment is not the issue. The issue is, and always has been, the right to a trial, the presumption of innocence, and the guarantee of due process to everyone no matter how heinous the crime.

For these reasons I cannot support the nomination of David Barron. I cannot and will not support a lifetime appointment for someone who believes it is OK to kill American citizens not involved in combat without a trial.

I yield back my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source