Associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States signed by 18 senators as follows. Mcconnell, ernst, smith, blackburn, ouppercaseletter, wicker, ran, purdue, cotton, f for, alexander. Mr. President. Majority leader. My First Experience with Supreme Court confirmations here in the senate, i was a young staffer the number of the judiciary committee, that is also the same time climate a young guy named alexander who just left the senate to go to the whitego house for congressional affairs. Ive had the opportunity for quite a long time to observe the confirmation process to various ups and downs, periods when nominees were confirmed almost overwhelmingly and here in which they were hated over nomination. I could safely say about the senate, over the last 40 or 50 years, it is unassertive. Doing the whole process as a joint thing, the president had a role to play and the senate has a role to play. The various times in our history in our country, the senate has been pretty passive about it and other times, theyve been pretty aggressive for the constitution is clear, the senate has a role if it chooses to exercise it. Rarely have we ever had a nominee as extraordinary as the one we have before us right now. Weve had a chance to witness this outstanding nominee, we watched the committee, demonstrated the deep legal expertise, judicial temperament and sheert intellectual rhorsepower of the American People deserve to have on the Supreme Court. Last week, we saw my fellow legal scholars call judge barrett conscientious lawyer and brilliant will analyze and decide cases in good faith and they say she is tailor made. Made for this job. We saw her former law clerks, students call her quote a woman of integrity and role model for generations to come. We saw the american bar association, and institutions the democratic leader is called the gold standard. Judge barrett well qualified to sit on the Supreme Court and they heard while the Legal Professionals have found behind that rating called her listen to this, a staggering academic mi mind. The chair of the Standing Committee on the federal judiciary told the committee directly that with individuals in the Legal Profession and community who know judge barre barrett, whether for a few years or decades, not one person, not one uttered a negative word about her character. This outstanding nominee is exceptionally suited to this j job. I know we all know that. Shes an exceptional nominee to the Supreme Court will make the senate and the country exceedingly proud. There are a few around to have experienced this up close and personal and i am one of them. Those of you who have followed parts of history from the outside and now you are making history. It is a matter of fact, a matter of history that it was senate contemporary difficulties with judicial nominations in 1987. It initiated every meaningful escalation, every single one of them from then up until the present day. Every escalation was initiated by the other side. 1987, kennedy and friends introduced the country to this america. The first effort to smear a fully qualified judicial nominee based on insulting, apocalyptic scare tactics. Even some of the people directly involved, democrats, by the way, say they regret that moment and what it has unleashed in the years since. In the early 2000s, it was democrats who willfully invented a brandnew strategy to make brandnew ideology and not just qualifications. Unacceptable criteria for president ial nominees. I remember r reading in the eary part of bush 43s first term seminar conveyed by the democratic leader and invited a couple of scholars to come talk to them to the appropriateness beginning to use every tool in the toolbox. It was always possible to filibuster judges, it just wasnt done. There are plenty of things you could do that you dont do because somebody wants it done and the best example was the Clarence Thomas nomination, there can be a more controversial nomination. Chairman of the judiciary committee, joe biden and it was about as aggressive as it getst. It made the treatment look like childs play. Committee reported justice thomas, and even vote even. As we all know, it only takes one of 100 senators to make you get 60. Just one. Only one to get the senate in a place where you have to get 60 votes. Te the tradition of dealing with traditional nominees for the simple majority was so strong that not one democrat, not one required 60 votes on claims thomas. In case you dont remember on this confirmation was 5248. Once editor out of 100 could have denied claims thomas of his career on the Supreme Court. Thats how strong it was. Dealing with judiciarys in a simple majority way. And bush 43, my colleagues and democrat at this meeting apparently was lawrence, i am paraphrasing, im sure, predicting all these crazy right wing would be set up by bush 43. We use every tool in the toolbox whether its used for or not, to stop judicial nominees. Democrats used a brandnew tool, partisan filibuster to block the nominee after another, whose nominations nobody disputed. In her own confirmation hearing years later, now Justice Elena kagan, without away, a name some nf you may not be familiar with who got here recently, what happened qualified to sit on the d. C. Circuit and would have been qualified to sit on the plane court. He became the poster child for this new process invented by the democratic leader and his colleagues to routinely filibuster judges. It was written that might provide for bush 43, the first hispanic Supreme Court justice and of course they didnt want that to happen. Democrats filibuster him seven separate times in 2003. He is one of the many victims of this form shattering breaking behavior. If you years later, colleague such as senator biden, lahey, schumer tried to filibuster the nomination to the Supreme Court. Fortunately, it was not successful. Then something really funny happened. Something really funny happened. All of a sudden there was a new president. President obama. Suddenly, the democratic president was making judicial nominations. Well, imagine what happened then suddenly summit democrats became very allergic to experiencing the effects of what they start started. The effects of their own playbook. They had no patience to taste their own medicine. None whatsoever. Colleagues did not appreciate, what was created just a few years before. The shoe was on the other foot. We all know what happened next. Another Massive Senate escalation by Senate Democrats in 2013, they both changed the senate rules for the democratic president would not have to play by the sameho rules they had invented. Shortly before. With the 51 vote threshold in place, democrats began confirming nominees without meaningful minority support. I said at t the time, quoting myself, they regret it a lot sooner than they would think. That regret again in 2016. In 2016 with Justice Scalia republicans won our majority a year later. As i said then, when i recommended to all of you that we not fill the vacancy created in the middle of a president ial Election Year, you have to go back to 1888 to find the last time senate of a Different Party from the president confirmed the Supreme Court nominee was created during the president ial year. Not surprisingly, one party in control of the senate was less inclined and had been less inclined for a very long time. Confirm Supreme Court nominee in the middle of the president ial Election Year. Within the rights of the senate to do that, because what had clearly developed over the years the senate viewed itself as a partner, a partner in the process. We get to decide whether to act on the nomination. Needless to say, after the unprecedented senate staff that Senate Democrats have taken Republican Senate majority was not much inclined to depart and was a obama favor. Our decision in 2016 was fully in line was president , falling within the constitution and completely within the senate rules. I understand why they didnt like it i wouldnt have either. Of course they didnt like it. But elections have consequences and america had chosen a report and senate in 2014. But theres no parallel between actually breaking the rules as the democrats did in 2013 and merely applying the rules in ways democrats didnt like. The difference between breaking the rules and applying the rules in ways the democrats did not like, if the senate is going to function, we must maintain a distinction between when people break the rules and when they apply the rules in ways we may not like. President trump in 2016, and it democrats took another unprecedented step, amounted the first ever successful partisan filibuster of the Supreme Court nominee, that has not been known before. Tried it before and it didnt succeed, try to on gorsuch and it did. The message was, in effect, nobody who nominates President Trump is going to get 60 votes for the Supreme Court. No matter how qualified. Of course, speaking of qualifications, Justice Gorsuch qualifications were simply beyond question. Someone who has gone on to issue some rulings, by the way, with these guys over here like. It shows you predicting the Supreme Court justice is going to rule on has been hazardous guess most of the time. Their apocalyptic trust, productions about what is going to happen with nominees of republican president s has been consistent going back to john paul, every single one of them will be a disaster for women and minorities and all the rest, none of which of course ever materialize. Republicans applied and extended what Senate Democrats have begun in 2013, theyve left out the Supreme Court from being dealt with as a simple majority. Ealt so we decided we are going to return to where the judicial calendar was by practice, just a few years ago, it was always dealt with with a simple majority. The thomas nomination proves it. That was the custom year until our friends on the other side decided to start a new custom within the rules, but a new custom. All my friends, all the happened of the threshold being lowered, we are back to where we were as recently as thomas. Calendar is that with with a simple majority. I think it is better for the country and they will benefit from that, to, at some time. When you have a president and a senate of the same party, obviously this will happen quicker. Thats the way its always been with of the rule allowed the filibuster or not. Ironically, we are back to where we were the entire executive calendar will not be dealt with as it was a few years ago before all of this back and forth with the simple majority. Obviously Justice Gorsuch was confirmed on a bipartisan basis once the executive calendar was returned finally to simple majority. Then justice kavanaugh, despite the horrific and embarrassing display some of our senateng colleagues aided and abetted, we made it through that. The good news is, and about 72 hours, i anticipate we will have a third new associate justice of the Supreme Court. About 72 hours. I do not blame some of my democratic colleagues who were not present for all of this, who behavee senate would differently but just know this, this is not spent, this is fact. Just know this, every new escalation, every new step, every new shattered president , every one of them, was initiated over there. No exceptions. Every one of t them. It all happened over the suggestion of republicans who tried, in each instance, to stop democrats from trading way longterm senate norms for shortterm political winds. Seventeen years ago, 17 years ago, democrats were posting to newspapers about this brandnew campaign to politicize judicial confirmations. They thought was a great idea, bragged about. One of my colleagues called themselves the filibuster, probably wanted to own it. Well, later, the shoe is always on the other foot. I hope our calling from new york is happy with what hes built, i hope hes happy with where his ingenuity has gone the senate, weve had this argument over and over for months. If not, years. This is not really what we are here to debate today. We are here to consider an Outstanding Company whose qualifications nobody doubts. Judge Amy Coney Barrett. So c colleagues, lest lets getn with it. Lets do our job. Lets rediscover the treatment of nominations of the democratic leader embarked on a deliberate project 20 years ago to erase. We will give this nominee the vote she deserves no later than monday. I i yield the floor. Is no justification when the rights of the American People are at stake. The republican majority is steering the senate towards one of the lowest moments long history. Republican majority is on the precipice of making a colossal and historic mistake and the damage it does to this chamber will be irrevocable. After thwarting the constitutional prerogative of a duly elected democratic president to appoint a Supreme Courtjustice because it was an Election Year , the republican majority is rushing to confirm a justice for a republican president one week before election day. Consistency . Afraid not. You dont havethe right to argue consistency when youre doing what youre doing now. Four short years ago, all of our republican friends argued that it was a principal, that was the word they nused. Principal to let the American People have a voice in the selection of a Supreme Court justice because an election was eightmonths away. Those same republicans are preparing to confirm a justice with an election that is tieight days away. In the process, the majority has trampled over norms, rules, standards, honor, values, any of them that could possibly stand in its monomaniacal pursuit to put someone on the court who will take away the rights of so many americans. The republican majority of course ignored Health Guidelines to conduct in person hearings in the middle of the pandemic after republican members of the committee themselves and contracted covid19. It has broken Longstanding Senate president , never in the history of the Senate Despite any analysis of recent history, never as a Supreme Court nominee, a lifetime appointment been consideredtmso close to an election. Presiding officer of the Senate Confirmed this yesterday in response to the senators inquiry. Never in the history of the senate as a Supreme Court nomineebeen confirmed after july of an Election Year. My friends, it is the hallmark of democracy might does not make right. The Republican Senate is blatantly ignoring this principle. Here in leader mcconnell senate, the majority lives by the rules of because we can. They completely ignore the question of whether they should. The Supreme Court nominee will be confirmed on a partyline vote after the rules were changed to allow it. Now it doesnt matter that an election is just a short time away. Its a complete contradiction of the supposedly principle that same party so be him argued only four years ago. Again, eight days. Eight days before an election in which the American People will choose exactly who they want to pick Supreme Court justices for them. For the republican leader, to argue for consistency using his convoluted version of history is laughable. It is absurd, it is outrageous. It is a stain on the spot. And an indelible mark on this senate majority. In short, the Senate Republican majority is conducting the most rushed, most partisan and least legitimate process in the entire history of Supreme Court nominations. And democrats will not lend an ounce of legitimacy to the process. Yesterday, the seat of the democratic members of the judiciary remained vacant in that committee room. In their place, for the reminders of what is ultimately at stake. In this nomination. The fundamental rights of the American People. Its not democrat or republican or who did this when and who did not win. It is therights of the American People , what America Needs and what judge barrett has stood for on these issues in the past that is ultimatelywhat matters. On the seats of those democratic members were photographs of americans whose lives would be devastated if a Justice Barrett delivers the decisive vote. To strike down the Affordable Care act. Ripping away healthcare from tens of millions of americans and eliminating protections for more than 130 million americans with preexisting conditions. You could imagine alongside their basis the faces of women who cherished the right to make their own private medical decisions. The faces of lgbt human americans who want to marry who they love. And not be fired yfor who they are. The faces of American Workers who are breaking their backs to make ends meet. Need their union to help them get a better wage. The faces of young people who know that the planet is in peril in their lifetimes. I hope that when republican members of the senate think about this nomination they will think about those faces. Whats this nomination means to them, hundreds of millions of americans who will lose rights. And fundamental things they need to make their lives better. Because of this nomination. Its not about qualifications, its about what the American People need and want and will and unelected body take those rights away from them. I hope my will think about that. Take a moment. Take a moment to think about it. And then think about what it says about this sham of the process and the passion that we on this side of the island about protecting those peoples rights that we were forced to take the extraordinary step of refusing to participate in this process. Because while they may realize it or not, our republican majorities monomaniacal drive to confirm this justice in the most critical most is inconsistent of circumstances will forever defile the senate and even more importantly, curtail the fundamental rights of the American People. For generations. To come. Democrats will play no part in that. I yield the floor. Class after a number of folks today and delaying the debate on judge Amy Coney Barrett for the us Supreme Court, the senate has recessed until tomorrow when other senators get a chance to offer their thoughts on thenomination. The debate will continue into sunday when a vote is expected in the afternoon on limiting debate 230 hours so that a final confirmation vote can take place on monday. Live coverage of that debate here on cspan2 resuming tomorrow at noon eastern and you can find all the hearings and debate on Amy Coney Barrett up to this point at cspan. Org