[Senate Document 109-7]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




109th Congress                 SENATE DOCUMENT          S.Doc 109-007 
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 
              THE HONORABLE WILLIAM H. REHNQUIST    1924-2005


                                WILLIAM H. REHNQUIST

                         CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE UNITED STATES

                                  MEMORIAL TRIBUTES

                                       IN THE

                            CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES

                     


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 23500.001


William H. Rehnquist






Photograph by Dane Penland, Smithsonian Institution
Courtesy the Supreme Court of the United States



                                WILLIAM H. REHNQUIST

                         CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE UNITED STATES

                                  MEMORIAL TRIBUTES

                                       IN THE

                            CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES

                     


                            Compiled under the direction

                                       of the

                             Joint Committee on Printing

                                Trent Lott, Chairman
                                 Order for Printing

               Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that 
             Senators be permitted to submit tributes to Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist for the Record until September 30, 2005, and 
             that all tributes be printed as a Senate document.
                                      FOREWORD

               For more than 33 years on the Supreme Court of the 
             United States, William H. Rehnquist stood his ground, 
             insisting on both institutional vigor and constitutional 
             rigor. Echoing Alexander Hamilton's call for the 
             ``complete independence of the courts,'' Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist consistently and directly defended judicial 
             independence as the ``crown jewel'' and the ``touchstone'' 
             of our constitutional system of government.
               Yet Chief Justice Rehnquist did not see judicial 
             independence merely as an end in itself, as a license for 
             judges to do as they wished, but as a means to an end. In 
             his 19th and final annual report assessing the state of 
             the judiciary, he wrote: ``The Constitution protects 
             judicial independence not to benefit judges, but to 
             promote the rule of law.'' Thankfully, he stood for the 
             judiciary using its independence properly to fulfill its 
             limited, but essential, role in our system of government.
               Indeed, Chief Justice Rehnquist stood for a judiciary 
             that would do only what it was supposed to do. Like the 
             legislative and executive branches, the judiciary is, 
             after all, part of a system of government and can only be 
             understood as such. In one dissenting opinion, Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist described the judiciary's role in that 
             system this way: ``The Court's role as a final expositor 
             of the Constitution is well established, but its role as a 
             Platonic guardian admonishing those responsible to public 
             opinion as if they were truant schoolchildren has no 
             similar place in our system of government.''
               One of Chief Justice Rehnquist's many former law clerks 
             who now populate law school faculties recently wrote in 
             tribute that ``[r]unning through his opinions on any 
             number of issues . . . is a commitment to the notion that 
             our Constitution leaves the hard questions, generally 
             speaking, to the people.'' When judges stick to judging, 
             in other words, legislators must do the legislating. I 
             think Chief Justice Rehnquist would say that is as it 
             should be.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist's legacy will live on in many 
             ways. The James E. Rogers College of Law at the University 
             of Arizona has already established the William H. 
             Rehnquist Center on the Constitutional Structures of 
             Government. Not surprisingly, one of its three primary 
             themes will be judicial independence.
               First as Associate and then as Chief Justice, William H. 
             Rehnquist touched the judiciary, the country, and the law. 
             But as a human being, he also touched many lives. In his 
             2000 commencement address at George Washington University 
             Law School, he painted a picture for the talented and 
             ambitious graduates of a life that includes ``pastimes and 
             occupations that many can enjoy simultaneously--love for 
             another, being a good parent to a child, service to your 
             community.'' Such choices, he said, ``will determine how 
             well spent you think your life is when you look back at 
             it.''
               The tributes contained in this book come from Members of 
             the Senate and House, from both political parties. They 
             testify to the profound impact that William H. Rehnquist's 
             choices have had on the law and on the life of our Nation.

                                        The Honorable Orrin G. Hatch,  
                        Member, Senate Committee on the Judiciary      
                                      CONTENTS
             Order for Printing....................................
                                                                    iii
             Foreword..............................................
                                                                      v
             Biography.............................................
                                                                     ix
             Proceedings in the Senate:
                Tributes by Senators:
                    Allen, George, of Virginia.....................
                                                                 57, 62
                    Baucus, Max, of Montana........................
                                                                     50
                    Boxer, Barbara, of California..................
                                                                     24
                    Brownback, Sam, of Kansas......................
                                                                     43
                    Carper, Thomas R., of Delaware.................
                                                                     42
                    Coleman, Norm, of Minnesota....................
                                                                     48
                    Conrad, Kent, of North Dakota..................
                                                                     27
                    Cornyn, John, of Texas.........................
                                                                     32
                    Corzine, Jon S., of New Jersey.................
                                                                      5
                    Craig, Larry E., of Idaho......................
                                                                     42
                    Dayton, Mark, of Minnesota.....................
                                                                     47
                    Dole, Elizabeth, of North Carolina.............
                                                                     64
                    Durbin, Richard, of Illinois...................
                                                                     19
                    Enzi, Michael B., of Wyoming...................
                                                                     29
                    Feingold, Russell D., of Wisconsin.............
                                                                     30
                    Frist, William H., of Tennessee 
                     ......................................
                                                        3, 4, 6, 41, 48
                    Gregg, Judd, of New Hampshire..................
                                                                     43
                    Hagel, Chuck, of Nebraska......................
                                                                 32, 58
                    Hatch, Orrin G., of Utah.......................
                                                                 24, 57
                    Hutchison, Kay Bailey, of Texas................
                                                                     28
                    Isakson, Johnny, of Georgia....................
                                                                     57
                    Jeffords, James M., of Vermont.................
                                                                     39
                    Kyl, Jon, of Arizona...........................
                                                                     35
                    Martinez, Mel, of Florida......................
                                                                     47
                    McCain, John, of Arizona.......................
                                                                     37
                    McConnell, Mitch, of Kentucky..................
                                                                 14, 60
                    Murray, Patty, of Washington...................
                                                                     49
                    Obama, Barack, of Illinois.....................
                                                                     38
                    Reid, Harry, of Nevada.........................
                                                                  4, 12
                    Sessions, Jeff, of Alabama.....................
                                                                     20
                    Specter, Arlen, of Pennsylvania................
                                                                     51
                    Stabenow, Debbie, of Michigan..................
                                                                     60
                    Stevens, Ted, of Alaska........................
                                                                     17
                    Voinovich, George V., of Ohio..................
                                                                     60
             Proceedings in the House of Representatives:
                Tributes by Representatives:
                    Berman, Howard L., of California...............
                                                                 74, 80
                    Carter, John R., of Texas ....................
                                        80, 86, 90, 91, 96, 97, 98, 100
                    Chabot, Steve, of Ohio.........................
                                                                     77
                    Coble, Howard, of North Carolina...............
                                                                     76
                    Davis, Tom, of Virginia........................
                                                                     79
                    DeLay, Tom, of Texas...........................
                                                                 67, 68
                    Franks, Trent, of Arizona 
                     ...............................................
                     ..........
                                                                 83, 97
                    Gohmert, Louie, of Texas 
                     .........................................
                                                     78, 87, 90, 97, 99
                    King, Steve, of Iowa 
                     ...............................................
                     .......
                                                        91, 97, 99, 102
                    Pearce, Stevan, of New Mexico..................
                                                                     68
                    Pelosi, Nancy, of California...................
                                                                     78
                    Schiff, Adam B., of California.................
                                                                    100
                    Sensenbrenner, F. James, Jr., of Wisconsin ..
                                             69, 70, 71, 76, 77, 78, 80
                    Wilson, Joe, of South Carolina.................
                                                                     69
             Memorial Service......................................
                                                                    103
                                      BIOGRAPHY

               William Hubbs Rehnquist was born October 1, 1924, in 
             Milwaukee, WI, the son of Margery Peck and William 
             Benjamin Rehnquist. He married Natalie Cornell of San 
             Diego, CA, and they had three children: James, born 1955; 
             Janet, born 1957; and Nancy, born 1959.
               Justice Rehnquist attended public elementary and high 
             schools in Shorewood, WI, a suburb of Milwaukee. He 
             received bachelor's and master's degrees from Stanford 
             University, where he was Phi Beta Kappa; a master's from 
             Harvard University, Order of the Coif; and his LL.B. from 
             Stanford University.
               He served in the U.S. Army Air Force in this country and 
             overseas from 1943 to 1946 and was discharged with the 
             rank of sergeant.
               From February 1952 to June 1953, he was clerk to the 
             Honorable Robert H. Jackson, Associate Justice of the 
             Supreme Court. He practiced law in Phoenix, AZ, from 1953 
             to 1969. He was engaged in a general practice of law with 
             primary emphasis on civil litigation. In January 1969 
             President Nixon appointed him to be Assistant Attorney 
             General in the Office of Legal Counsel. In 1972 he became 
             an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. In 1986 
             President Reagan nominated him to be Chief Justice.
               He contributed many articles on legal subjects to 
             various periodicals. He authored four books: ``The Supreme 
             Court: How It Was, How It Is''; ``Grand Inquests''; ``All 
             The Laws But One''; and ``Centennial Crisis: The Disputed 
             Election of 1876.''
               Chief Justice Rehnquist served on the Supreme Court with 
             distinction for 33 years.


                                 MEMORIAL TRIBUTES

                                         FOR

                                    CHIEF JUSTICE

                                WILLIAM H. REHNQUIST
                              Proceedings in the Senate
                                             Tuesday, September 6, 2005
                                       prayer
               The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, offered the following 
             prayer:
               Let us pray.
               Immortal, invisible, God only wise, You rule the Earth, 
             sea, and sky. As we deal with Hurricane Katrina's wake-up 
             call and the death of our 16th Supreme Court Chief 
             Justice, steady this great land. Make us grateful for the 
             acts of generosity and altruism we have seen in this 
             Nation and around the world.
               Help us to remember Your sovereignty as You lead us away 
             from the dead-end streets of pointing fingers to the 
             productive paths of self-examination.
               Like the canary in the mine, may these difficult days 
             warn us of the dangers of ignoring extreme disparities in 
             economic and social conditions. Forgive us when we cry 
             pathology in order to justify our own indifference. Help 
             us to build on this opportunity to work toward liberty and 
             justice for all.
               Use our Senators as agents of Your will. Give them 
             wisdom to know what is right and the courage to do it. As 
             we labor to strengthen freedom in other nations, open our 
             eyes to the invisible people on life's margins in America. 
             Hasten the day when justice will roll down like waters and 
             righteousness like a mighty stream.
               We pray in Your Holy Name. Amen.

               Mr. FRIST. . . . Tomorrow, I will have more to say about 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist and the nomination of Judge 
             Roberts for Chief Justice.
               Today, let me briefly say the Senate and the Nation 
             mourn the loss of the Chief, as he was affectionately 
             known by so many of us and known on the Supreme Court. We 
             will all miss Chief Justice Rehnquist--from his brilliant 
             legal mind to his efficient and effective administration 
             of the Supreme Court.
               We look forward with confidence as the President's new 
             nominee for Chief Justice, Judge Roberts, is considered. 
             Judge Roberts learned from the best. He was, in fact, a 
             clerk, as we all know, for then-Associate Justice 
             Rehnquist. There is no doubt in my mind that Judge Roberts 
             has the temperament, has the skill, and has the mind to 
             lead the Supreme Court for decades to come.
               With that, we have a lot to do. I know the Democratic 
             leader has a statement. Then we will have time this 
             afternoon after lunch for people to come back and make 
             statements as well.

               Mr. REID. Mr. President, much has happened in the weeks 
             since we adjourned for the August recess. In just the last 
             few days, we have seen tragedy strike the gulf coast and 
             learned that our friend, William Rehnquist, Chief Justice 
             of the United States, had passed. Our thoughts and our 
             prayers are with those struggling to pick up the pieces on 
             the gulf coast following the hurricane. And, of course, 
             our thoughts and prayers are with the Chief Justice's 
             family.
               I had the good fortune of working with the Chief on 
             several occasions, the first when I was head of the 
             Democratic Policy Committee. I told my Democratic Senators 
             I was going to ask the Chief Justice to come and talk to 
             us. They said he would never do that. I called him, and he 
             was happy to come. At that lunch, he displayed a great 
             command of the law, of course, a strong commitment to 
             judicial independence, and something that we didn't know 
             existed--a sharp sense of humor. Just a short time later, 
             I got to know him better when he presided over the 
             impeachment trial here in the Senate.
               I am grateful to have worked with him, and in addition 
             have spoken to him on the telephone on several occasions 
             at his office and at his home.
               As I have indicated, my condolences are with his family. 
             He will be missed. . . .

               Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, tomorrow the Senate will pay 
             its respects to the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist. 
             Senators will be able and are encouraged to make 
             statements tomorrow morning relating to the passing of 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist.
               We will be voting at noon tomorrow on a resolution which 
             expresses the sense of the Senate. The Senate will recess 
             during the funeral ceremonies as a further mark of 
             respect. As I mentioned earlier, we will begin 
             consideration of the Commerce, Justice and Science 
             appropriations bill on Thursday this week.

               Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, I rise today to offer my 
             sincere condolences to the family of Chief Justice William 
             H. Rehnquist and to recognize his achievements during a 
             lifetime of public service.
               Throughout his life, William H. Rehnquist served this 
             Nation with dignity and integrity, first in the Army Air 
             Corps during World War II and later as an Associate and 
             then Chief Justice on the U.S. Supreme Court. For 33 
             years, Chief Justice Rehnquist was a fixture on the Court, 
             and he demonstrated both a love and a respect for the 
             institution. He led the Judicial Conference of the United 
             States with distinction, advocating for judicial 
             independence during his 18-year tenure as Chief Justice. 
             And even as his health declined in recent years, Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist continued to lead the Court, a testament 
             to his tenacity and character.
               Although I did not always agree with his legal 
             decisions, I have deep respect for Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist's service to our Nation, and I join my 
             colleagues in honoring him today.
               NOTIFICATION OF THE DEATH OF THE HONORABLE WILLIAM H. 
                    REHNQUIST, CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE UNITED STATES
               The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair lays before the Senate 
             a communication from the Associate Justice of the Supreme 
             Court of the United States, the Honorable Antonin Scalia, 
             notifying the Senate of the death of the Chief Justice of 
             the United States, the late Honorable William H. 
             Rehnquist.
               The message is as follows:

                            Supreme Court of the United States,
                                  Washington, DC, September 6, 2005.
             Hon. Richard B. Cheney,
             President, U.S. Senate,
             Washington, DC.
               Dear Mr. President: This is to notify the Senate, 
             through you, that the Chief Justice of the United States 
             died in Arlington, Virginia, on Saturday, September 3, 
             2005.
                  Very truly yours,
                                                     Antonin Scalia,
                                                   Associate Justice.
                                           Wednesday, September 7, 2005
                                       prayer
               The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, offered the following 
             prayer:
               Let us pray.
               Eternal Spirit, King of kings and Lord of lords, we 
             thank You today for the gift of exemplary living, 
             particularly as we remember our Supreme Court's 16th Chief 
             Justice, William Rehnquist. We received inspiration from 
             his commitment to public service and from his desire to 
             invest his life in things that flourish beyond his 
             lifetime. We were challenged by his willingness to choose 
             duty over personal comfort.
               As many mourn his death, remind us that one day we must 
             all stand before Your judgment seat, for You are the Chief 
             Judge of the universe. May the reality of our 
             accountability to You prompt us to live our lives for Your 
             glory.
               Empower each Senator to listen to the whisper of 
             conscience as he or she labors for liberty. May his or her 
             first priority be to live for Your honor. Give all of us 
             the power to rule our spirits so that we may fulfill Your 
             purpose for our lives.
               We pray in Your powerful Name. Amen.

               Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, just a short while ago, the 
             Senate proceeded as a body to the U.S. Supreme Court to 
             pay final respect to the late Chief Justice William 
             Rehnquist. We continue this morning with tributes to the 
             Chief Justice. Senators will be able to come to the Senate 
             floor until 12 noon to make those statements.
                                 Order of Procedure
               I ask unanimous consent that at 12 noon today, the 
             Senate proceed to a vote on the adoption of a resolution 
             honoring the life of Chief Justice Rehnquist.

               The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
             ordered.

               Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, Senators should be aware that 
             the next vote will occur at noon today. The Senate will 
             also recess early this afternoon during the funeral for 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist as a further mark of respect. . . 
             .

               Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, last Saturday, in the wake of 
             one terrible loss, our Nation suffered another loss, a 
             quiet loss but one that was also deeply felt across the 
             land. We learned that William H. Rehnquist, the 16th Chief 
             Justice of the United States, had passed away. Karen and I 
             and the entire Senate family extend our deepest sympathies 
             to his family and to his friends. Our Nation mourns the 
             loss of a great leader.
               William Rehnquist was an American hero--a World War II 
             veteran, a lifelong public servant, a brilliant legal 
             mind, and a jurist of historic consequence. He was an 
             inspiration to all who knew him. This was especially true 
             in his final months as he stoically fought the cancer that 
             would eventually claim his life.
               Since October 2004, when the Chief Justice announced he 
             had thyroid cancer, his chin remained up and his mind 
             focused and devoted. Today, that optimism, that 
             determination, that strength of spirit in purpose remain 
             an encouragement to us all.
               I feel privileged to have had the opportunity to get to 
             know William Rehnquist during my tenure in the Senate. I 
             am honored to call him a friend. But even more, perhaps 
             the most one can say of any leader, I simply feel blessed 
             to have lived in his time and in the country that so 
             benefited from his wisdom.
               William Rehnquist was born on October 1, 1924, in 
             Milwaukee, WI. The son of William Benjamin Rehnquist, a 
             paper salesman, and Margery Peck Rehnquist, a multilingual 
             translator, he spent his childhood in the Milwaukee suburb 
             of Shorewood, WI, where he attended public schools. Even 
             as a young student, William Rehnquist expressed interest 
             in public service, telling others he wanted to ``change 
             the government.'' Well, he did exactly that.
               William Rehnquist grew up in an era marked by grave 
             challenges and extraordinary triumphs. He saw our Nation 
             rise from the depths of the Great Depression to defeat the 
             threat of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
               On December 7, 1941, when Pearl Harbor was bombed, 
             William Rehnquist was 17 years old. Shortly thereafter, he 
             signed up to fight, joining the Army Air Corps, serving at 
             home and abroad from 1943 to 1946.
               After the Armed Forces, with the help of the GI bill, 
             William Rehnquist went on to college. At Stanford, he 
             earned bachelor's and master's degrees in political 
             science and graduated Phi Beta Kappa. But his academic 
             journey was far from over.
               He took a brief hiatus from Stanford, heading east to 
             Harvard for a second master's degree, this time in 
             government. In 1950, he returned to Stanford ready for law 
             school and the defining point in his life. From Stanford, 
             William Rehnquist would graduate first in his class that 
             included none other than his future colleague on the High 
             Court, Sandra Day O'Connor.
               As a law student, he was known for his astute ability to 
             defend conservatism and for his bright legal mind. One of 
             his professors described William Rehnquist as ``the 
             outstanding student of his law school generation.'' This 
             same professor would later introduce him to Supreme Court 
             Justice Robert Jackson. In a private interview, William 
             Rehnquist convinced Justice Jackson to award him with a 
             coveted clerkship with the Supreme Court, despite 
             Rehnquist's initial thoughts that he had been ``written 
             [off] as a total loss'' by Justice Jackson.
               After completing his clerkship, he married Natalie 
             Cornell. The couple settled in Phoenix, where they raised 
             three children--James, Janet, and Nancy--and where Justice 
             Rehnquist would practice law for 16 years.
               As a young lawyer, William Rehnquist was known to wear 
             loud shirts and ties, prompting even President Nixon to 
             refer to him as ``the guy [who] dressed like a clown.'' 
             But clearly, Nixon was impressed by what he saw on the 
             inside of the young lawyer from Phoenix. President Nixon 
             selected Rehnquist to serve as the Assistant Attorney 
             General for the Department of Justice's Office of Legal 
             Counsel.
               In 1971, President Nixon nominated William Rehnquist 
             again, this time to replace Justice John Marshall Harlan 
             as an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court. William 
             Rehnquist was overwhelmingly confirmed by a Democratic 
             Senate by a vote of 68 yeas and 26 nays.
               In 1986, President Reagan nominated William Rehnquist as 
             Chief Justice, and the Senate, by a wide margin once 
             again, confirmed him to serve as the 16th Chief Justice of 
             the highest court in the land. Today I echo what my good 
             friend and former colleague, Senator Bob Dole said of the 
             Chief Justice during that confirmation debate two decades 
             ago. He was a man of ``unquestioned integrity, 
             incorruptibility, fairness, and courage.''
               During my tenure in the Senate, I had the privilege of 
             getting to know the Chief Justice, or ``the Chief'' as the 
             law clerks called him. And since our first introduction, I 
             found William Rehnquist to be thoughtful, intelligent, 
             and, I must say, quite humorous.
               A skilled writer and avid historian, Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist is the author of a number of books on Supreme 
             Court history and the American legal system. Many articles 
             have been written about William Rehnquist and his 
             successes as Chief Justice of the United States, and in 
             almost every one of these articles, he is praised for his 
             superb ability to efficiently manage the Court.
               Speaking to this point, Supreme Court Justice Byron R. 
             White once said:

               I have never ceased to marvel how one person could 
             possibly carry out all of the tasks given the Chief 
             Justice and yet also decide cases and write opinions as 
             the rest of us do. Yet Chief Justices do them with 
             regularity and, of the three Chief Justices with whom I 
             have served, the man who now sits in the center chair in 
             the courtroom . . . seems to me to be the least stressed 
             by his responsibilities and to be the most efficient 
             manager of his complicated schedule.

               A former adviser to the Chief Justice said that Justice 
             White's comments mirrored his own observations. He said 
             that William Rehnquist's rigorous work ethic and 
             dedication to efficiency is reflected on his staff, which 
             he, in fact, reduced when he became Chief Justice, relying 
             on only three clerks, although he was authorized to have 
             four.
               The former adviser described William Rehnquist as a man 
             who could do twice the work of the average judge in half 
             the time. Having worked alongside William Rehnquist on the 
             Smithsonian's Board of Regents, I couldn't agree more. I 
             treasure the days we spent together on this Board of 
             Regents. In his capacity as the chancellor of the 
             Smithsonian, he served as chairman of the Smithsonian's 
             Board of Regents. I, in that capacity, saw firsthand the 
             Chief Justice's commitment to that institution, the 
             Smithsonian, attending every meeting despite his very busy 
             day job at the Court. He even hosted planning meetings for 
             board staff and liaisons of the Supreme Court in the 
             Natalie Cornell Rehnquist Dining Room, named after his 
             late wife of 38 years. Recently, he brought the entire 
             Court to the Smithsonian's American History Museum to see 
             the Brown v. Board of Education exhibit.
               As he did on the Court, since the Chief Justice became 
             chancellor, he emphasized the importance of efficient 
             management in the Smithsonian's affairs, and he brought a 
             certain sense of distinction to our work for the 
             Smithsonian. Moreover, he inspired me to always be mindful 
             of our duty to history, our place in preserving the 
             strength of this Nation we serve.
               In recent months, while the ongoing debate in the Senate 
             regarding judicial nominations was occurring, I thought a 
             lot about our Federal courts and our judges. I have often 
             wondered what are the most important qualities to look for 
             in an individual who is being considered for a lifetime 
             appointment on the courts. I have looked to the Chief, and 
             I have seen those qualities embodied in his approach to 
             the law--commitment to judicial restraint, fairness, 
             integrity, impartiality, even temperament, openmindedness, 
             and respect for the Constitution and the rule of law.
               What is more, William Rehnquist was a man not only of 
             high intellect but common sense--a unique combination 
             reflected in the clarity of his opinions.
               I witnessed firsthand William Rehnquist's intelligence, 
             his temperament, and his commitment to equal justice under 
             the law when he became only the second Chief Justice to 
             preside over a Presidential impeachment in the trial of 
             President Bill Clinton.
               A friend of mine and a former administrative assistant 
             to the Chief Justice said:

               What impressed me most about the manner in which he 
             presided over the impeachment trial was his astute and 
             facile recognition of and respect for the traditions and 
             rules of the Senate. I knew he would provide impartial 
             leadership but he also adjusted his superb management 
             skills appropriately to the Senate's traditions. At the 
             conclusion of the trial he was praised by the Leaders of 
             both parties. It was another demonstration of the rare 
             combination of high intellect and common sense that he 
             possesses.

               To this day, my colleagues on both sides of the aisle 
             continue to remember the Chief Justice for his efficient 
             managerial skills and his steadfast respect for the Senate 
             during the impeachment trial. In an atmosphere of 
             partisanship, the Chief Justice was a constant reminder of 
             the solemn legal duties our Constitution requires of the 
             Senate.
               The Chief loved the Court. He held a deep respect for 
             the law and its traditions, and in turn his colleagues, 
             even those with different judicial philosophies, held a 
             deep respect for him.
               A former colleague who often decided cases differently 
             than the Chief Justice, Justice Harry Blackmun praised 
             William Rehnquist as a ``splendid administrator'' and 
             often testified to his fairness and commitment to the 
             coherence and cohesion of the Court.
               Once the Court's leading liberal, Justice William 
             Brennan called Chief Justice Rehnquist ``the most all-
             around successful'' Chief that he had known and described 
             him as ``meticulously fair.''
               Another liberal on the Court, Justice Thurgood Marshall, 
             described him as ``a great Chief Justice.''
               In his 19 years as Chief Justice of the highest court in 
             the land, Chief Justice Rehnquist never placed himself on 
             a higher plane than his colleagues. To fellow Justices, 
             his law clerks and secretaries, he was sensitive, humble, 
             and ever respectful.
               I am confident that the President's nominee to the Chief 
             Justice's seat, Judge John Roberts, will bring the same 
             dignity to the job and earn the same level of respect from 
             his colleagues. Judge Roberts, after all, learned from the 
             best. From 1980 to 1981, he was clerk to then-Associate 
             Justice Rehnquist.
               Having come to know John Roberts these last few weeks, 
             there is no doubt in my mind that he has the skill, the 
             mind, the philosophy, and the temperament to lead the 
             Supreme Court.
               With the passing over the weekend of Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist, the Supreme Court loses one of the most 
             prolific scholars and brilliant legal minds ever to sit on 
             the Federal bench. His passing marks a sad day for 
             America, but it is also a day to reflect on our great 
             fortune to have had William Rehnquist in the service of 
             our Nation.
               For over 33 years, Chief Justice Rehnquist generously 
             offered America his brilliant mind, his unwavering 
             leadership, and his fair and impartial judgment. He was 
             the embodiment of all of the ideal qualities of a judge, 
             and his humility, wisdom, and superb managerial skills 
             allowed him to become one of the most memorable, 
             influential, and well-respected Supreme Court Justices in 
             our history.
               Many feel that history will remember the Chief for 
             presiding over the Senate during the impeachment trial, 
             for his participation in landmark decisions, for his 
             perseverance in fulfilling his duties through ailing 
             health. I believe William Rehnquist will be most 
             remembered for his magnificent leadership and management, 
             his ability to build consensus, his compassion and respect 
             for others, and his fair and impartial review of each and 
             every case that came before the Court. The imprint of 
             William Rehnquist's gavel will not fade fast. No, it is 
             indelibly stamped upon the face of American history and 
             the legacy of the law we uphold. America was blessed to 
             have William Rehnquist as Chief Justice and today he 
             enters the history books as one of the greatest Chief 
             Justices ever to serve on the Supreme Court of the United 
             States.
               May God bless William Rehnquist and may God bless the 
             United States of America.

               Mr. REID. Mr. President, I was a high school student in 
             a place called Basic High School in Henderson, NV. I was a 
             boy about 16 years old, and Mrs. Robinson came into the 
             classroom. She was a part-time counselor and a full-time 
             government teacher. She pulled me out of the class and she 
             said, I have looked at all of your reports and you should 
             go to law school.
               I had never met a lawyer, had never even seen a 
             courthouse, let alone been in one, but I accepted Mrs. 
             Robinson's word that I should go to law school. From that 
             day forward, that is what I set my mind to do. I came back 
             here to go to law school. I was a full-time student at 
             George Washington University, went to school in the 
             daytime and worked as a Capitol policeman in the 
             nighttime.
               Still having never been in a courthouse, as a law 
             student in an appellate practice course I was taking, the 
             students were invited to go into the Supreme Court to 
             listen to a Supreme Court argument. I can remember going 
             there. The case the professor chose was not one that 
             sounds very exciting. It certainly did not sound very 
             exciting to me at the time. It did not involve some 
             spectacular criminal case. It involved a case called Baker 
             v. Carr. The first time I was ever in a courthouse I 
             listened to one of the most important, significant Supreme 
             Court arguments in the history of the country because 
             those lawyers debating this case, these issues of law, 
             were there to talk about the one man-one vote doctrine, 
             which the U.S. Supreme Court a few months later, after 
             having heard these arguments, decided that we in the 
             United States would be bound by one man, one vote.
               As a result of that, reapportionment took place in State 
             legislatures and, of course, in the United States through 
             the Federal courts. In the States where the legislature 
             did not follow the one man-one vote rule, the courts took 
             over.
               As I look back, I was so fortunate to be able to have my 
             first exposure to the law in the place where I later 
             became a member of the Supreme Court bar. Having heard 
             that case is something I will always remember.
               I was a trial lawyer, and I have argued cases before the 
             Nevada Supreme Court and the Ninth Circuit, but I never 
             argued a case before the U.S. Supreme Court. I wish I had 
             had that opportunity.
               Having heard Baker v. Carr those many years ago, I have 
             never forgotten it. That is why it has been so pleasant 
             for me to develop a personal relationship with some of the 
             Supreme Court Justices, one of whom was the man whose 
             funeral I will go to today at 2, William Rehnquist.
               I said earlier and I will say again, I had a tour of 
             duty as chairman of the Democratic Policy Committee and 
             every Thursday there is an off-the-record discussion that 
             takes place in the Senate with Democratic Senators, and we 
             always try to come up with things that will interest the 
             Senators. I said to a number of my colleagues I wanted to 
             invite William Rehnquist to come to the Democratic Policy 
             luncheon and they said, no, he is a dyed-in-the-wool 
             Republican, he is partisan, and he will not come anyway.
               I picked up the telephone and in a matter of a minute or 
             two he was on the line. I said, Mr. Justice, would you 
             come to this policy luncheon? You will talk for 5 or 10 
             minutes, and we will ask questions.
               Yes, I would like to do that.
               He came over to the LBJ Room and it was one of the best 
             luncheons we ever had. He answered all the questions. As I 
             reflect on Chief Justice Rehnquist coming to that 
             Democratic Policy luncheon, the thing I remember more than 
             anything else is how funny he was. He was a man physically 
             large in stature with a biting sense of humor.
               I felt so comfortable having him preside over the 
             impeachment trial. That was also kind of an awkward time 
             for me. I had just been selected as the assistant 
             Democratic leader. I had this seat right here. I had never 
             sat so close to what was going on before and I felt so 
             uncomfortable sitting here. My first tour of duty in the 
             Senate in that seat was as a Senator as part of the 
             impeachment trial of President Clinton.
               Of course, I visited with him, talked to him when he 
             kept getting up. He had a bad back and he suffered a lot 
             from physical pain for many years as a result of his back. 
             He would get up every 20 minutes or so and stand and walk 
             around his chair. I had a number of very nice, warm 
             conversations with him at that time.
               The conversation I will remember beyond all other 
             conversations with the Chief Justice, there was so much 
             speculation in the newspapers about how he was sick and 
             was he going to step down and would it be this Monday or 
             the next Monday or when was it going to be. So in that I 
             felt comfortable and had spoken to him on the telephone a 
             number of occasions, I called him at his home and I said, 
             I am sorry to bother you at home. He was not well. I said, 
             the simple reason I have called you is to say, do not 
             resign.
               He said, I am not going to.
               I am not going to talk about all that was said during 
             the call, but I would say he told me he was not going to 
             resign. I will always remember that telephone conversation 
             with the Chief Justice of the United States. I am 
             confident I did the right thing in calling him. I did not 
             tell any of my colleagues. I did not tell my family. I did 
             not tell anybody, but I picked up the telephone and I 
             called him, and I am glad I did.
               So I join with the distinguished majority leader in 
             spreading on the record of this Senate the accolades for 
             this good man. He was very politically conservative, so I 
             understand. He served as a lawyer for 16 years after he 
             graduated first in his class at Stanford Law School, and I 
             have a great amount of affection for that law school. One 
             of my boys went to Stanford. It was a wonderful place to 
             go to school. He served in the Army Air Corps. He was Phi 
             Beta Kappa. That was not enough education for him. He got 
             a second master's degree at Harvard University after 
             having gotten a master's degree at Stanford.
               I am sorry that he is not going to be on the Court any 
             more because I thought he was an outstanding 
             administrator. He spoke for the Federal judges with 
             strength and clarity. When we kept piling stuff on Federal 
             judges to give them jurisdiction to do things, he 
             complained about it. He said they work too hard, they have 
             too much to do. So we are going to miss his voice.

               Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, it is my privilege to 
             join others in discussing the life and career of the late 
             Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Chief Justice Rehnquist 
             was only the 16th Chief Justice in American history. John 
             Jay was the first, sworn in on October 1789. Many of us 
             had an opportunity to go over and pay our respects, over 
             in the Supreme Court a few moments ago, and had a chance 
             to look at the busts of those Chief Justices.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist filled the role defined for him 
             by our Founding Fathers with wisdom and with dignity. 
             Millions of Americans honor him for his legacy of 
             achievement. When I went home last night, I noticed a long 
             line of people waiting to file past the casket and pay 
             their respects to this wonderful man.
               I first met the Chief Justice in 1969 here in 
             Washington. At the time, he was Assistant Attorney General 
             for the Office of Legal Counsel. I was a young legislative 
             aide to a Senator named Marlow Cook, who represented the 
             Commonwealth of Kentucky. Senator Cook was on the 
             Judiciary Committee and this was a period in which there 
             were a couple of highly contentious Supreme Court 
             nominations. Judge Clement Haynsworth of the Fourth 
             Circuit, who was subsequently defeated, and District Judge 
             Harold Carswell from Florida, who was also defeated. So 
             President Nixon had not only one but two nominations at 
             the Supreme Court defeated.
               Bill Rehnquist, which is what I called him in those 
             days, was the guy who sort of crafted the speeches and 
             helped us, helped the Republicans and as many Democrats 
             who were interested in supporting those two nominees--
             helped us craft the speeches and did the important work of 
             helping us express ourselves. My boss ended up supporting 
             Haynsworth and opposing Carswell, so I was not working 
             with Bill Rehnquist on the second nomination.
               He was an extraordinary person: Dedicated, hard working, 
             the smartest lawyer I had ever been around at that point, 
             and even after all these years I would still say he was 
             the smartest lawyer I had ever been around; a keen 
             intellect with a very sharp mind. He was also, as others 
             have pointed out and will point out this morning, a kind 
             and personable man, which he remained even while rising to 
             the foremost position in American jurisprudence.
               After working for Senator Cook, I returned to Kentucky 
             in January 1971, thinking I was sort of through with 
             Washington. Toward the end of the year, to my surprise and 
             pleasure, President Nixon nominated Bill Rehnquist to be 
             on the Supreme Court. So, on my own nickel, I came back to 
             Washington for a month and worked on his confirmation--
             just as a volunteer, and did odd jobs and helped do 
             whatever was thought to be appropriate by those who were 
             officially in charge of his confirmation. But it was a 
             thrill to see him confirmed to the Supreme Court.
               Later, in 1986, when President Reagan elevated Justice 
             Rehnquist to the Chief Justice position, by then I was a 
             Member of this body and, in fact, a member of the 
             Judiciary Committee. So that was my second opportunity to 
             work on a William Rehnquist nomination to the Supreme 
             Court. Of course, I was proud to be involved in that and 
             very proud to vote to confirm him.
               The Chief Justice served our country with his 
             characteristic wisdom and grace. After leading the Court 
             for 19 years, he was the longest serving Chief Justice 
             since 1910. He was only the fifth Chief Justice in our 
             Nation's history to have previously served as an Associate 
             Justice. He exemplified the highest virtue for a Justice: 
             He entered each case with an open mind, free of bias, 
             never prejudging the case before the decision was made. In 
             fact, some of his decisions over the years surprised 
             observers and proved that he was willing to rethink 
             opinions he may have once held. Actually, that is a good 
             thing.
               He reminded us that judges should be like umpires--never 
             taking sides, just fairly applying the rules.
               He leaves behind him a legacy that will be studied for 
             generations. I would submit that a chief component of that 
             legacy will be his steering the Supreme Court back toward 
             the principle of federalism, which, alongside separation 
             of powers, stands as one of the two structural principles 
             undergirding our Constitution. Chief Justice Rehnquist 
             expressed that view in dissent after dissent in the early 
             years when he was on the Court until, with time, his 
             dissenting views became majority ones. Because of his 
             clear understanding of the underlying purpose of 
             federalism, he worked to establish a jurisprudence that 
             guards against untrammeled Federal power and helps ensure 
             that decisions that are purely local in nature will remain 
             in the hands of the citizens who must, of course, abide by 
             them.
               The Chief Justice earned a reputation for being a fair 
             and even-handed leader of the High Court. Former Justice 
             William Brennan, who was frequently on the opposite side 
             in cases, said Chief Justice Rehnquist was ``meticulously 
             fair in assigning opinions.'' He went on to say that since 
             Rehnquist's ascension to the Chief Justice position, ``I 
             can't begin to tell you how much better all of us feel . . 
             . and how fond all of us are of him personally.'' That was 
             Justice Brennan, with whom Justice Rehnquist rarely 
             agreed.
               In this recent age of many 5-to-4 decisions, it is all 
             the more extraordinary that the Chief Justice created such 
             a harmonious court. The late Justice Thurgood Marshall, 
             who served with the Chief Justice from 1972 to 1991, said 
             simply that William Rehnquist is ``a great Chief 
             Justice.''
               As Chief Justice, William Rehnquist was the same honest 
             and upright man I had observed when I first met him back 
             in 1969. In his final months as Chief, he reminded us all 
             once again what it means to serve with dignity and honor, 
             as he persevered through his fight with cancer. Who was 
             not moved to see the concept of ``duty'' personified on 
             January 20, 2005, when, under extraordinary physical 
             duress, he administered the oath of office to the 
             President of the United States?
               This Nation owes Chief Justice Rehnquist a debt that can 
             never be fully repaid. He served his country in combat 
             with the Army Air Corps during World War II, as a law 
             clerk to Associate Justice Robert Jackson, as an Assistant 
             Attorney General, as Associate Justice, and finally as 
             Chief Justice of the United States. Throughout it all he 
             stood for the rule of law and the upholding of the 
             principles that this Republic holds dear. In my opinion, 
             he was the most consequential Chief Justice since John 
             Marshall. I repeat: the most consequential Chief Justice 
             since John Marshall.
               Elaine and I extend our sympathies to his family, his 
             daughters Janet and Nancy, his son James, his sister Jean, 
             and his nine grandchildren.
               As miraculous a document as it is, the Constitution is 
             only words on paper. It requires men and women of 
             principle to see its meaning and spirit made real. William 
             Rehnquist was one of those persons. Our grateful Nation 
             will always remember his heroic service and his devotion 
             to duty until the very end.
               I yield the floor.

               The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.

               Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, let me thank the 
             distinguished Democratic whip for letting me precede him 
             in making this statement.
               It was with great sadness that I learned of Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist's passing, and even sadder when I joined 
             the Senate to pay our last respects to him this morning.
               I first met Bill Rehnquist in 1952. We were both young 
             lawyers here in Washington, DC. We each had taken jobs 
             here in Washington after finishing law school and in the 
             course of many months became very good friends. In fact, 
             my first date with my first wife was double-dating with 
             Bill Rehnquist.
               We had both served in the Army Air Corps during World 
             War II, and we were comrades in the deepest sense of the 
             word. I respected Bill personally then and professionally. 
             He was a law clerk to Supreme Court Justice Jackson.
               He took his responsibilities to the Court and to the 
             American people very seriously. Bill Rehnquist was devoted 
             to the rule of law and to our democratic system.
               In many of our Nation's most turbulent moments, we 
             relied upon Chief Justice Rehnquist's commitment to the 
             law to steer us toward calmer waters. History will 
             remember his evenhandedness and his impartiality in the 
             face of tough decisions. During the impeachment process, 
             which he chaired in the Senate, the Chief demonstrated his 
             fairness and his commitment to follow precisely our 
             Constitution and the precedents of the past. It was during 
             that time that I once again had the privilege of sharing 
             lunches and coffees and just talking off the floor with my 
             great friend of the past.
               Bill Rehnquist was a humble and gracious man, as we all 
             know. Among his clerks and among his friends, he was known 
             just as ``the Chief,'' and he was guided by the belief 
             that no man is more important than the nation or the 
             institution he serves. It was this belief that guided his 
             efforts to narrow the concept of judicial activism and 
             restore our system to its constitutional roots.
               I didn't always agree with Bill Rehnquist. As a matter 
             of fact, as young lawyers, we had a lot of arguments. But 
             I knew he was a brilliant man, and he proved to be a great 
             administrator for our Supreme Court. Those of us who knew 
             the Chief respected his commitment to law and valued his 
             advice and counsel. His friends were from all walks of 
             life. He counted law clerks, Senators, Congressmen, and 
             Presidents among his friends.
               He embodied the lines in the Rudyard Kipling poem, 
             ``If.'' Bill Rehnquist could ``walk with kings'' without 
             losing ``the common touch.''
               Those of you who knew him will miss the Chief's wry 
             sense of humor. As a matter of fact, inspired by a costume 
             from his favorite Gilbert and Sullivan operetta, he is the 
             only Justice who added four gold stripes to each sleeve of 
             his black Supreme Court robe.
               He also loved a practical joke. One of my favorite 
             stories is an April Fools' prank played on Chief Justice 
             Warren Burger, with whom I also served at the Department 
             of Justice. Bill put a life-size photo of Warren Burger on 
             the front steps of the Supreme Court Building with a sign 
             asking tourists to pay $1 to get a picture with the Chief 
             Justice. Remember, it was April Fools' Day. He then drove 
             the Chief Justice by those steps so he could see his 
             reaction to this prank.
               But he said once to me, ``The Chief Justice brings to 
             the office no one but himself.'' This may be true, but 
             this Chief Justice leaves office with the gratitude of our 
             entire Nation. You can see it today in those long lines 
             over by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has lost a 
             great legal mind, the country has lost a devoted public 
             servant, and I have lost another good friend.
               Catherine and I extend our deepest sympathies to Bill's 
             family and friends. He will be missed by all--greatly by 
             me.

               The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.

               Mr. DURBIN. Thank you, very much. I will try to be brief 
             and to the point.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist was a person I probably 
             disagreed with in most political arguments. I read his 
             opinions, and I realized that we just looked at the world 
             in a different way. Yet I liked him. I liked him a lot.
               I had two direct contacts with him as a U.S. Senator. 
             The first time was as a new Member of the Senate and as a 
             member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and I received 
             an invitation to come across the street, which is unusual, 
             from the Senate to the Supreme Court for lunch. It was 
             with a Federal judicial council. I was flattered and 
             accepted the invitation. I then started asking the staff: 
             Who are these people? They said: They are Federal judges 
             from all across the United States. They gather together 
             infrequently across the street for lunch in the Supreme 
             Court, in a large chamber with the Chief Justice. They 
             have invited you to come and speak to them.
               Reflecting on my storied legal career as a small-town 
             lawyer in Springfield, IL, and the fact that I didn't set 
             the world on fire in law school, I wondered why they would 
             ever invite me. Then it dawned on me. I was the ranking 
             member on the Court Administrations Subcommittee of the 
             Judiciary Committee which had responsibility for 
             determining the salaries of Federal judges. So they were 
             going to entertain me for lunch and pay close attention to 
             all of my views in the hopes that I would listen carefully 
             when they recommended increases in judicial salaries. That 
             is exactly what happened. But the circumstances of that 
             meeting were amazing.
               It was a large room and a huge table. There were two 
             chairs empty as I walked into the room with all of these 
             Federal judges in every direction. I sat in one of them. 
             Then we waited quietly, and the door of the back room 
             opened and everyone stood as Chief Justice Rehnquist came 
             in to sit next to me. As he sat down, I thought to myself: 
             There isn't a single law professor I ever had in school 
             who would ever dream I would be sitting next to the Chief 
             Justice, but I am certain my mother looking down from 
             Heaven thought it was entirely appropriate that her son 
             was sitting next to the Chief Justice of the United 
             States.
               The second time was the impeachment trial in the Senate, 
             which was presided over by Chief Justice Rehnquist. There 
             is a small room called the President's Room. It is a 
             historic chamber, and people often go in there for quick 
             meetings off the floor. It became the Chief Justice's 
             office when he was here for the impeachment trial. It was 
             a curious setup because as you walked by there, he had a 
             desk that was literally smack dab in the center of the 
             room with the chair behind it, and I do not recall that 
             there was any other furniture in the room. He just kind of 
             sat there isolated, like this little island. I would walk 
             by and glance in there from time to time.
               Finally, I got the courage to walk in and talk to him. 
             He dropped what he was doing and started talking right 
             away. I was impressed. The man was entirely approachable, 
             personable, and funny. He had a ton of questions about the 
             Senate because he had been for over 30 years at the 
             Supreme Court and the Senate was brand new to him. He 
             asked basic questions and joked about the rollcalls. He 
             said, ``I love it when we have a rollcall, and it will be 
             Bayh `aye' and Snowe `no.' '' He said, ``I just love to 
             listen as you call the roll here in the Senate.''
               We had a great conversation. He gave me a book he had 
             written about the impeachment process. He agreed to 
             autograph a few things. I really liked him a lot 
             personally.
               I can understand why those who disagreed with him 
             politically still thought the world of Chief Justice 
             William Rehnquist. He was a man dedicated to public 
             service. I respected him so much for that.
               As others have said, when he showed up in frail health 
             at the second inauguration of President George W. Bush on 
             a blustery, cold day to administer the oath, it was a 
             great gesture on his part. It showed his personal 
             commitment to his job as Chief Justice, his love of his 
             Nation, and his responsibility. We are going to miss him. 
             Very few men and women ever get the chance to serve as 
             Chief Justice.
               The Rehnquist court was a court which because of his 
             leadership will be remembered for many years to come.

               Mr. SESSIONS. Madam President, I will share a few 
             personal thoughts about Chief Justice Rehnquist. I came to 
             appreciate Justice Rehnquist as a young prosecutor. I was 
             an assistant U.S. attorney, and tried a lot of cases and 
             was involved in a lot of cases and had to read Supreme 
             Court opinions on criminal law. I was impressed with his 
             writings. It touched me in many ways. I felt he was 
             speaking the truth when other Justices were missing and 
             not understanding the reality of law enforcement in 
             America.
               This was in the mid-1970s, when our crime was increasing 
             at an exponential rate. We had double-digit percentage 
             increases in crime in the 1960s and 1970s. In the 1950s, 
             we did not lock the door of our house, and we left our 
             keys in the car. People did not worry about crime. It 
             became a growing problem. At the same time crime was 
             surging, the Warren court handcuffed the police and their 
             ability to deal with it.
               Justice Rehnquist, during the Warren court years, would 
             often write dissents. Sometimes he would be the lone 
             dissenter. I distinctly remember being in the U.S. 
             Attorney's Office in Mobile, AL, reading an opinion and 
             calling my colleagues to say: Look at this. At least one 
             Justice understands the reality of crime and law 
             enforcement in America.
               He helped create a different approach to law and order 
             in America. Instead of ruling on emotion and politics, he 
             made his decisions based on the law and facts. In fact, 
             before he left office, cases he was dissenting 8 to 1, he 
             was winning a number of them 5 to 4 and 6 to 3. What an 
             accomplishment to see that happen over a lifetime. I never 
             would have thought it possible. I thought the trends were 
             against that. Being young, I never thought we would see 
             the pendulum swing back, but it did, and he played a key 
             role in that.
               From my observations as a member of the Department of 
             Justice for nearly 15 years, as a member, now, of the 
             Senate Judiciary Committee for 8 years, where I currently 
             chair the Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight and the 
             Courts, my humble opinion is Chief Justice Rehnquist is 
             one of the greatest Chief Justices ever to serve. Senator 
             McConnell said after John Marshall, but I don't know. I am 
             not sure any have served more ably.
               He was also a great Associate Justice. He wrote clean, 
             succinct opinions that made sense. They were consistent 
             with the law of our country and our heritage.
               He came to the Court when the Warren court was in full 
             bloom and judicial activism was at its apex. In case after 
             case, he was the lone member of that Court to sound the 
             alarm about the dangers that arise when a court detaches 
             itself from a principled and honest commitment to the 
             Constitution of the United States of America and the laws 
             we passed. He saw the dangers in that, and he dissented 
             many times--he joined with the majority many times, but he 
             dissented many times--on matters of great principle in an 
             intelligent and effective way.
               He played a key role in the demise of judicial activism 
             as a dominant view of the Court. By ``judicial 
             activism''--I will paraphrase Senator Hatch's definition 
             of it--it means when a judge allows their personal or 
             political views about what is good policy or bad policy to 
             affect their rulings in a case. It is not faithful to the 
             Constitution when you twist the words of the Constitution 
             or of a statute so they come out to mean what you would 
             like them to in order to achieve the result that you 
             prefer in a given case. Justice Rehnquist loved our 
             Constitution, the one that we have, the good parts of it 
             and the parts he may not agree with. He loved every 
             section and respected each one of them. He followed them 
             and was faithful to them.
               He understood liberty in America is dependent on order. 
             Look what is happening, so sadly, in New Orleans: police 
             are threatened, doctors and nurses could not get out to 
             help or rescue people because order broke down. The 
             Founders of our Republic never doubted the Government and 
             the law enforcement of the United States of America. The 
             States and counties and cities had to have certain 
             authority to maintain order or we would never have 
             liberty. This extreme commitment to libertarian views can 
             undermine the basic order necessary to allow liberty to 
             flourish in our individual capability first. He understood 
             that very critically.
               An example of the dangers he saw on the Court would be 
             in death penalty cases. Chief Justice Rehnquist, as 
             Associate Justice and as Chief, fully understood the 
             Constitution makes at least eight references to capital 
             crimes, to not being able to take someone's life without 
             due process; at least eight references were made in that 
             great document to the death penalty. How could the 
             Constitution declare the death penalty was 
             unconstitutional when it absolutely approved it?
               Two Justices dissented in every single death penalty 
             case, saying they thought it was cruel and unusual 
             punishment. What a weird, unprincipled dangerous 
             interpretation of the Constitution. Justice Rehnquist 
             stood against that tide, often as a lone Associate 
             Justice.
               Until now, people have come to realize that the 
             Constitution and laws of this country allow a State or the 
             Federal Government to have a death penalty, if they choose 
             to have it. If you do not like that, take it to your 
             legislative branch. The Constitution does not prohibit it, 
             for Heaven's sake. The Constitution explicitly authorizes 
             it.
               He had a good understanding of church and state. I 
             remember Senator Reid, the distinguished majority leader 
             now, when he was the assistant leader under Thomas Daschle 
             during that year when they were in the majority, and the 
             Ninth Circuit struck down the Pledge of Allegiance, he 
             criticized the Ninth Circuit. I have been a big critic of 
             the Ninth Circuit, but I remember making remarks at that 
             time saying as big a critic of the Ninth Circuit and as 
             much of a critic of their striking down the Pledge of 
             Allegiance, I have to say many Supreme Court rulings on 
             separation of church and state are so extreme that could 
             well be justified under language of the U.S. Supreme 
             Court. The Supreme Court has given us a very confused 
             jurisprudence on what is a legitimate separation of church 
             and state in America.
               We got to the point in one case, the Jaffree case from 
             Alabama, the Supreme Court, by a 6 to 3 majority, struck 
             down a moment of silence in a classroom. Justice Rehnquist 
             dissented in that case, as he consistently dissented 
             against some of the confused thinking that was there.
               If this court had followed Justice Rehnquist's thoughts 
             and opinions on the question of separation of church and 
             state, we would not have the confusion we have today. We 
             would not have one case where the Ten Commandments in 
             Texas are OK and another case in Alabama where the Ten 
             Commandments are not OK. What kind of jurisprudence is 
             that? We need to get that straight. The Court has failed, 
             in my view, in establishment clause jurisprudence. But 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist has been a consistent and sound 
             and reasonable voice on how to strike the proper balance. 
             We need to go back and continue to read those opinions and 
             see if we cannot make them correct.
               He also was a student of America. He wrote a number of 
             books, grand inquests about impeachments, before we had 
             the Clinton impeachment case in this body. He wrote a 
             book, ``All The Laws But One,'' that deals with the rule 
             of law in America in a time of crisis, and dealt with the 
             Civil War and other times in our country. He was a 
             historian who understood America, understood our 
             exceptional nature, our commitment to law and the 
             Constitution. He understood that deeply. Every day when he 
             went to work, every opinion he ever wrote was consistent 
             with his view and respect for America, her heritage, her 
             rule of law, and her Constitution.
               He understood that States have certain powers in our 
             country. He understood that the Federal Government, 
             through the commerce clause, has broad power, but there 
             are limits to the reach of the commerce clause. It does 
             not cover every single matter the U.S. Senate may desire 
             to legislate on, to the extent that the Federal Government 
             controls even simple, discrete actions within a State. He 
             reestablished a respect for State law and State 
             sovereignty through a number of his federalism opinions.
               Madam President, we have lost one of the Nation's great 
             Justices, a man who respected our Constitution, gave his 
             life to his country, his whole professional career. All of 
             us should be proud of that service and honor his memory.

               Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, I rise today with a heavy 
             heart. We have all watched in horror as the Gulf Coast has 
             been struck by what could be called the worst natural 
             disaster in our history.
               Over the weekend, Chief Justice Rehnquist, who served 
             our Court and country with such distinction for 33 years, 
             and showed such bravery in the last months of his life, 
             passed away.
               We have now lost nearly 2,000 young men and women in 
             Iraq, and we still do not have, in my opinion, a credible 
             plan, a mission, a timetable to achieve success and bring 
             our troops home. Gas prices are putting horrible strains 
             on most Americans.
               There is a tremendous amount of anxiety in America 
             today. I feel it when I go home to California. We must 
             confront it immediately in the Senate, in the House, and, 
             yes, at the White House. . . .

               Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I want to pay tribute to a 
             good man whom I knew well, who was a great judge, the late 
             Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
               His service and leadership on the Supreme Court, the 
             principles he consistently followed, and the steady hand 
             with which he guided the judiciary make him one of the 
             judiciary's very best.
               William Hubbs Rehnquist served on the Supreme Court of 
             the United States for 33 years and almost 8 months.
               He was the 8th longest serving of the Court's 108 
             members, having recently surpassed the tenure of the 
             legendary Justice Joseph Story.
               He was the 4th longest serving of the Court's 16 Chief 
             Justices, and 1 of just 5 individuals to have served as 
             both Associate and Chief Justice.
               William Rehnquist's service was a powerful mixture of 
             the personal and the professional.
               He brought a kind of dignified practicality, or perhaps 
             it was practical dignity, to what is one of the most 
             formal and respected posts in the Federal Government.
               William Rehnquist was the historian who could play a 
             practical joke, the defender of the judicial institution 
             who played poker with his colleagues.
               We will miss this scholar and author, who also led an 
             annual Christmas carol sing-along for the Court's 
             employees.
               Yesterday his former clerks surrounded his casket and 
             carried it past his former colleagues into the Court where 
             he lay in repose in a plain white pine casket. It was so 
             touching.
               We were all touched by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor 
             weeping at the loss of a man who had been a fellow law 
             student more than 50 years ago and was a fellow Justice 
             for the past 24. He was No. 1 in his class; she was No. 3. 
             They were close friends.
               The respected legal analyst Stuart Taylor writes that 
             one attribute of greatness is being esteemed by one's 
             colleagues. Whether his fellow Justices voted with him or 
             against him on the cases before the Court, they all 
             cherished and esteemed him.
               Liberal icons such as Justice William Brennan called 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist a breath of fresh air.
               Justice Thurgood Marshall called him a great Chief 
             Justice.
               Justice Lewis Powell said he had a good sense of humor 
             and was both generous and principled.
               When President Nixon nominated William Rehnquist to be 
             an Associate Justice in 1971, Attorney General John 
             Mitchell said he expected Justice Rehnquist to be 
             independent.
               Before the Judiciary Committee, the nominee pledged as 
             his fundamental commitment to totally disregard his own 
             personal beliefs when interpreting and applying the law.
               Democratic Senator John McClellan of Arkansas, a member 
             of the Judiciary Committee, explained in the pages of the 
             New York Times why he supported what he called a 
             distinguished nominee.
               He said that William Rehnquist would not contribute to 
             the trend of pursuing abstract goals driven by ideology 
             rather than law. As both Associate and Chief Justice, 
             William Rehnquist confirmed Senator McClellan's judgment.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist strongly defended the 
             prerogatives of the judicial branch. This alone might give 
             pause to those who believe the judiciary was already too 
             strong.
               But he coupled that commitment to institutional vigor 
             with a fidelity to constitutional rigor.
               While insisting that the Court was the primary 
             interpreter of the Constitution, he did not join those who 
             said the Constitution's meaning ebbed and flowed with the 
             latest cultural and political fad.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist understood that we entrust 
             interpretation of our laws to unelected judges only 
             because, as he had, they promise to keep their own moral 
             and political viewpoints on the sideline.
               Over time, by example and leadership, this principle 
             helped him move the Court toward its traditionally modest 
             role within our system of government.
               Commentators and reporters discussing the Chief 
             Justice's legacy almost reflexively use the moniker ``Lone 
             Ranger'' to describe the new Associate Justice Rehnquist.
               He was sometimes a lonely dissenter on a Court that saw 
             itself as the vanguard of social change.
               In that role, however, he reminded us of the fundamental 
             principles that should guide the judiciary.
               Judges may not exercise judicial review based on their 
             personal opinions, preferences, or agendas. They must take 
             the Constitution as they find it and apply it as it is.
               As new Justices joined the Court, and Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist continued articulating and applying such 
             traditional principles, he found himself with more 
             company.
               While some talk of Chief Justices as able to bring 
             colleagues together in a particular case, Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist did so, patiently and steadily, over the long 
             haul of his entire tenure.
               In a 1996 address at American University's Washington 
             College of Law, Chief Justice Rehnquist called judicial 
             independence the ``crown jewel'' of the American judicial 
             system.
               He took this seriously on a personal as well as a 
             judicial level.
               In this last year or so, William Hubbs Rehnquist lived 
             and finished life on this Earth in his own independent 
             way.
               He shared what he wanted to share, when and how he chose 
             to share it.
               He carried himself with dignity, in a way protecting his 
             privacy publicly, if such a thing is possible.
               He was a good man and a good judge.
               Our lives, individually as citizens and collectively as 
             a Nation, are much better for him having been among us.
               I knew him personally. I know what a great man he was, 
             as far as I am concerned. I know what a supreme intellect 
             he was on that Court. I know what a decent, honorable, 
             honest person he was on that Court. I can remember one 
             lunch I had with Chief Justice Rehnquist, Justice Scalia, 
             and Justice Kennedy. It was a terrific luncheon, filled 
             with intellectual repartee. It was a luncheon that I will 
             never forget. I can remember his smiling from time to time 
             as his colleagues made some of their points. He had this 
             wry sense of humor that I suppose came from the people 
             that he was born and raised with in his own State. This is 
             a man of tremendous, inestimable talent, intellect, and 
             ability. But he was warm. He was kind. He was decent. The 
             only time I saw any flare for the unusual was the stripes 
             on his black robe. That was done tongue in cheek, to just 
             kind of lampoon some of the overseriousness some of us 
             sometimes have with regard to the Supreme Court.
               William Rehnquist was a good father. His daughter Janet 
             worked with us on my staff for a short time. I think the 
             world of her. She is a good person. The other offspring of 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist are also good people. I knew Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist's wife who preceded him in death. She 
             was a beautiful, lovely human being, to whom he gave great 
             deference. This was a man who counted. This was a Chief 
             Justice who made a difference. This is a person whom I 
             respect and whom I care for.
               I yield the floor.

               Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, today we remember the life 
             and dedication of one of the most influential leaders of 
             the U.S. Supreme Court.
               William H. Rehnquist, 16th Chief Justice of the United 
             States, passed away on Saturday, September 3, 2005. A 
             midwesterner, Rehnquist's service to our country dates 
             back to March 1943 when he was drafted into the U.S. Army 
             Air Corps, the equivalent of today's U.S. Air Force. He 
             served in World War II until 1946.
               After his time in the military, Rehnquist began his 
             academic journey under the GI bill at Stanford University, 
             where he earned a bachelor's degree, a master's degree, 
             and ultimately graduated first in his class at the 
             Stanford Law School. After clerking for Justice Robert H. 
             Jackson, Rehnquist spent the next 16 years in private 
             practice in Arizona.
               In 1971, President Nixon nominated William Rehnquist to 
             be an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court. As Associate 
             Justice, Rehnquist was nicknamed the ``Lone Ranger'' for 
             his many lone dissents on the nine-member Court.
               In 1986, President Ronald Reagan elevated William 
             Rehnquist to Chief Justice of the United States. In that 
             role, Rehnquist became known for his ability to foster and 
             retain collegiality among Associate Justices with widely 
             differing views on the issues before the Court. He was an 
             outstanding leader of the judicial branch of our 
             Government.
               Those of us in the Senate probably remember him best for 
             his service during the impeachment trial for President 
             Clinton. He presided over that historic event with dignity 
             and decorum.
               Over the past year, as he battled cancer, Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist was as determined and sharp as ever, doing his 
             job faithfully until the day that he passed away.
               Today, we remember the Chief Justice's passion, 
             dedication, and brilliance. And we also remember his great 
             sense of humor. Bill Rehnquist will be sorely missed by 
             his family, his friends, and his country.

               Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize 
             and honor one of our country's greatest judicial leaders, 
             a noble public servant, the 16th Chief Justice of the 
             United States, William Hubbs Rehnquist. For the past 33 
             years, the last 19 of which as its leader, Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist served the Supreme Court with honor, wisdom, and 
             keen judgment. His record will be remembered as one of 
             ideological dedication and devotion in a court of 
             consensus and collegiality.
               A native of Milwaukee, WI, William Rehnquist first 
             answered his country's call to service in World War II by 
             serving in the Army Air Corps as a weather observer in 
             North Africa from 1943 to 1946. Upon his return, he earned 
             his bachelor's and master's degrees in political science 
             from Stanford University in 1948, and a master's degree in 
             government from Harvard University in 1950. He earned his 
             L.L.B. from Stanford in 1952, graduating first in his 
             class, a class that included his future Supreme Court 
             colleague Sandra Day O'Connor.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist's first experience with the 
             Supreme Court came when he clerked for Associate Supreme 
             Court Justice Robert Jackson. Rehnquist observed during 
             this time at the Court what he would later describe as the 
             ``expansion of federal power at the expense of State 
             power.''
               After his clerkship, Rehnquist moved to Phoenix, AZ, 
             where he practiced law in the private sector for more than 
             15 years. During this time, he became involved in 
             politics; and when President Nixon was elected in 1968, 
             Rehnquist was asked to serve as Assistant Attorney General 
             for the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel. 
             Three years later, in 1971, President Nixon nominated 
             Rehnquist to replace Justice John Marshall Harlan on the 
             U.S. Supreme Court.
               From his early years as an Associate Justice through his 
             years as the Court's leader, Chief Justice Rehnquist 
             chartered a course to reestablish the important principle 
             of federalism, an integral part of our Nation's 
             constitutional structure. In cases such as National League 
             of Cities v. Usery in 1976 through U.S. v. Lopez in 1995, 
             his opinions aimed to protect the role of the States 
             within the Federal system by recognizing that our 
             government is one of enumerated rights and dual 
             sovereignty.
               Though a strong and vigorous advocate for his beliefs, 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist was always respectful of his 
             colleagues and committed to the rule of law, never 
             allowing politics or infighting to threaten his Court. All 
             of us in the Senate got to know Chief Justice Rehnquist 
             when he presided over the impeachment trial of President 
             William Clinton. He was a decisive, but not intrusive 
             arbiter. His insightful observations about the operation 
             of the Senate were both serious and humorous. A profound 
             defender of the Constitution and a staunch protector of 
             liberty, Chief Justice Rehnquist has left behind a legacy 
             of thoughtfulness and quiet intellect, and will be 
             remembered as one of our Nation's greatest judicial 
             leaders.

               Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I was sad to hear of Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist's passing, but I want to share my 
             gratitude for his service. He exceeded all but seven 
             Justices by the length of his 33 years on the Supreme 
             Court Bench. President Nixon nominated him to be the 100th 
             Supreme Court Justice in 1971. Fourteen years later, 
             President Reagan nominated him to serve as Chief Justice. 
             In his tenure as Chief Justice, he oversaw benchmark cases 
             and events that helped to shape the Supreme Court and the 
             country as we know it today. His efficient management of 
             the Court and careful interpretation of the Constitution 
             provide a good example for future Chief Justices.
               He was a very learned man, interested in a wide range of 
             topics and pleasant to be around. In 1952, he graduated 
             first in his law school class at Stanford. In addition to 
             his law degree, he held master's degrees in political 
             science from Stanford and Harvard.
               He left law school and moved to Washington, DC, to clerk 
             at the Supreme Court, a place where he would eventually 
             spend over a third of his life.
               At times our lives intersected. During the impeachment 
             trial of President Clinton, I presided on the Senate floor 
             just before Chief Justice Rehnquist took the presiding 
             officer's chair--and then I took over each day as he left 
             the chair. I also presided when he was escorted out of the 
             Chamber following the end of the trial. I enjoyed reading 
             his book about civil liberties in wartime and his book 
             about the history of impeachments, which I was fortunate 
             enough to get him to sign for me.
               Now in the wake of his death and one of the worst 
             natural disasters in U.S. history, the Senate will soon 
             move to fill the vacancies on the Court. People are going 
             through some hard times in our country. Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist knew about hard times.
               He returned to the bench after being diagnosed and 
             treated for cancer. He fought bravely to finish his job 
             and spurned the rumors of retirement this summer. He 
             stated that he would continue as long as his health 
             permits. And he did. I admire him for it.
               We also must continue to do our job by holding hearings 
             and then voting on the President's nominees to the court. 
             If we keep the political posturing to a minimum, we should 
             have plenty of time to fill the spot of the man who held 
             it for so long and so well.

               Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today we mourn Chief 
             Justice William H. Rehnquist, who faithfully served the 
             Supreme Court and our Nation for 33 years--19 of them as 
             Chief Justice. That tenure made him the fourth longest 
             serving Chief Justice in the history of our Nation, 
             surpassed only by Chief Justices Melville Weston Fuller, 
             Roger B. Taney, and John Marshall. He was also the fifth 
             longest serving Justice in our history. Walter Dellinger, 
             former acting Solicitor General in the Clinton 
             administration, has suggested that Chief Justice Rehnquist 
             will be judged by history as one of the three most 
             influential Chief Justices, together with Marshall and 
             Chief Justice Earl Warren. We have truly lost a historic 
             figure.
               It is with pride, then, that we in Wisconsin claim Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist as a native son. He was born in our 
             State, and Wisconsin was his first home. He grew up in 
             Shorewood, a suburb of Milwaukee, and graduated from 
             Shorewood High School in 1942. Wisconsin must have 
             provided a good foundation for his future; he went on to 
             graduate first in his class from Stanford Law School and 
             to clerk for former Supreme Court Justice Robert H. 
             Jackson, another of the great jurists of the 20th century.
               I have deep respect for this son of Wisconsin, although 
             I did not always agree with his substantive legal views. 
             Indeed, we are hearing praise for Chief Justice Rehnquist 
             from across the political and legal spectrum. To be 
             admired and respected despite philosophical differences is 
             one of the marks of a truly great man.
               Justice John Paul Stevens, perhaps Rehnquist's most 
             ideologically distant colleague on the current Court, paid 
             tribute to him on behalf of the entire Court on the 
             occasion of Chief Justice Rehnquist's 30th anniversary on 
             the bench. Justice Stevens praised him for his efficiency, 
             good humor, and absolute impartiality when presiding over 
             Court conferences. That Chief Justice Rehnquist possessed 
             sufficient intellectual strength and personal skill to 
             preside over discussions among nine of the finest legal 
             minds in the Nation and to earn their respect is no small 
             feat, particularly considering the difficulties and 
             dissension that have marked discussions and conferences in 
             other eras. All acknowledge that Chief Justice Rehnquist 
             was a devoted and skilled Court administrator, not just 
             for his own highest court but also in his role as guardian 
             of our entire third branch of government, the Federal 
             judiciary.
               In addition to his accomplishments on the Court, Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist deserves our greatest respect for the 
             dignity and fortitude with which he conducted himself in 
             the last year. Despite the fact that he was clearly 
             suffering from a serious illness, he continued to serve 
             the public and the Court. He was an inspiration to all who 
             encounter physical obstacles in carrying out their duties, 
             to all who face the challenges of illness or disability 
             but still want to contribute to their country or their 
             communities.
               History will judge whether Chief Justice Rehnquist led 
             the Court in a direction that was good for the country. 
             For now, it is appropriate to recognize his intellect and 
             his service. I have deep respect for Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist's integrity, his personal fortitude and his 
             devotion to the Court and the entire judicial branch. 
             Wisconsin will miss our distinguished son.

               Mr. HAGEL. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the late 
             Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist. The Chief Justice 
             leaves behind a legacy as one of the longest serving and 
             most influential members of America's highest court. 
             America is a better and stronger nation because of his 
             distinguished service on the U.S. Supreme Court.
               As many from his generation did, Chief Justice Rehnquist 
             served in the military during World War II. He relied on 
             the GI bill to attend college after the war and graduated 
             from Stanford Law School at the top of his class. In 1951 
             and 1952, Justice Rehnquist served as a U.S. Supreme Court 
             law clerk to Justice Robert Jackson, and then went on to a 
             distinguished career in private legal practice.
               In 1971, President Nixon nominated Rehnquist to replace 
             John Marshall Harlan on the Supreme Court, beginning one 
             of the longest terms of service in the history of the U.S. 
             Supreme Court. In 1986, President Ronald Reagan nominated 
             Justice Rehnquist to be Chief Justice. He served in that 
             capacity for over 18 years.
               Only 16 individuals have served as Chief Justice of the 
             United States. Legal scholars identify periods of 
             evolution in American jurisprudence by the name of the 
             Chief Justice presiding during each era. The Rehnquist 
             court will go down in American history as one of the most 
             important.
               As an Associate Justice, Rehnquist began coaxing the 
             Court back into the role our Founders envisioned. As Chief 
             Justice, Rehnquist continued to gradually pull the Court 
             away from promoting particular social policies and back 
             toward the principles of federalism enshrined in our 
             Constitution. By the time he was through, Rehnquist had 
             patiently helped reshape the relationships between our 
             branches of government and the States.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist deserves enormous credit for 
             returning the Court to its role of analyzing and 
             interpreting the Constitution and our laws. History will 
             judge Chief Justice Rehnquist well for the way in which he 
             shaped and guided the Supreme Court during his service to 
             our Nation.
               America will miss him.

               Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, today I rise to pay tribute 
             to one of the greatest legal minds of our day: Chief 
             Justice William Hubbs Rehnquist, who passed away late 
             Saturday night. His death is a tremendous loss to our 
             entire Nation. I join my fellow Americans in both mourning 
             his passing and honoring his profound contribution to our 
             country.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist faithfully served the American 
             people on their Supreme Court for 33 years. Without 
             question, our country owes him a debt of great gratitude.
               The individual who occupies the center seat on the 
             Supreme Court is not the Chief Justice of the Supreme 
             Court, but the Chief Justice of the United States--the one 
             person who embodies our national commitment to 
             constitutional democracy and to the rule of law. 
             Throughout his life, William Hubbs Rehnquist revered the 
             Supreme Court and the rule of law as few people have--not 
             only as our Nation's Chief Justice for 19 years, as 
             Associate Justice for 14 years, and as a High Court law 
             clerk, but also a student and a scholar of the Supreme 
             Court. Rehnquist has written numerous books on legal 
             history and the Supreme Court--including: ``The Supreme 
             Court: How It Was, How It Is''; ``Grand Inquests: The 
             Historic Impeachments of Justice Samuel Chase and 
             President Andrew Johnson''; ``All the Laws But One: Civil 
             Liberties in Wartime''; and ``Centennial Crisis: The 
             Disputed Election of 1876.''
               William Hubbs Rehnquist was born October 1, 1924, in 
             Milwaukee, WI. He entered the U.S. Army Air Force and 
             served in World War II from 1943 to 1946. Rehnquist 
             obtained his undergraduate degree from Stanford University 
             and two master's degrees from Stanford and Harvard 
             Universities. He received his law degree from Stanford, 
             graduating first in his class. Rehnquist served as a law 
             clerk for Justice Robert H. Jackson, then practiced law in 
             Phoenix, AZ. President Richard Nixon appointed Rehnquist 
             to serve, first as Assistant Attorney General in charge of 
             the Office of Legal Counsel at the U.S. Department of 
             Justice, and then as Associate Justice in 1972. President 
             Ronald Reagan nominated him as Chief Justice in 1986.
               The Supreme Court enjoyed renewed admiration under 
             Rehnquist's leadership. Guided by Rehnquist's steady hand, 
             the U.S. Senate weathered one of the most difficult and 
             controversial moments in our Nation's modern history--the 
             impeachment trial of a sitting U.S. President.
               Rehnquist believed that the best judiciary was a 
             restrained judiciary--one that would adhere to the letter 
             of the law--not to the personal policy preferences of its 
             members. Two areas in particular stand out in my mind as 
             perhaps the most lasting examples of this legacy.
               The Rehnquist court may perhaps best be remembered for 
             the restoration of common sense to our criminal justice 
             system. Many Americans perhaps do not remember the days of 
             the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren. The 16 
             years under Warren, from 1953 to 1969, were nothing short 
             of a heyday for criminals in America. Many Americans 
             probably are familiar with the notion of letting a 
             criminal off on the basis of a ``technicality.'' This 
             notion originated in the years of the Warren court. The 
             Supreme Court let countless criminals go free because 
             police officers did not say precisely what the Court 
             wanted them to say when they arrested criminals, or 
             because warrants did not say precisely what the Court 
             wanted them to say when the police searched criminals. It 
             is no exaggeration to assert that, at that time, the 
             rights of criminals were placed before the rights of 
             victims--not to mention before the well-being of society 
             in general.
               This period ended when President Reagan elevated William 
             Rehnquist to Chief Justice. Chief Justice Rehnquist did 
             his level best to return our Constitution to its original 
             understanding, an understanding that gives law enforcement 
             officials the freedom they need to protect society from 
             criminals. Over the last decade, we have witnessed a 
             historic decline in violent crime all across America. This 
             is due, in no small part, to the efforts of Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist.
               The second area, one equally, if not more important than 
             the first, was the effort to restore the Federal-State 
             partnership known as ``federalism'' envisioned by our 
             Founding Fathers. Our Founding Fathers believed that 
             States and the Federal Government should be equal 
             partners. Indeed, it was the view of our Founding Fathers 
             that the Federal Government should have limited and 
             enumerated powers, and, in fact, the primary authority to 
             legislate should be left to State governments. I know this 
             might come as a surprise to some, but not all wisdom 
             emanates from Washington, DC. State governments, after 
             all, are closer to the people than the Federal Government 
             is. Our Founding Fathers realized this fact.
               Unfortunately, many Supreme Court Justices did not. Over 
             the years, many of these Justices had interpreted the 
             Constitution to give the Federal Government unlimited 
             powers. These Justices characterized everything the 
             Federal Government wanted to do as a regulation of 
             ``interstate commerce.''
               This was a fiction, of course, but over the years the 
             Federal Government grew bigger and more powerful, the 
             State governments grew smaller and less powerful, and the 
             American people became less free.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist did his part to stem this tide. 
             He tried to stand for our Constitution and the founding 
             vision that not everything should be left to the Federal 
             Government. Although this project is still unfinished, 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist made impressive strides, and there 
             is no question that our Nation is better off today for his 
             efforts.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist's passing also reminds us that 
             Supreme Court Justices are, after all, human beings--and 
             that they should be treated with civility and respect, not 
             as political pawns. Thus, perhaps the best way that we in 
             the Senate might pay tribute to Chief Justice Rehnquist's 
             legacy is to put partisanship aside in the judicial 
             confirmation process.
               President Bush has now fittingly nominated one of 
             Rehnquist's former law clerks, Judge John Roberts, to 
             replace him as Chief Justice. We should do the right thing 
             by Chief Justice Rehnquist and vote on Judge Roberts' 
             nomination as expeditiously as possible--and without some 
             of the political posturing that has greeted other well-
             qualified nominees.
               My thoughts and prayers are with Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist's family. The Nation suffered a profound loss on 
             Saturday night. I am confident, however, that we in the 
             Senate will do our part to proceed in a manner that honors 
             the memory of our late Chief Justice and in a manner that 
             would make him proud.

               Mr. KYL. Mr. President, the death of William Hubbs 
             Rehnquist leaves us saddened but also grateful for his 
             more than three decades of service to his country as a 
             Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, including 19 years as 
             its Chief Justice.
               I first met Chief Justice Rehnquist when he was a lawyer 
             in Phoenix. He spent most of the 1950s and 1960s 
             practicing law in our State, and raising a family there 
             with his wife, Natalie, who passed away in 1991. He made 
             an annual return to Arizona from 1994 until last year, to 
             teach a course on Supreme Court history at the University 
             of Arizona College of Law, my alma mater.
               Appointed to his seat by President Nixon in 1972, and 
             elevated to Chief Justice by President Reagan in 1986, he 
             provided steady leadership at the Court through turbulent 
             decades. He showed that one man of integrity really can 
             make a difference.
               He was a conservative whose philosophy did not always 
             carry the day, especially in his early years on the Court. 
             More recently, there has been greater acceptance of his 
             notion of balance between the authority of States and the 
             Federal Government. His decisions helped prevent the 
             rights of criminal suspects from being overemphasized to 
             the point that law enforcement was hampered in doing its 
             job. They curbed the government's use of racial quotas, 
             deemed by most Americans to be a squandering of the moral 
             authority of the civil rights movement. They reaffirmed 
             the religious freedom clause of the first amendment. They 
             upheld restrictions on the practice of abortion, again in 
             keeping with the views of most Americans.
               On a personal level, William Rehnquist had a quick, dry 
             wit and a manner that was warm and courteous. He was a 
             straight shooter, devoid of pretentiousness, yet deeply 
             learned in the law and many other things. The legacy he 
             leaves includes the histories he wrote, namely his four 
             books on the Court and the American legal system: ``The 
             Supreme Court: How It Was, How It Is,'' 1987; ``Grand 
             Inquests: The Historic Impeachments of Justice Samuel 
             Chase and President Andrew Johnson,'' 1992; ``All the Laws 
             But One: Civil Liberties in Wartime,'' 1998; and 
             ``Centennial Crisis: The Disputed Election of 1876,'' 
             2004.
               Notice those titles. We had, during his tenure as Chief 
             Justice, a Presidential impeachment--over which he 
             presided with a dignity and good sense that were 
             reassuring to all, in and out of the Senate Chamber. We 
             had a disputed election--in which he led the Court in 
             delivering the U.S. Government and the country from a 
             nightmare of litigation and partisan combat.
               His death has left mourners even among those who 
             disagreed with him. The liberal law professor Laurence H. 
             Tribe offered words of praise for his brilliance, his 
             honesty, and his calm leadership. He called Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist ``a master'' at enabling the Court to ``earn the 
             respect of all who take part in its proceedings or are 
             affected by its rulings.'' Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg 
             said he ``was the fairest, most efficient boss I have ever 
             had.''
               The admiration he inspired in people all across the 
             political spectrum is due also to the superb job he did as 
             the Federal judiciary's top administrator, which is part 
             of the role of Chief Justice. He staunchly asserted the 
             independence of the Federal court system and fought to see 
             that those who worked in it were adequately compensated.
               William Rehnquist loved his family; he loved the law; he 
             loved America and its history; and he loved the Supreme 
             Court as an institution. The courage and tenacity he 
             showed, despite suffering from thyroid cancer, were 
             typical of him. He presided over oral arguments in the 
             spring and continued his work on that group of cases until 
             just last month.

               It is the right of every citizen to be tried by judges 
             as free, impartial, and independent as the lot of humanity 
             will admit.

               So said the Massachusetts Constitution of 1780, which 
             influenced the writing of the U.S. Constitution. William 
             Rehnquist was a free, impartial, and independent judge. 
             His combination of strong-mindedness and meticulous 
             fairness made him perfect for the position he held. He 
             makes Americans, and especially Arizonans, very proud. We 
             mourn his loss.

               Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, while the Nation's attention 
             is rightly focused on the ongoing tragedy in the South, I 
             would also like to say a few words about the passing of a 
             great American. After a long and extraordinary life, 
             William Rehnquist died this past weekend. The 16th Chief 
             Justice of the United States leaves us with an unmatched 
             legacy of service to our Nation.
               Born 80 years ago in Milwaukee, WI, William Rehnquist 
             lived a truly remarkable life. Like many in his 
             generation, he served in World War II and was stationed in 
             North Africa. With the support of scholarship money from 
             the GI bill, Chief Justice Rehnquist attended college at 
             Stanford University. He then went on to earn his law 
             degree from Stanford Law School. At law school, the Chief 
             Justice began to establish his reputation as a brilliant 
             legal thinker and an able scholar. He graduated at the top 
             of his class, just ahead of Sandra Day O'Connor.
               After clerking for Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, 
             Rehnquist married his late wife Natalie Cornell and moved 
             to Phoenix, AZ. There, Chief Justice Rehnquist and Nan 
             raised their three children--James, Janet, and Nancy--
             while he built a long career as one of Arizona's leading 
             attorneys.
               In 1969, Chief Justice Rehnquist became a public servant 
             as an Assistant U.S. Attorney General. Two years later, he 
             was nominated by President Nixon to the Supreme Court. 
             After being confirmed by the Senate, he took his seat as 
             an Associate Justice of the Court--at 47, he was the 
             Court's youngest member. In 1986, President Reagan 
             nominated and the Senate confirmed Justice Rehnquist as 
             the Chief Justice of the United States.
               During his 33 years on the Court, Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist gained respect for his sharp intellect, his 
             strong sense of fairness, and his profound devotion to the 
             Court and to public service.
               The Chief Justice's extraordinary legal career was 
             surpassed only by the courage that he showed in his final 
             year of life. During that time, he battled bravely against 
             thyroid cancer. Through radiation and chemotherapy 
             treatments, he continued to serve on the Court and stated 
             that he would continue to perform his duties as Chief 
             Justice as long as his health permitted. He did just that, 
             with the dignity and dedication that characterized his 
             tenure on the Court.
               William Rehnquist truly was first among equals. May he 
             rest in peace.

               Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, today I speak in honor of 
             Chief Justice William Rehnquist. The Chief Justice served 
             this Nation's highest court with distinction and honor for 
             more than three decades, and his career in public service 
             started years earlier. Even as he battled cancer over the 
             past year, he continued to be an example of personal 
             strength, dignity, and fortitude. I join my colleagues in 
             mourning his passing and offering my prayers to his 
             family.
               The Chief Justice was a staunch defender of the Supreme 
             Court and an active, independent judiciary. He was admired 
             as a warm and helpful colleague, a thoughtful mentor, and 
             an extremely effective administrator of the Federal court 
             system. The courts were well cared for under his 
             distinguished leadership.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist also engaged directly with many 
             of the toughest constitutional controversies of the 20th 
             century. Although I often disagreed with his decisions, 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist's opinions have been the source of 
             important scholarship and litigation. Like the Chief 
             Justice he followed, the late Earl Warren, Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist will be remembered as an important historical 
             figure whose legacy will impact generations of Americans.
               I knew the Chief Justice only at a distance. As a lawyer 
             and a constitutional law instructor, I was required to 
             wrestle intellectually with his ideas and arguments, and 
             to press my students to divine his judicial instincts and 
             motivations. My regret is that I never got to know him 
             personally, or even to join one of his legendary walks 
             around the Capitol or monthly poker games. I know that his 
             warmth and humor have touched many of my colleagues, and 
             he will be missed.
               Of course the strength of our constitutional structure 
             is that it is greater than any individual. Each of us 
             plays but a small role in designing or building or 
             repairing that structure. It is greater and more important 
             than any of us. We mourn the passing of Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist and now look to the future and the important 
             work to be done.

               Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I rise today to honor Chief 
             Justice William Rehnquist, who was a brilliant jurist, a 
             devoted public servant, and a person who shared my love of 
             Vermont.
               Though most Americans knew Chief Justice Rehnquist for 
             his years of service on the Supreme Court, many Vermonters 
             knew him as a neighbor and a friend. Like most who visit 
             our great State, Chief Justice Rehnquist fell in love with 
             Vermont's natural beauty and rural character and purchased 
             a home in Greensboro in 1974.
               For over 30 years, Chief Justice Rehnquist escaped the 
             humidity and stress of Washington every summer in favor of 
             the picturesque surroundings and quiet charm of Caspian 
             Lake. Whether it was playing cards, visiting Willey's 
             Store, or worshipping at the Greensboro United Church of 
             Christ, Chief Justice Rehnquist immersed himself in the 
             community with a remarkable subtlety and modesty for a man 
             of his stature and prominence. The Chief Justice would 
             also share his knowledge of history, politics, and the law 
             with community members in a lecture that became a much 
             anticipated summer tradition in Vermont's Northeast 
             Kingdom.
               Each year, before the State of the Union, I would 
             usually have a chance to chat with the Chief Justice about 
             his time in Vermont. Amidst the chaos and cameras of the 
             Capitol on such a busy night, Chief Justice Rehnquist 
             always found time to reminisce about the summer months he 
             spent in our State. I always enjoyed these brief 
             discussions with such a kind and engaging man who valued 
             life's simple pleasures so dearly.
               On September 5, the Burlington Free Press, describing 
             the reaction in Greensboro to the Chief Justice's passing, 
             wrote:

               It wasn't a dignitary that was mourned; it was a guy who 
             liked to walk everywhere and call people by their first 
             names (and expected them to return the favor). It was a 
             guy who had an affinity for Hershey's Special Dark 
             Chocolate bars and Donna Gerow's homemade pumpkin bread.

               As millions of Americans mourn the loss of one of the 
             most influential people of our time, Vermonters in 
             Greensboro, and around Caspian Lake, mourn a good 
             neighbor, a great friend, and a fellow Vermonter.

               The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the 
             Senate will proceed to a vote on the resolution honoring 
             the life of Chief Justice William Rehnquist, which the 
             clerk will report.
               The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

               A resolution (S. Res. 234), relative to the death of 
             William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice of the United States.

               The result was announced--yeas 95, nays 0.
               The resolution (S. Res. 234) was agreed to.
               The preamble was agreed to.
               The resolution, with its preamble, reads as follows:
                                     S. Res. 234
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist, the late Chief Justice of 
             the United States, was born in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, to 
             William Benjamin Rehnquist and Margery Peck Rehnquist and 
             raised in Shorewood, Wisconsin;
               Whereas a young William H. Rehnquist served our Nation 
             during the Second World War in the United States Army Air 
             Force at home and abroad from 1943 to 1946;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist enrolled in Stanford 
             University, where he earned a bachelor's and master's 
             degree in political science and was elected to Phi Beta 
             Kappa;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist earned a second master's 
             degree in government from Harvard University;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist graduated first in a very 
             impressive class, including his future Supreme Court 
             colleague, Sandra Day O'Connor, from Stanford University's 
             School of Law;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist began his legal career by 
             serving as a law clerk to Supreme Court Justice Robert 
             Jackson;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist married the late Natalie 
             Cornell, and they raised 3 children, James, Janet, and 
             Nancy;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist was an accomplished 
             attorney, having practiced law for 16 years in Phoenix, 
             Arizona;
               Whereas President Richard Nixon selected William H. 
             Rehnquist to serve as Assistant Attorney General for the 
             Office of Legal Counsel of the Department of Justice;
               Whereas President Richard Nixon also nominated William 
             H. Rehnquist to serve as an Associate Justice on the 
             Supreme Court of the United States;
               Whereas President Ronald Reagan nominated William H. 
             Rehnquist to serve as the sixteenth Chief Justice of the 
             United States;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist had a profound love for 
             history and respect for the arts and served as Chancellor 
             of the Smithsonian Institution for 19 years;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist was a skilled writer and 
             avid historian and authored several books on Supreme Court 
             history and the American legal system;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist was a man of enormous 
             intellect and great common sense, a combination that was 
             reflected in the clarity of his opinions;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist's record illustrates his 
             unwavering commitment to judicial restraint, judicial 
             independence, and the rule of law;
               Whereas, under his firm leadership and superb managerial 
             skills, William H. Rehnquist efficiently managed the 
             Supreme Court of the United States for 19 years;
               Whereas leaders of both political parties agree that 
             William H. Rehnquist served with honor and integrity in 
             his role as the second Chief Justice of the United States 
             to preside over a presidential impeachment trial, 
             respecting the institutional domain of the Senate and its 
             processes, procedures, and traditions;
               Whereas, as the leader of the Supreme Court, William H. 
             Rehnquist was highly regarded by all of his colleagues, 
             including those with differing judicial philosophies;
               Whereas his former colleagues have described William H. 
             Rehnquist as a ``splendid administrator'', ``the most 
             efficient manager'', ``a great Chief Justice'', 
             ``meticulously fair'', and the ``most all-around 
             successful'' Chief Justice;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist served with distinction on 
             the Supreme Court of the United States for over 14 years 
             as an Associate Justice and 19 years as the Chief Justice, 
             more than 33 years in all;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist was the fourth longest 
             serving Chief Justice of the United States;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist was 1 of our Nation's most 
             influential and memorable Chief Justices;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist was the embodiment of the 
             ideal qualities of a judge, fair, impartial, open minded, 
             and above all committed to the Constitution and the rule 
             of law;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist will be remembered as 1 of 
             the greatest Chief Justices of the United States;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist passed away on September 3, 
             2005, surrounded by his loving family; and
               Whereas our Nation is deeply indebted to William H. 
             Rehnquist, a truly distinguished American: Now, therefore, 
             be it
               Resolved, That the Senate--
               (1) extends its heartfelt sympathy to the family and 
             friends of William H. Rehnquist;
               (2) acknowledges William H. Rehnquist's life-long 
             service to the United States of America as a World War II 
             veteran, a talented attorney, a dedicated public servant, 
             a brilliant jurist, and one of our Nation's greatest Chief 
             Justices; and
               (3) commends William H. Rehnquist for his 33 year tenure 
             on the Supreme Court of the United States and his many 
             accomplishments as Chief Justice of the United States.

               Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent the time until 1:30 
             be equally divided, and at 1:30 the Senate stand in recess 
             until 3:30 today as a further mark of respect to Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist, provided further that when the Senate 
             reconvenes at 3:30 there be a period for morning business 
             with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes 
             each.

               The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so 
             ordered.

               Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I would like to take the next 
             10 minutes to talk about a couple of different items.
               Not far from where we are today, the body of our late 
             Chief Justice has lain in repose, and a number of us were 
             privileged to go there earlier today just to say goodbye 
             and to thank him for his service to our country--33 years. 
             That is a long time, more than three decades that he has 
             served us. His love for our country, his love for the law 
             and the integrity of our Nation's judiciary system was 
             only surpassed by his love for his family and for those 
             with whom he worked.
               During his time on the Court, he fostered, among other 
             things, real congeniality among the Justices--something 
             that is not easy to do in that forum or, frankly, in this 
             one. In return, he was held in high esteem by his 
             colleagues who had called him, among other things, 
             ``brilliant,'' ``principled,'' ``generous,'' with ``a good 
             sense of humor,'' something we can never have too much of.
               He demonstrated great personal strength and courage in 
             leading the Court and this country through difficult and 
             contentious times, continuing his work in the face of 
             ever-daunting health problems that would have set most of 
             us on our backs and far out of the courtroom.
               There are many judicial hallmarks of his time on the 
             Court. Throughout his tenure on the Court, he staunchly 
             supported the independence of the Federal judiciary and 
             our overall governmental system of checks and balances. We 
             will miss him, but we are grateful that he was here to 
             serve us for as long as he has.

               Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I come to the floor this 
             afternoon to speak for three very important reasons. Of 
             course, first is to recognize our Chief Justice who has 
             just passed, William Rehnquist.
               Today the Senate paid its respects to the late Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist, filing through the halls of the Supreme 
             Court where he served this Nation with distinction for 
             more than 33 years.
               I could not help but remember a conversation I had with 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist a couple of years ago. I was 
             walking to work and happened to run into him on one of his 
             legendary strolls around the Court. We talked a bit about 
             what was happening in the judicial nomination process in 
             the Senate. But the specifics of that conversation are 
             probably less important than the style of the 
             conversation. He was informal, approachable, genteel, but 
             certainly direct. And regardless of his physical frailty, 
             he had lost none of his interest or his ability to give a 
             shrewd analysis of the events of the day. If you spent any 
             time at all with this very important man, you would feel 
             the force of his great personality.
               Much has already been written about the legal legacy of 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist because he was one of the most 
             influential jurists of our time. He anchored and presided 
             over a shift to conservative principles, underscoring in 
             particular the importance of federalism and limitations on 
             government. I know some in the conservative community were 
             disappointed that the Supreme Court, on his watch, did not 
             reverse more prior left-leaning precedents, but his strong 
             hand was certainly obvious in a long series of history-
             making decisions. William Rehnquist's impact on 
             jurisprudence was profound and will be felt for many years 
             to come.
               In his personal life, I know this engaging man had many 
             friends, and to all of them, as well as his family, I 
             extend my deepest condolences. The Court has lost a 
             brilliant and fair leader. America has lost a great public 
             servant. I consider myself fortunate to have had the 
             chance to know and be inspired by William Rehnquist.
               I thank the leader for this opportunity to add one more 
             voice to the chorus of tributes from a grateful Nation.

               Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I wish to join with all my 
             colleagues and with America in expressing our condolences 
             to the Rehnquist family and, obviously, our great 
             appreciation for his extraordinary service to this Nation. 
             I hope at a later date to put in a more extensive 
             statement. He was a man whose commitment to the law was 
             exceptional, but his commitment to the country was even 
             higher. We are very fortunate to have had him as our Chief 
             Justice and as a Justice on the Supreme Court for so long.

               Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to 
             William Rehnquist, 16th Chief Justice of the United 
             States. That is the title, Chief Justice of the United 
             States. While the ceremony honoring him goes forward I 
             think it is appropriate that we in this body recognize his 
             incredible service to the Nation. His biography, where he 
             came from and what he did, has been spoken of a great 
             deal. What I wanted to speak about is not only that, but 
             also his personal impact on me, one that he wouldn't have 
             known or known about.
               As a young law student in the early 1980s at the 
             University of Kansas, I can remember studying 
             constitutional law and other areas where his opinions came 
             forth. Frequently in those days he was in the minority 
             opinion role.
               Many of my law school professors would say: Can you 
             believe what this guy wrote? I remember reading his 
             opinions and thinking his opinion seemed very logical. It 
             seems to me he believed in holding with the great 
             traditions of being a Nation of the rule of law, not the 
             rule of man. The Constitution is a textural document. 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist had a big impact on me in his 
             writings and what he believed we stood for as a nation. He 
             has had a big impact on this Nation, and he will be sorely 
             missed.
               He was genteel in all of his dealings. Even when he 
             presided in the Senate over the impeachment trial for 
             President Clinton, he did so in a very stately, gentle 
             fashion. Just his presence was one of a man at peace with 
             himself, who knew what he was about, and knew his role and 
             his duty. He fulfilled his duty to the best of his 
             abilities as Chief Justice, Associate Justice on the 
             Supreme Court, as presiding over an impeachment trial, and 
             working with clerks.
               I think one of the most telling things for an individual 
             is what the people say who worked for you, and 
             particularly those who worked for you perhaps in a lower 
             capacity. It seems unanimous that the clerks for Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist admired the man while they worked for 
             him. It is a tribute to him how well they worked together 
             and how he helped form them. There is a great symmetry 
             about this in John Roberts being nominated now, as a 
             former clerk of Chief Justice Rehnquist, and now nominated 
             to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court left by his 
             former boss. John Roberts is an outstanding nomination to 
             the Chief Justice position. I hope we can move forward in 
             an expeditious fashion, certainly thorough, but in an 
             expeditious fashion.
               That is not what we are here today to talk about. Today 
             it is to talk about and to reflect upon an amazing 
             American in William Rehnquist. He grew up in the suburbs 
             of Milwaukee, WI. His father was the son of Swedish 
             immigrants, and worked as a paper salesman. His mother was 
             a multilingual professional translator. Shortly after 
             graduation from high school, Chief Justice Rehnquist 
             enlisted in the Air Force and during World War II served 
             as a weather observer in North Africa. On completion of 
             his service in the Air Force, the Chief Justice began his 
             undergraduate work at Stanford University. Yes, he did it 
             on the GI bill.
               In 1952, Rehnquist graduated first in his class from 
             Stanford Law School, certainly a monumental 
             accomplishment, an accomplishment of great discipline. 
             Following law school, he clerked for former Supreme Court 
             Justice Robert Jackson. In 1953, he began work at a law 
             firm in Phoenix, and his brilliance was noted by the Nixon 
             Deputy Attorney General at that time, Richard Kleindienst. 
             On October 22, 1971, President Richard Nixon nominated him 
             to serve as an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court. He 
             was confirmed less than 2 months later, which would be 
             record speed for this body by today's standard.
               During his time on the Supreme Court, Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist has defended the original text of the 
             Constitution. To a number of people that may seem like a 
             simple task. After all, it is the Constitution. It is the 
             basic law of the land. What is there to defend? The law 
             speaks for itself. It is a set of plain words on a clear 
             document that has such a significant historical place in 
             our hearts and minds. Yet he comes along on a Court at a 
             point in time when a number of people are saying: It is a 
             living document, it can move with the culture, and we can 
             interpret the words more broadly. We can interpret it not 
             by what it says, but by what we would like it to say.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist fought against that and fought 
             for the original text of the Constitution and said it is 
             as it is. This is a textural document. If we want to 
             change it, that is fine, but it is changed by two-thirds 
             of the House and two-thirds of the Senate and three-
             fourths of the States, not by five people on the Court. 
             Those are not his words, but they are the principles he 
             stood for.
               The role of a Justice on the Supreme Court is to look at 
             the plain meaning and the original text of the 
             Constitution, not at your own cultural bias of the moment 
             and what you believe America may need and therefore may be 
             willing to move to.
               The problem with a living document is that you don't 
             have the rule of law. You are more of a rule of man. So he 
             defended this proposition of the original text of the 
             Constitution, the intent of the Framers.
               Certainly he was a promoter of life. It was in the 1973 
             dissent in Roe v. Wade that then-Associate Justice 
             Rehnquist wrote:

               To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to 
             find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right 
             that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of 
             the Amendment.

               These are Associate Justice Rehnquist's words. In his 
             early years of lonely dissents in cases like Roe, 
             Rehnquist made his mark by standing for constitutional 
             principle over the political preferences of an unelected 
             judiciary. With the retirement of Chief Justice Warren 
             Burger in 1986, President Reagan then elevated Associate 
             Justice Rehnquist to the Court's top post where he served 
             with distinction until his death.
               The last 19 years have shown that Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist was a terrific choice to lead the Supreme Court. 
             He authored countless landmark decisions and thought-
             provoking dissents. In carefully reasoned opinions, he 
             insisted that the principle of federalism is an integral 
             part of our Nation's constitutional structure. He 
             recognized that our government is one of enumerated rights 
             and dual sovereignty, with certain functions and powers 
             properly left to the States.
               One example of Chief Justice Rehnquist's commitment to 
             the laws is his opinion in Dickerson v. United States. 
             Although a long-time critic of Miranda v. Arizona, 
             Rehnquist nevertheless placed his past position aside and 
             wrote the opinion in Dickerson, effectively affirming the 
             holding of Miranda. He served well. He served nobly, and 
             he served with courage. I might note that even during his 
             recent sickness, he found the strength to do his duty and 
             to serve in office. He found the strength to administer 
             the oath of office to President Bush, to consider the 
             challenging cases that came before the Court.
               Peggy Noonan wrote of President Bush's inauguration:

               [T]he most poignant moment was the manful William 
             Rehnquist, unable to wear a tie and making his way down 
             the long marble steps to swear in the president. The 
             continuation of democracy is made possible by such 
             gallantry.

               While some of his colleagues on the Court disagreed with 
             him at times, there can be no doubt that they admired his 
             strong leadership, his likable personality, and his 
             ability to build consensus. That is the noteworthy quality 
             of a gentleman. He served with distinction. He served us 
             well. He carried his course out, and he is now at rest.
               I yield the floor.

               Mr. MARTINEZ. Mr. President, I would be remiss if I did 
             not take a moment to say what a great loss our country has 
             experienced with the passing of our Chief Justice William 
             Rehnquist. William Rehnquist was a man of deep integrity 
             and honor, a true public servant. He served our country 
             well, always keeping an eye toward tradition and working 
             to bring constitutional reason to the complex questions of 
             our Nation. Our country is better for the guiding hand he 
             placed on the Court. His resolute spirit will be missed.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist's leadership brought the Court 
             through three decades of very tumultuous times. September 
             17 of this year would mark the 19th year of his tenure as 
             Chief Justice.
               He led the judiciary with resolve and a steady hand. He 
             will be greatly missed by his family, his colleagues, the 
             Court, and by a grateful Nation.
               As we turn our attention in the coming weeks to the 
             confirmation process to consider the President's nominee 
             to serve as the next Chief Justice, it would be 
             appropriate to pause and reflect on the service to our 
             country provided by this man of exceptional intellect who 
             served his Nation long and faithfully.
               I yield the floor.

               The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.

               Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I join with my colleague, the 
             distinguished Senator from Florida, in expressing my 
             personal condolences and those of my fellow Minnesotans to 
             the family and friends of the former Chief Justice, and I 
             share the sentiments in regard to his distinguished 
             service to our Nation.
                                            Thursday, September 8, 2005
                               MESSAGES FROM THE HOUSE
               At 12:08 p.m., a message from the House of 
             Representatives, delivered by Mr. Croatt, one of its 
             reading clerks, announced that the House has agreed to the 
             following resolution:

               H. Res. 422. Resolution expressing the profound sorrow 
             of the House of Representatives on the death of the 
             Honorable William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice of the 
             United States.

               The message also announced that the House has agreed to 
             the following concurrent resolution, without amendment:

               S. Con. Res. 52. Concurrent resolution providing for the 
             use of the catafalque situated in the crypt beneath the 
             Rotunda of the Capitol in connection with memorial 
             services to be conducted in the Supreme Court Building for 
             the late honorable William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice of 
             the United States.

               Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that 
             Senators be permitted to submit tributes to Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist for the Record until September 30, 2005, and 
             that all tributes be printed as a Senate document.

               The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so 
             ordered.
                                              Friday, September 9, 2005
               Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, on behalf of the people of 
             Minnesota I have taken the floor today to express our 
             condolences to the Rehnquist family for their loss and 
             gratitude and admiration for his extraordinary life of 
             service.
               The Midwest, where William Rehnquist was born, does not 
             have the high mountains or the pounding ocean surf of 
             other parts of the country. We learn from our geography 
             the value of moderation and dependability. William 
             Rehnquist was a solid human being whose consistency and 
             resolve as a member of the Supreme Court benefited the 
             whole country in turbulent times.
               The historian Whitehead has written that the essence of 
             leadership is maintaining order in the midst of change, 
             and change in the midst of order. William Rehnquist lived 
             out the principle that both change and order are necessary 
             in the law and he knew when we needed each.
               Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist served America with 
             great distinction on the Supreme Court for 33 years. His 
             profound respect for the Constitution and his collegial 
             relationships throughout the judiciary will be a standard 
             for future Justices. He knew that his role was more than 
             deciding cases: it was to raise the knowledge of and 
             respect for the rule of law.
               Mr. Rehnquist took his seat as an Associate Supreme 
             Court Justice in 1972 after being appointed by President 
             Richard Nixon, and became Chief Justice in 1986, during 
             the Reagan administration.
               His opinions reflected a staunch adherence to the 
             constitutional principle of States rights. He also 
             displayed an untiring willingness to work with his 
             colleagues to find a compromise without minimizing his 
             position. Chief Justice Rehnquist will be remembered as 
             one of our most influential Chief Justices in history.
               As the Court's most junior Justice, Rehnquist made State 
             sovereignty his central principle of American 
             constitutional law. At times, especially in those early 
             years in 1973, he stood alone in his support of State 
             sovereignty but continued this fight to the end of his 
             time on the bench.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist succeeded in shifting the 
             balance of power between States and the Federal 
             Government. The control and limitation of Federal control 
             will always be a legacy of Chief Justice Rehnquist. He 
             protected the Constitution in his application of the law 
             and took great pride in his protection of civil liberties 
             and the importance of freedom and the democratic spirit in 
             our Constitution.
               As Chief Justice, Mr. Rehnquist made his mark on the 
             Court with grace in an environment where Justices of 
             varying opinions could express themselves free from 
             personal attacks and/or ideological stalemates. His was a 
             Court of strong personalities who operated in profound 
             respect for each other and the country gained from their 
             wisdom and discourse. He was a great leader and effective 
             administrator of the Supreme Court.
               I was personally touched by Chief Justice Rehnquist's 
             determination and heroic passion to serve while battling 
             cancer. As we often hear, we are a government of law and 
             not men and women, and that is true. But our 
             constitutional principles are not self-enforcing. We 
             depend on men and women of good hearts and sharp minds to 
             steer us through difficult moments when the issues of the 
             day collide with our Constitution of over 200 years of 
             age.
               He was to the end a midwesterner: strong, reliable and 
             devoted to the idea of leaving things better than he found 
             them. The whole Nation, and future generations of 
             Americans should be deeply grateful for the legacy he has 
             left.
                                             Monday, September 12, 2005
               Mrs. MURRAY. . . . Last week, this Chamber mourned the 
             passing of Chief Justice Rehnquist who served on our 
             Nation's highest court for over three decades. The great 
             range of issues on which the Supreme Court ruled during 
             Justice Rehnquist's tenure--from Roe v. Wade to capital 
             punishment to Miranda rights to the conclusion of a 
             Presidential election--shows the American public just how 
             closely the Court touches each of our daily lives. My home 
             State of Washington is 3,000 miles away from the Nation's 
             Capital, but the issues the Supreme Court takes up, 
             whether it be title IX or eminent domain or a woman's 
             right to choose, hits home for them as well.
                                          Wednesday, September 14, 2005
               Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I join in acknowledging the 
             life and service of Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
               His was a life of public service. During the Supreme 
             Court's 1951 and 1952 terms, he served as a law clerk for 
             Justice Robert Jackson. From 1969 to 1971, he served as 
             Assistant Attorney General in the Justice Department's 
             Office of Legal Counsel. And from January 7, 1972, to his 
             passing Saturday, he served on the Supreme Court. Through 
             his life of service, Justice Rehnquist has left an 
             indelible mark on this Nation.
               In 1969, on appointing Judge Burger as Chief Justice of 
             the Supreme Court, President Nixon had said: Our Chief 
             Justices have probably had more profound and lasting 
             influence on their times and on the direction of the 
             Nation than most Presidents.
               President Nixon was right. And the service of Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist was proof.
               In 1971, President Nixon nominated Justice Rehnquist to 
             the Supreme Court as an Associate Justice. And in 1986, 
             President Reagan elevated him to the position of Chief 
             Justice. In the history of this Nation, only 16 men have 
             held this high office. Justice Rehnquist presided over the 
             court as Chief Justice for 19 years. Only three men served 
             longer as Chief Justice: Melville Weston Fuller, Roger 
             Taney, and John Marshall.
               I felt a tie with Justice Rehnquist, as he had attended 
             Stanford University and Stanford Law School, a few years 
             ahead of me at both schools. In another one of those 
             quirks of history, he attended the same Stanford Law 
             School class with Sandra Day O'Connor, who would later 
             join him on the Supreme Court.
               I was also able to observe Chief Justice Rehnquist at 
             close range, in 1999, when he presided over the Senate 
             sitting in on the impeachment trial of President Clinton. 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist had written a book on 
             impeachments. But more important, his presence brought 
             dignity and a much-needed sense of humor to those 
             difficult proceedings.
               At one point he noted that a Senate rule forbids both 
             sides in the impeachment trial from objecting to a 
             question.
               From the presiding officer's chair, the Chief Justice 
             wryly observed: The Parliamentarian says they can only 
             object to an answer and not to a question, which is kind 
             of an unusual thing.
               The Chief Justice chuckled, and Senators laughed with 
             him.
               At another point, Majority Leader Lott asked how much 
             time each side had used. The Chief Justice checked with 
             the Parliamentarian and first announced that the House 
             managers had taken 54 minutes and the White House had 
             taken 57 minutes. But then the Chief Justice said that he 
             needed to correct himself, saying that the House managers 
             had actually used up 64 minutes, not just 54 minutes.
               House Manager Rogan, who was scheduled to speak next, 
             inquired: I trust that doesn't mean I have to sit down, 
             Mr. Chief Justice.
               The Chief Justice quipped in response: It's not 
             retroactive.
               Mr. President, Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote many 
             opinions with which I do not agree. He was a very 
             conservative Justice.
               But I will miss Chief Justice Rehnquist. He was a great 
             figure of our times. We will not forget him.
                                             Monday, September 26, 2005
               Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, this afternoon, the Senate 
             begins the debate on the confirmation of Judge John G. 
             Roberts, Jr., to be Chief Justice of the United States. It 
             is not an overstatement to note this is a historic debate. 
             At the age of 50, Judge Roberts, if confirmed, has the 
             potential to serve as Chief Justice until the year 2040 or 
             beyond.
               Today, Justice John Paul Stevens, at the age of 85, 
             continues to serve. If you project Judge Roberts ahead 35 
             years, it would be to the year 2040. Obviously, by that 
             time it will be a very different world. There will be very 
             different issues which will confront the Court with the 
             advances in technology, with the advances in brain 
             scanning, key questions as to how far the privilege 
             against self-incrimination goes to scan someone's brain. 
             Will it be like a blood test and fingerprints or will it 
             be viewed as invasive and a violation of a right to 
             privacy? Those are the kinds of issues which Judge Roberts 
             will confront if confirmed as Chief Justice.
               He also has the potential to project a new image on the 
             Supreme Court. That Court has been buffeted by a whole 
             series of 5-to-4 decisions. Candidly, some of them are 
             inexplicable, where you have, this year, the Supreme Court 
             of the United States saying that Texas could display the 
             Ten Commandments outdoors, but Kentucky could not display 
             the Ten Commandments indoors. There are some minor 
             differences, but it is hard to understand how the Ten 
             Commandments can be shown in Texas but not in Kentucky by 
             a 5-to-4 vote.
               Under the very important legislation of the Americans 
             With Disabilities Act, the Supreme Court had two 5-to-4 
             decisions 3 years apart. One, in a case captioned Garrett 
             v. University of Alabama, in 2001, the Supreme Court 
             declared the title unconstitutional which dealt with 
             discrimination against the disabled in employment.
               Three years later, in Tennessee v. Lane, the Supreme 
             Court upheld the constitutionality of another title of the 
             Americans with Disabilities Act which dealt with access to 
             public accommodations. We have seen a proliferation of 
             opinions with multiple concurrences, making them very hard 
             to understand. Earlier this year, the Judiciary Committee 
             took up the issue of what was happening in Guantanamo, and 
             a study was undertaken on three opinions handed down by 
             the Supreme Court in June of last year. On one case, they 
             couldn't get a majority, a plurality of four, so there was 
             no holding. In the other two cases, there were 
             concurrences and dissents. You have a pattern which exists 
             where Justice A will write a concurring opinion, joined by 
             Justice B, and Justice B will write a separate concurring 
             opinion, joined by Justice A and Justice C.
               This is an issue which was considered during the course 
             of Judge Roberts' hearings. It is one where a new judge, a 
             new Chief Justice at the age of 50, will have an 
             opportunity to make some very systemic changes in the way 
             the Court functions. When Judge Roberts was questioned 
             about his ability to handle this matter--first during the 
             informal meeting in my office and later in the hearings--
             he said he thought he could handle it because, in his many 
             appearances before the Supreme Court, some 39 in number, 
             it was a dialog among equals. I was impressed by his 
             concept of a dialog among equals, that he considered 
             himself as a lawyer arguing before the Court to be dealing 
             with equals. I have had occasion three times to appear 
             before the Supreme Court, and it didn't seem to me like a 
             dialog among equals. But when you have been there 39 times 
             and you know the Justices as well as he does--and the word 
             is that the Justices very much applaud his nomination to 
             be Chief Justice--he has the potential almost from a 
             running start to bring a new day and a new era to the 
             Supreme Court. That is a very attractive feature about his 
             projection as Chief Justice.
               We know the famous historical story about Earl Warren's 
             becoming Chief Justice in 1953. The Court was then faced 
             with Brown v. Board of Education, the desegregation case. 
             There were many disputes in the Court at that time. They 
             had to carry the case over. Chief Justice Warren was able 
             to get a unanimous Court, which was important, so that 
             contentious issue was one where nine Justices agreed and 
             came down with an opinion which was obviously difficult to 
             implement but had a great deal more stature because of its 
             unanimity. So here is an extra bonus for the Court, an 
             extra bonus for America, if confirmed as Chief Justice: 
             the potential that Judge Roberts has to promote a new day 
             and a new era for the Court administratively.
               On his qualifications, Judge Roberts was rated ``well 
             qualified'' by the American Bar Association. It is 
             understandable, since he was a summa cum laude graduate of 
             Harvard College, magna cum laude graduate of Harvard Law 
             School; had a very distinguished career as assistant to 
             Attorney General William French Smith, after serving as a 
             clerk to a distinguished Second Circuit judge, Henry 
             Friendly; then served as clerk to then-Associate Justice 
             William Rehnquist; then, following his work with Attorney 
             General William French Smith, became Associate White House 
             Counsel; practiced with the prestigious law firm of Hogan 
             & Hartson--Hogan & Hartson was prestigious before Judge 
             Roberts got there but a lot more so after he was there 
             and, frankly, after he left--then his status as a premier 
             appellate lawyer; then the Supreme Court with some 39 
             cases.
               It was my view that Judge Roberts has a broad, expansive 
             understanding of the application of the Constitution. He 
             said:

               They

             --referring to the Framers--

             were crafting a document that they intended to apply in a 
             meaningful way down through the ages.

               While he would not quite accept my characterization of 
             agreement with Justice John Marshall Harlan on the 
             document being a living thing, he did say that the core 
             principles of liberty and due process had broad meaning as 
             applied to evolving societal conditions. He is not an 
             originalist. He is not looking to original intent. But he 
             sees the Constitution for the ages and adaptable to 
             evolving societal conditions.
               On the issue of how many questions he answered before 
             the Judiciary Committee, I believe he answered more than 
             most but, candidly, did not answer as many questions as I 
             would like to have had him answer. I will detail that in 
             the course of this brief presentation.
               I have observed, in the 10 Supreme Court nominations 
             where I have had the privilege to participate on the 
             Judiciary Committee, that nominees answer about as many 
             questions as they believe they have to in order to be 
             confirmed. But it has become an evolving process. A view 
             of some of the history of Supreme Court nominations is 
             relevant to see what has happened, what is in the course 
             of happening, and what the next nominee may face.
               The Senate Judiciary Committee has conducted hearings on 
             nominees only since 1916--that is, for the Supreme Court--
             with the nomination of Louis Brandeis by President Woodrow 
             Wilson. Justice Brandeis did not appear. The first time a 
             nominee appeared before the committee was in 1925. The 
             nominee was Harlan Fiske Stone. An issue had arisen as to 
             whether there was a political motivation in the 
             controversial investigation into the conduct of Judge 
             Burton Wheeler. Justice Stone asked to appear to respond 
             to the allegations. He did so, and he was confirmed.
               In 1939, President Roosevelt nominated Felix 
             Frankfurter, who initially refused to appear personally, 
             but after being attacked for his foreign birth, his 
             religious beliefs, and his associations, Frankfurter 
             decided to appear. He read from a prepared statement, 
             refused to discuss his personal views on issues before the 
             Supreme Court. His hearing lasted only an hour and a half 
             in duration and did not set a precedent for future 
             nominees.
               In 1949, Sherman Minton, who had been a U.S. Senator, 
             became the only Supreme Court nominee to refuse to testify 
             before the Judiciary Committee. Minton wrote to the 
             committee:

               I feel the personal participation by the nominee in the 
             committee proceedings related to his nomination presents a 
             serious question of propriety, particularly when I might 
             be required to express my views on highly controversial 
             and litigious issues affecting the Court.

               Notwithstanding Minton's refusal, the committee 
             conducted its hearing in Minton's absence and confirmed 
             him. It wasn't until 1955, with the nomination of Justice 
             John Marshall Harlan, that nominees have appeared 
             regularly before the Judiciary Committee. Only since 1981, 
             following my own election in 1980, have the hearings taken 
             on a little different approach as to what the nominees 
             will answer. Justice O'Connor declined to answer many 
             questions. The next nomination hearing was that for Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist, who was a sitting Associate Justice. 
             Initially Justice Rehnquist declined to appear, then was 
             advised that if he wanted to be confirmed, he would have 
             to appear. It was a contentious hearing. As the record 
             shows, Chief Justice Rehnquist was confirmed by a vote of 
             65 to 33. He did answer a great many questions, although 
             he did not answer a great many questions.
               I asked him a bedrock question as to whether Congress 
             had the authority to take away the jurisdiction of the 
             Supreme Court of the United States on the first amendment. 
             He declined to answer. Overnight a Senate staffer brought 
             me an article which had been written by a young Arizona 
             lawyer in 1958 by the name of William H. Rehnquist which 
             appeared in the Harvard Law Record. The young Arizona 
             lawyer, William H. Rehnquist, was very tough on the Senate 
             Judiciary Committee for the way it conducted its hearings 
             for Charles Whittaker. Charles Whittaker was from Kansas 
             City. There are two Kansas Cities--one in Kansas and one 
             in Missouri. Justice Whittaker lived in one and practiced 
             law in the other. A big to-do was made about the fact that 
             it would be an honor to two States if he was confirmed, 
             where he worked and where he lived.
               This young lawyer from Arizona, Bill Rehnquist, didn't 
             think that amounted to a whole lot. He chastised the 
             Senate Judiciary Committee for not asking about due 
             process and other constitutional issues. So in the face of 
             his declination to answer my questions on taking 
             jurisdiction away from the Supreme Court on the first 
             amendment, I asked him if he was that William H. Rehnquist 
             from Arizona. He said, Yes, that was true, he was.
               I said: Did you write this article?
               He said: Yes, I did. Then he added quickly: And I was 
             wrong.
               So that didn't end the issue because having the 
             authority of this young lawyer from Arizona, pretty good 
             reasoning, I pursued the questions. Finally, he answered 
             the question on could the Congress take away the 
             jurisdiction of the Court on the first amendment. He said, 
             No, the Congress could not do that.
               So naturally I then asked about the fourth amendment, 
             search and seizure. Could the Congress take away the 
             jurisdiction from the Supreme Court on search and seizure. 
             He declined to answer that. I went to amendment five on 
             privilege against self-incrimination. Again he declined. 
             And then six, on right to counsel, and seven, and eight on 
             cruel and unusual punishment. Then I asked him a follow-up 
             question: Why would he answer on the first amendment but 
             not on any of the others? As you may suspect, he refused 
             to answer that question as well.
               It was my judgment that Chief Justice Rehnquist passed 
             muster. It was a battle. And then Justice Scalia came 
             before the Senate following Chief Justice Rehnquist. 
             Justice Scalia would not answer any questions. As I have 
             said--and really too apocryphal--Justice Scalia wouldn't 
             even give his serial number. He would only give his name 
             and rank. Prisoners of war are compelled to answer 
             questions, but only three--name, rank, and serial number. 
             But as I have said, and I have said this to Justice Scalia 
             in interpersonal banter, he wouldn't even give us his 
             serial number. But it was perhaps an exhausted Senate 
             following the confirmation of Chief Justice Rehnquist or 
             perhaps it was Justice Scalia's superb academic and 
             professional record, he would not even answer the question 
             as to whether he would uphold Marbury v. Madison, a 
             decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in 1803 
             where the Court undertook the authority to interpret the 
             Constitution and to interpret the law and to be the final 
             arbiter of the Constitution. Then in 1987 the Judiciary 
             Committee considered the nomination of Judge Bork from the 
             District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Judge Bork had very 
             extensive writings in law reviews and books, many 
             speeches, had a very extensive paper trail, a 
             controversial paper trail. Judge Bork had written that 
             absent original intent there was no judicial legitimacy, 
             and absent judicial legitimacy, there could not be 
             judicial review. Understandably, the committee had many 
             questions for Judge Bork, and in that context Judge Bork 
             felt compelled to answer the questions.

               Mr. HATCH. . . . I was impressed at the Rehnquist 
             funeral to see some 95 former clerks paying respect to 
             their Chief Justice Rehnquist, some of whom were from 
             Utah. . . .

               Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I am pleased today to honor 
             the birth of one of Virginia's and America's true citizen 
             soldiers, statesmen, and most important jurists, the 
             former Chief Justice of the United States, John Marshall.
               The 250th commemoration of his birth over the weekend 
             takes on special significance this week as the Senate 
             prepares to confirm John Roberts as the 17th Chief Justice 
             of the United States. He will replace Chief Justice 
             William Rehnquist, whose decent, dedicated and principled 
             leadership will be difficult to replace. I am confident 
             that Judge Roberts will follow in the tradition of 
             honorable service that was so evident in the work of 
             former Chief Justices Rehnquist and Marshall. . . .
                                            Tuesday, September 27, 2005
               Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I rise on the advice and 
             consent question of Judge John Roberts.
               Before I address my judgment on that, I would like to 
             pay tribute for a second to Sandra Day O'Connor and the 
             late William Rehnquist.
               Sandra Day O'Connor's announced retirement caused the 
             nomination by the President of John Roberts, and 
             subsequently the untimely passing of Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist afforded the opportunity for that nomination to 
             be for Chief Justice as well. In the anticipated furor of 
             this debate and confirmation, the credit never was given 
             that should have been to Justice O'Connor or Justice 
             Rehnquist.
               Sandra Day O'Connor was the first woman appointed to the 
             U.S. Supreme Court. She served with honor and distinction. 
             She wrote brilliantly, concisely, and succinctly, and, 
             most important of all, she had an insight and wisdom 
             second to none. In fact, I commend to everyone her final 
             writing, her dissenting opinion on the eminent domain 
             case, if you want to see a Justice who was well grounded 
             and interested in the American people.
               William Rehnquist was the 16th Chief Justice of the 
             United States, an outstanding individual of immense 
             capacity, dedication, and commitment to the United States 
             of America. His loss is a tragedy, and the retirement of 
             Justice O'Connor is a loss to the Court. . . .
                                          Wednesday, September 28, 2005
               Mr. HAGEL. Mr. President, 25 years from now most of the 
             events and personalities of September 2005 will have 
             passed into the pages of history. New Orleans will once 
             again stand proudly as one of America's most vibrant 
             cities; America will have been forced to address our need 
             for energy independence; and the legacies of today's 
             politicians will be the work of tomorrow's history 
             professors. However, the confirmation of John Roberts as 
             the 17th Chief Justice of the United States could well be 
             even more significant in 2030 than it is today. The 
             Roberts court will have a profound and historic impact on 
             the preservation of liberty for decades to come.
               I first met John Roberts when we both served in the 
             Reagan administration in the early 1980s. He is a person 
             of enormous intelligence, character and judgment. His 
             performance in his Senate confirmation hearings earlier 
             this month transcended tv ads, Internet blogs, tv talking 
             heads, and the million dollar industry that reduces the 
             judicial nominations process to caricatures and buzz words 
             across the political spectrum. As many of my colleagues 
             have noted, the Roberts confirmation hearings forced a 
             serious examination of the role of the Supreme Court and 
             the Federal Government in our society.
               My beliefs about the role of government were shaped and 
             molded when I served on the staff of Nebraska Congressman 
             John Y. McCollister in the 1970s. I remember him warning 
             America about the wholesale disregard of the 10th 
             amendment to the Constitution which states:

               The powers not delegated to the United States by the 
             Constitution, nor prohibited to it by the States, are 
             reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

               In the late 1930s and early 1940s, the Supreme Court 
             used Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution which gives 
             the Federal Government the power to ``regulate commerce,'' 
             as a crowbar to pry open the lid of federalism and more 
             fully insert the Federal Government into the lives of the 
             American people. By the 1970s, we saw an expansion of the 
             Federal Government's power our Founders could not have 
             imagined.
               At the same time that Congressman McCollister was 
             invoking the 10th amendment in the House of 
             Representatives, Justice William Rehnquist was frequently 
             the lone voice on the Supreme Court for the discretion of 
             States and the integrity of the 10th amendment. Much has 
             been said about William Rehnquist in the last month. He 
             was a giant of our time. As history considers his legacy, 
             I believe his ability to move the Court back to a 
             responsible position concerning federalism will be his 
             greatest accomplishment. In this, he had a strong ally in 
             Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
               The Founders did not arrive at the 10th amendment by 
             accident. It was a necessary compromise in order to get 
             the Constitution ratified. The Founders believed that the 
             Constitution must protect the citizens of the United 
             States from the consolidation of the Federal Government's 
             power. History has proven them wise. Well-meaning 
             politicians never have enough power to do all the good 
             things they believe are essential to the Nation's well-
             being. History shows that the growth of central 
             governments is no substitute for the ingenuity and energy 
             of individual citizens.
               It was President Woodrow Wilson who said:

               The history of liberty is a history of the limitation of 
             governmental power, not the increase of it.

               As we work to address 21st century challenges like 
             terrorism, the proliferation of weapons of mass 
             destruction and incredible advances in technology, we will 
             constantly be confronted with the need to balance the 
             expansion of the Federal Government's power with States 
             rights, individual liberties and national security. As we 
             act to secure our Nation, we must also guard against 
             Federal overreaching. That is why measures like the sunset 
             provisions in laws like the Patriot Act are so important.
               In years to come, Congress will be under great pressure 
             to reach into areas of law historically reserved for State 
             and local governments, including land use, education, 
             economic development, law enforcement and contract law, 
             including marriage. A wise and judicious Supreme Court 
             will be as critical as it has ever been to see America 
             through this volatile time.
               Decades from now, if John Roberts can look back upon a 
             legacy of having protected the rights of States and 
             individuals while helping strengthen America from within, 
             and constraining the power of the Federal Government, then 
             it will be a legacy worthy of succeeding William 
             Rehnquist.

               Mr. VOINOVICH. . . . The Chief Justice is the top 
             administrator of the Federal Courts, so any nominee to 
             Chief Justice must possess management skills. Former Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist was an excellent administrator, so Judge 
             Roberts has some shoes to fill. . . .
                                           Thursday, September 29, 2005
               Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, this is a critical time in 
             our Nation's history. For the first time in more than a 
             decade, we have not just one but two vacancies on the U.S. 
             Supreme Court. Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman 
             Justice and often the critical deciding vote, is retiring, 
             and Chief Justice Rehnquist, who served on the Court for 
             more than 33 years, passed away after a courageous battle 
             with cancer. . . .

               Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, Senators cast many 
             important votes--votes to strengthen our highway system, 
             or to implement a comprehensive energy strategy, for 
             example--but it is not often we cast a vote that is both 
             important and truly historic. We do so, however, when we 
             vote on whether to confirm a nominee to be Chief Justice 
             of the United States.
               There have been 9,869 Members of the House of 
             Representatives, 1,884 Senators, and 43 Presidents of the 
             United States, but only 16 Chief Justices. On average, 
             each Chief Justice serves for well over a decade. Our last 
             Chief Justice served for 19 years, a little short of two 
             decades. The occupant of the ``center seat'' on the Court 
             often has had a profound impact on the shape and substance 
             of our legal system. But despite such profound effects, 
             the position of Chief Justice actually got off to a rather 
             inauspicious start.
               The Constitution of the United States mentions the 
             position of Chief Justice only once. Interestingly, it 
             does not do so in Article III, which establishes the 
             judicial branch of our government. Rather, the 
             Constitution refers to the position of Chief Justice, 
             almost in passing, only in Article I, which sets forth the 
             powers of the legislative branch.
               There, in Section 3, Clause 6, it discusses the Senate's 
             procedures for a trial of an impeached President, stating 
             that ``When the President of the United States is tried, 
             the Chief Justice shall preside.'' That is the sum and 
             substance of his constitutional authority.
               The Judiciary Act of 1789, which established the Federal 
             court system, did not add much to the Chief Justice's 
             responsibilities. It specified merely that ``the supreme 
             court of the United States shall consist of a chief 
             justice and five associate justices.''
               It is not surprising, then, that the position of Chief 
             Justice initially was not viewed as particularly 
             important. Indeed, the first Chief Justice, John Jay, left 
             completely disillusioned, believing that neither the Court 
             nor the post would ever amount to very much.
               It took George Washington four tries to find Jay's 
             successor, as prominent people repeatedly turned him down. 
             They were turning down George Washington's offers to make 
             them the Chief Justice of the United States.
               With such humble constitutional roots for the office, 
             the power, prestige, and independence of the Supreme Court 
             and the Federal court system in general often has been 
             tied to the particular personal qualities of those who 
             have served as Chief Justice.
               John Marshall was our first great Chief Justice. His 
             twin legacies were to increase respect for the Court and, 
             relatedly, its power as well. He worked to establish 
             clear, unanimous opinions for the Court, and his opinion 
             in Marbury v. Madison forever cemented the Court as a co-
             equal branch of government.
               Marshall's successes were viewed, then as now, as a 
             function of his formidable personal qualities. He is said 
             to have had a ``first-class mind and a thoroughly engaging 
             personality.'' Thomas Jefferson, for example, tried, in 
             vain, to break his influence on the Court. In writing to 
             James Madison, his successor, about Supreme Court 
             appointments, Jefferson said:

               [I]t will be difficult to find a character of firmness 
             to preserve his independence on the same bench with 
             Marshall.

               That is Thomas Jefferson speaking about Chief Justice 
             Marshall.
               I find myself agreeing with the columnist George Will, 
             who wrote recently in one of his columns:

               Marshall is the most important American never to have 
             been President.

               William Howard Taft and Charles Evans Hughes also used 
             their individual talents to become great Chief Justices. 
             Taft, the only Chief Justice to serve also as President, 
             which was prior to that, had a singular determination to 
             modernize the Federal courts. He used his energy and his 
             political acumen to convince Congress to establish what is 
             now the Judicial Conference of the United States to 
             administer the Federal courts; enact the Judiciary Act of 
             1925, which allowed the Court to decide the cases it would 
             hear; and, before he left office, to give the Court its 
             first, and current, permanent home--a stone's throw from 
             where we stand today, across the East Lawn of the Capitol.
               A fellow Justice called Charles Evans Hughes ``the 
             greatest in a great line of Chief Justices.'' He was known 
             for his leadership in running the Court and for constantly 
             working to enhance the public's confidence in the Court. 
             His successes were at least partly due to his keen 
             appreciation of the limits of that office. This is what 
             Charles Evans Hughes had to say:

               The Chief Justice as the head of the Court has an 
             outstanding position, but in a small body of able men with 
             equal authority in the making of decisions, it is evident 
             that his actual influence will depend on the strength of 
             his character and the demonstration of his ability in the 
             intimate relations of the judges.

               Hughes was famous for the efficient, skillful, and 
             courteous way in which he presided at oral argument, ran 
             the Court's conferences, and assigned opinions, calling 
             the latter his ``most delicate task.'' But his greatest 
             service may have been in spearheading public opposition to 
             FDR's court-packing plan.
               Our last great Chief Justice, William Rehnquist, may be 
             said to have possessed the best qualities of Marshall, 
             Taft, and Hughes. He had an exceptional mind, an engaging 
             personality, boundless energy, and a courteous and 
             professional manner. These qualities helped him 
             revolutionize Federal jurisprudence, administer the 
             Supreme Court and the court system very efficiently, and 
             interact constructively with those of us here in Congress. 
             . . .
                                             Friday, September 30, 2005
               Mr. ALLEN. On September 3, 2005, America lost one of its 
             greatest public servants when, following a year-long 
             battle with cancer, William Hubbs Rehnquist passed away at 
             the age of 80. At the time of his death, he had been a 
             member of the U.S. Supreme Court for 33 distinguished 
             years, having served as Chief Justice since 1986 and 
             previously as an Associate Justice, appointed in 1972.
               Much of William Rehnquist's professional career was 
             dedicated to public service. He served his country 
             honorably in the U.S. Army Air Corps during World War II 
             from 1943 to 1946. After his military service, he earned 
             an undergraduate, a master's and a law degree from 
             Stanford University. Even further demonstrating his 
             intellectual acumen, Rehnquist also graduated with a 
             master's degree from Harvard University and was first in 
             his class at Stanford University Law School. After law 
             school, he became a Supreme Court clerk for Associate 
             Justice Robert Jackson before leaving for private practice 
             in Arizona. In 1969, Chief Justice Rehnquist joined the 
             Nixon administration as an Assistant Attorney General 
             where he served until 1971. That year, President Nixon 
             nominated William H. Rehnquist to be on the Supreme Court; 
             the following year, he was confirmed to be an Associate 
             Justice by the U.S. Senate.
               It was on the Supreme Court that William Rehnquist built 
             his reputation as one of the great legal minds of our 
             time. His tenure on the High Court of the land, both as an 
             Associate Justice and as the Chief Justice, was an 
             extraordinary achievement. I was particularly impressed 
             with his leadership as the head of the entire Federal 
             judiciary, as well as his affable personal demeanor on the 
             bench and off, both of which were important traits in his 
             role as Chief.
               I respect immensely the way in which Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist served on the Court with honor and restraint. As 
             a Justice, he fairly and properly interpreted the words of 
             the Constitution without usurping the rights of the 
             American people and those of the States to make laws as 
             they deem appropriate rather than allowing un-elected 
             judges who are appointed for life to substitute their 
             personal political views for the popular will of the 
             people.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist clearly understood that judges 
             ought to apply the law and Constitution, not invent the 
             law or amend the Constitution by judicial decree. And I 
             believe that he perfectly embodied what I consider to be 
             the proper role of a Justice and that America should be 
             grateful for his long and distinguished public service on 
             the bench.
               Our Nation was so fortunate to have a man of William 
             Rehnquist's intelligence and legal experience in public 
             service for so many years. As a Supreme Court Justice, he 
             was a decent, dedicated, steady, and principled jurist 
             whose legal brilliance and knowledge will be difficult to 
             replace. Chief Justice Rehnquist deserves America's 
             gratitude for his over three decades of dedicated service 
             on the Supreme Court and a life devoted to the service of 
             this great Nation and its citizens.
               My condolences go out to his family, in particular his 
             three children, James, Janet, and Nancy, during this 
             difficult time.
               May he rest in peace.

               Mrs. DOLE. Mr. President, I was deeply saddened to learn 
             of the passing of Chief Justice William Rehnquist. He will 
             most certainly be remembered as one of this Nation's 
             greatest Chief Justices.
               During his 33 years of distinguished service on the High 
             Court, Chief Justice Rehnquist served with tremendous 
             wisdom, skill, and intellect. His legacy will be defined 
             by his calm and steady leadership, his staunch defense of 
             the Constitution, and his support of an independent 
             judiciary.
               Born into a modest home in the Midwest, Rehnquist 
             enlisted in the Army at age 19 during World War II. He 
             went on to have a very impressive academic career, earning 
             bachelor's and master's degrees in political science from 
             Stanford University. In 1950, Rehnquist received a 
             master's degree in government from Harvard University. He 
             later returned to Stanford Law School, where he graduated 
             first in his class and served as the editor of the law 
             review.
               After law school, Rehnquist served as a law clerk to 
             Associate Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson. He then 
             settled in Phoenix, AZ, with his wife Nancy, where he 
             spent 20 years in successful private practice. In 1968, 
             Rehnquist returned to Washington, DC, to serve as 
             President Nixon's Assistant Attorney General in the Office 
             of Legal Counsel. In 1972, William Rehnquist became the 
             100th Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.
               I expect we will hear much discussion in the coming 
             years about the legacy of Chief Justice Rehnquist. But I 
             am confident that a significant part of his legacy, his 
             strong leadership of the Court, will be unquestionable. 
             President Bush said at Rehnquist's memorial service, ``He 
             built consensus through openness and collegiality.'' 
             Likewise, praise from so many of his colleagues and 
             friends serve as a true testament to William Rehnquist's 
             ability to treat people graciously and fairly, both from 
             the bench and in his personal life.
               The praise for his professional life is certainly 
             plentiful, but we know that most important to William 
             Rehnquist was his family. He was greatly loved as a 
             husband, father, grandfather, and uncle. His daughters 
             Nancy and Janet joked that dating your father was 
             completely underrated, after they had the pleasure of 
             accompanying their father around Washington and on foreign 
             trips after the death of their mother. He was a family 
             man, first and foremost.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist deserves our praise and our 
             tremendous gratitude for his dedicated service to this 
             country. Our Nation mourns the passing of this great man. 
             The significant contributions he made, personally and 
             professionally, will certainly be remembered always.
                                 Proceedings in the
                              House of Representatives
                                             Tuesday, September 6, 2005
                               MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE
               A message from the Senate by Ms. Curtis, one of its 
             clerks, announced that the Senate has passed a concurrent 
             resolution of the following title in which the concurrence 
             of the House is requested:

               S. Con. Res. 52. Concurrent resolution providing for the 
             use of the catafalque situated in the crypt beneath the 
             Rotunda of the Capitol in connection with memorial 
             services to be conducted in the Supreme Court Building for 
             the late honorable William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice of 
             the United States.
                COMMUNICATION FROM ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF SUPREME COURT
               The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Biggert) laid before the 
             House the following communication from Antonin Scalia, 
             Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United 
             States:

                            Supreme Court of the United States,
                                  Washington, DC, September 6, 2005.
             Hon. J. Dennis Hastert,
             Speaker of the House of Representatives,
             Washington, DC.
               Dear Mr. Speaker: This is to notify the House of 
             Representatives, through you, that the Chief Justice of 
             the United States died in Arlington, Virginia, on 
             Saturday, September 3, 2005.
                  Very truly yours,
                                                     Antonin Scalia,
                                                   Associate Justice.

               Mr. DeLAY. Madam Speaker, I offer a privileged 
             resolution (H. Res. 422) and ask for its immediate 
             consideration.
               The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
                                     H. Res. 422
               Resolved, That the House has heard with profound sorrow 
             of the death of the Honorable William H. Rehnquist; Chief 
             Justice of the United States.
               Resolved, That the House tenders its deep sympathy to 
             the members of the family of the late Chief Justice in 
             their bereavement.
               Resolved, That the Clerk communicate these resolutions 
             to the Senate and to the Supreme Court and transmit a copy 
             of the same to the family of the late Chief Justice.
               Resolved, That when the House adjourns today, it adjourn 
             as a further mark of respect to the memory of the late 
             Chief Justice.

               The resolution was agreed to.
               A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

               Mr. DeLAY. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to 
             take from the Speaker's table the Senate concurrent 
             resolution (S. Con. Res. 52) providing for the use of the 
             catafalque situated in the crypt beneath the Rotunda of 
             the Capitol in connection with memorial services to be 
             conducted in the Supreme Court Building for the late 
             Honorable William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice of the 
             United States, and ask for its immediate consideration in 
             the House.
               The Clerk read the title of the Senate concurrent 
             resolution.

               The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the 
             request of the gentleman from Texas?
               There was no objection.
               The Clerk read the Senate concurrent resolution, as 
             follows:
                                   S. Con. Res. 52
               Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
             concurring), That the Architect of the Capitol is 
             authorized and directed to transfer to the custody of the 
             Supreme Court of the United States the catafalque which is 
             situated in the crypt beneath the Rotunda of the Capitol 
             so that such catafalque may be used in the Supreme Court 
             Building in connection with services to be conducted there 
             for the late honorable William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice 
             of the United States.

               The Senate concurrent resolution was concurred in.
               A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

               Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 
             422, I move that the House do now adjourn in memory of the 
             late Honorable William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice of the 
             United States.
               The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 11 o'clock and 
             44 minutes p.m.), pursuant to House Resolution 422, the 
             House adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, September 7, 
             2005, at 10 a.m. in memory of the late Honorable William 
             H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice of the United States.
                                           Wednesday, September 7, 2005
                                       PRAYER
               The Chaplain, the Reverend Daniel P. Coughlin, offered 
             the following prayer:
               Since justice and judgment are the foundation of Your 
             throne, Lord God; because You love those who hate evil and 
             guard the lives of Your faithful ones, Lord, we know that 
             You welcome into the heavenly court Your servant, Chief 
             Justice William H. Rehnquist.
               May his legacy continue to guide this Chamber, the 
             provisions of the courts of this land and the citizens 
             governed; to seek the truth behind every dispute and 
             deferring opinion, to work for equal justice under the law 
             for all Your people.
               Eternal rest and reward grant unto him, O Lord. Amen.

               Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, today our 
             thoughts and prayers are with the Rehnquist family and our 
             Nation. As we celebrate the life of Chief Justice William 
             Rehnquist today, we mourn the loss of a true leader who 
             made the most of his unique opportunity to help the 
             American people. He was a skilled judge and a brilliant 
             man who devoted over a third of his life to ensuring that 
             our highest court fairly upheld our laws.
               From fighting excessive Federal laws as an Associate 
             Justice to battling cancer as Chief Justice, Rehnquist 
             embodied determination and conviction throughout his 
             tenure. Often the lone vote on an issue, he remained true 
             to his conservative beliefs and worked tirelessly to 
             ensure that justice was fairly delivered, and efficiently. 
             Because of his monumental impact on our legal system, he 
             earned a valuable place in our Nation's history.
               As his family and friends gather today, I would like to 
             express my sincere respect and gratitude for the life and 
             work of Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
               In conclusion, God bless our troops, and we will never 
             forget September 11.

               Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
             that it shall be in order at any time to consider in the 
             House the resolution (H. Res. 423); the resolution shall 
             be considered as read; and the previous question shall be 
             considered as ordered on the resolution to its adoption 
             without intervening motion or demand for division of the 
             question except: (1) 1 hour of debate equally divided and 
             controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of 
             the Committee on the Judiciary; and (2) one motion to 
             recommit.

               The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). Is there 
             objection to the request of the gentleman from Wisconsin?
               There was no objection.

               Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the order of 
             the House entered into previously today, I call up the 
             resolution (H. Res. 423) honoring and recognizing the 
             distinguished service, career, and achievements of Chief 
             Justice William Hubbs Rehnquist upon his death, and for 
             other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.
               The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
               The text of House Resolution 423 is as follows:
                                     H. Res. 423
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist was born on October 1, 
             1924, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin and grew up the son of a 
             paper salesman;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist served the United States in 
             the Army Air Corps during World War II;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist attended and graduated from 
             Stanford University, earning a bachelor's and master's 
             degree in political science, and a second master's degree 
             in government from Harvard University;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist went on to graduate first 
             in his class at Stanford Law School in 1952, where he met 
             his wife Natalie ``Nan'' Cornell;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist and Natalie had three 
             children: James, Janet, and Nancy;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist served as a law clerk to 
             Justice Robert H. Jackson on the Supreme Court during the 
             1951 and 1952 terms, and as Assistant Attorney General for 
             the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, where he 
             advised the Nixon Administration on constitutional law 
             from 1969 until 1971;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist was appointed by President 
             Nixon and confirmed by the Senate as an Associate Justice 
             of the United States on December 10, 1971, at the age of 
             47;
               Whereas William H. Rehnquist was appointed by President 
             Reagan and confirmed by the Senate as the 16th Chief 
             Justice of the United States in 1986;
               Whereas Chief Justice Rehnquist's 33-year tenure on the 
             Supreme Court was one of the longest and most influential 
             in the Nation's history;
               Whereas legal scholars of all perspectives rank Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist as among the great Chief Justices of the 
             United States who influenced the interpretation of the law 
             in significant ways;
               Whereas Chief Justice Rehnquist was widely respected for 
             his evenhandedness as Chief Justice; and
               Whereas on January 7, 2002, the 30th Anniversary of his 
             swearing in at the Supreme Court, Justice John Paul 
             Stevens praised Chief Justice Rehnquist for ``the 
             efficiency, good humor and absolute impartiality that you 
             have consistently displayed when presiding at our 
             Conferences'': Now, therefore, be it
               Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
               (1) has learned with profound sorrow of the death of 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist; and
               (2) honors, recognizes, and expresses gratitude for the 
             distinguished service, career, and achievements of William 
             H. Rehnquist upon his death.

               The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the 
             House of today, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
             Sensenbrenner) and the gentleman from California (Mr. 
             Berman) each will control 30 minutes.
               The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
             Sensenbrenner).

               Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time 
             as I may consume.
               Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 
             423 which honors and recognizes the distinguished service, 
             career, and achievements of Chief Justice William Hubbs 
             Rehnquist upon his death.
               Mr. Speaker, the passing of Chief Justice Rehnquist 
             means that a long and distinguished career has come to an 
             end. William Rehnquist was born on October 1, 1924, in 
             Milwaukee, WI, and was raised in nearby Shorewood, WI, 
             which currently lies in the congressional district I am 
             proud to represent. The future Chief Justice attended 
             Kenyon College briefly before joining the U.S. Army Air 
             Corps during World War II.
               Following his career in the Army, Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist attended and graduated from Stanford University, 
             where he received a bachelor's and master's degree in 
             political science and a second master's degree in 
             government from Harvard University.
               At Stanford Law School, the future Chief Justice 
             graduated first in the class that famously included his 
             future colleague, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. It was also 
             at Stanford Law School that the Chief Justice met his 
             future wife, Natalie ``Nan'' Cornell, whom he married in 
             1953.
               After graduation, William Rehnquist clerked for Supreme 
             Court Justice Robert H. Jackson for the 1952 and 1953 
             terms. He then went on to practice as an attorney in his 
             adopted home State of Arizona for several years before 
             returning to Washington, DC, to serve as Assistant 
             Attorney General for the Justice Department's Office of 
             Legal Counsel, where he advised the Nixon administration 
             on constitutional law from 1969 until 1971.
               On October 22, 1971, President Nixon nominated William 
             Rehnquist to fill the vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court 
             created by Justice John Marshall Harlan's retirement. The 
             Senate confirmed him to the post of Associate Justice on 
             December 10, 1971, and he was sworn into office on January 
             7, 1972, at the age of 47.
               Under his leadership, federalism, judicial restraint, 
             and State autonomy once again became staple features of 
             the Court's jurisprudence. Chief Justice Rehnquist deeply 
             respected the proper roles of each branch of government 
             and the separation of powers envisioned by our Founders. 
             He repeatedly acknowledged that the first amendment to the 
             Constitution guaranteed the free exercise of religion.
               By the time President Reagan nominated him to become the 
             16th Chief Justice of the United States on June 20, 1986, 
             to replace Warren Burger, the pieces were in place for the 
             Chief Justice to make a profound impact on American 
             jurisprudence. His commitment to his principles were 
             evidenced in his majority opinion upholding Cleveland, 
             Ohio's program of school vouchers, which allowed public 
             school students in poor areas to use vouchers to attend 
             better, and often religious, schools, against an 
             establishment clause challenge. His support for freedom of 
             religion was also evidenced in his concurring opinion of 
             Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, in which he 
             rightly concluded that the phrase ``under God'' in the 
             Pledge of Allegiance was not a violation of the 
             establishment clause.
               Most recently, Chief Justice Rehnquist joined Justice 
             O'Connor's dissent in Kelo v. City of New London in which 
             they correctly concluded that it is a violation of the 
             fifth amendment's public use clause when a government 
             takes private property and gives it to another private 
             entity to use for private commercial purposes.
               Apart from the doctrinal changes the Chief Justice 
             brought to the Court, he also streamlined the manner in 
             which the Court operated. His keen intellect and 
             evenhandedness were appreciated by all of his colleagues. 
             On the 30th anniversary of Rehnquist's swearing in, 
             Justice John Paul Stevens, who often found himself on the 
             opposite side of opinions from the Chief Justice, praised 
             him for the ``efficiency, good humor, and absolute 
             impartiality that you have consistently displayed when 
             presiding at our conferences.'' These traits have led 
             observers of all political persuasions to view Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist as one of the most consequential jurists 
             in our history.
               When Chief Justice Rehnquist was diagnosed with thyroid 
             cancer in October 2004, many of his admirers feared that 
             his tenure on the Court would come to an end. The Chief 
             Justice, however, had other plans and continued to make 
             his presence felt on the Court even as he battled his 
             disease. Unfortunately, last Saturday, Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist lost that battle, and the country has lost a 
             great intellect and a great public servant. His decision 
             to swear in President George W. Bush last January while 
             battling his illness inspired millions of Americans.
               From a personal standpoint, let me say that I first met 
             the future Chief Justice back in 1968 going door to door 
             while running for a seat in the Wisconsin Assembly, and 
             when I knocked on his parents' door, they introduced me to 
             the Chief Justice-to-be, and he and I have kept contact up 
             for a number of years until he passed away, both before he 
             was selected for the Court and I was elected to the 
             Congress.
               As the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, let 
             me say that I deeply appreciated the Chief Justice's 
             invitations to address the twice-yearly meetings of the 
             Judicial Conference of the United States on issues 
             relating to the separation of powers and the 
             interrelationship to how the laws the Congress passes 
             relate to the operation of the third branch of government. 
             I can say that the Chief Justice was extremely responsive 
             when I had complained that the judicial discipline statute 
             enacted in 1980 was not being utilized properly and 
             effectively in terms of disciplining judges in the appeals 
             court and in the lower Federal courts that may have 
             strayed from the bounds of propriety and the ethical 
             standards that we hope all of the judges will uphold.
               I can say that probably one of my most profound memories 
             of the Chief Justice was at a Judicial Conference meeting 
             on the morning of September 11, 2001, where, because I had 
             the first three bills up on the floor at 10 o'clock, the 
             Chief Justice put me on first. At that time the Twin 
             Towers had both been hit, and the Chief Justice came in, 
             sat down and said, ``Jim, make this snappy. Something bad 
             is going on.''
               So my remarks got condensed to a minute and a half and 
             the Chief Justice said, ``There are no questions of the 
             chairman, are there?'' And everybody else in the room got 
             the message, so I was then excused, and when I got here to 
             the Capitol to make the three motions for suspensions of 
             the rules, the Pentagon had already been hit. So the Chief 
             Justice, I think, was advised that we were all in danger, 
             he wanted to get the business done despite the danger, and 
             he was able to do that. I think that this shows his 
             character, and that touched me in an extremely personal 
             way.
               While the country has lost so much, his family, 
             including his children James, Nancy, and Janet, and his 
             six grandchildren have lost a loving family member as 
             well. I know that the whole House will join me in 
             extending our condolences to his family and our thanks for 
             his great service to this country. I hope that all Members 
             will join me in supporting House Resolution 423 honoring, 
             recognizing, and expressing our gratitude for the 
             distinguished service, career, and achievements of Chief 
             Justice William H. Rehnquist.
               Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

               Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
             may consume.
               Mr. Speaker, today I rise to celebrate the life of Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist. Chief Justice Rehnquist was devoted to 
             the highest court of the land and, more broadly, to our 
             system of justice; and throughout his long tenure, he 
             served them both admirably. During his 33 years on the 
             Court, 19 of which were as Chief Justice, he chartered a 
             definitive path which reflected his philosophy and left an 
             unquestionable impact on the direction of the Court.
               In his early years on the Court, at a time when his 
             approach to constitutional interpretation often was not 
             shared by a majority on the Court, Justice Rehnquist stuck 
             closely to his principles, earning him the moniker ``The 
             Lone Ranger.'' Over time, he was joined by other Justices 
             who shared his ideology, and he was able to craft 
             majorities that moved the Court toward adopting his vision 
             of the law. To his great credit, when faced with a 
             conflict between his own strongly held position and the 
             dictates of stare decisis, as happened with recent efforts 
             to limit the Miranda decision, he frequently sided with 
             precedent.
               While it is fair to say that over the years on decisions 
             which have split the Court, I have probably disagreed with 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist's opinions more often than I have 
             agreed with them; however, I have admired many of his 
             efforts to protect the independence of the judiciary and 
             his willingness to criticize his own party.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist often stated his discomfort with 
             Congress encroaching on a court's prerogative in an 
             attempt to guard judicial independence. He lashed out at 
             those attempting to impeach judicial activists and 
             threaten judges for rulings they did not like. ``The 
             Constitution protects judicial independence not to benefit 
             judges but to promote the rule of law. Judges are expected 
             to administer the law fairly, without regard to public 
             reaction,'' he once said.
               Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist also criticized 
             Congress for repeatedly enacting Federal criminal laws 
             that overlap State laws. The States have the primary role 
             in the area of crime and law enforcement, he said in his 
             annual message on the judiciary, and Congress needs to 
             think twice before turning ``every highly publicized 
             societal ill or sensational crime'' into a new Federal 
             law. ``The trend to federalize crimes that traditionally 
             have been handled in State courts not only is taxing the 
             judiciary's resources,'' he said, ``but it also threatens 
             to change entirely the nature of the Federal system. 
             Federal courts were not created to adjudicate local 
             crimes, no matter how sensational or heinous the crimes 
             may be. State courts do, can, and should handle such 
             problems.''
               The impact of Congress having relegated more complex and 
             time-consuming cases appropriate for State court 
             adjudication to Federal jurisdiction, such as Congress did 
             with class action reform, warranted Rehnquist's rebuke:

               Congress should commit itself to conserving the Federal 
             courts as a distinctive judicial forum of limited 
             jurisdiction in our system of federalism. Civil and 
             criminal jurisdiction should be assigned to the Federal 
             courts only to further clearly define national interests, 
             leaving to the State courts the responsibility for 
             adjudicating all other matters. This long-range plan for 
             Federal courts is based not simply on the preferences of 
             Federal judges but on the traditional principle of 
             federalism that has guided this country throughout its 
             existence.

               As noted by the New York Times, Chief Justice Rehnquist 
             was also duly critical of hastily enacted limitations on 
             judicial sentencing decisions and the potential damage 
             that compiling information on the sentencing habits of 
             individual judges could do to fair and impartial Justices. 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist plainly saw his role as defender 
             in chief of the Nation's independent court system, which 
             he famously called ``one of the crown jewels of our system 
             of government.''
               His often practical approach to immeasurably weighty 
             responsibility of having one out of nine votes on the most 
             powerful court in the country reflected his devotion and 
             respect for the institution of the Supreme Court and its 
             effect on the lives of all Americans. Nowhere did Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist's love for the Court shine through more 
             than in his numerous books on Supreme Court history and 
             lore.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist also displayed considerable 
             skill in managing an often divided Court. His colleagues 
             have spoken of his deft ability, good humor, and 
             impartiality as he led the Court through landmark cases. 
             On top of this, he served for nearly two decades as the 
             chief judicial officer of the Nation's Federal court 
             system, constantly advocating for the resources needed to 
             improve the courts' mission of delivering evenhanded 
             justice throughout the Nation.
               I would commend to my colleagues the op-ed piece in the 
             New York Times yesterday by Laurence Tribe, a frequent 
             litigator in the Supreme Court who argued many, many 
             cases, who speaks of Chief Justice Rehnquist's career 
             there and finds many, many reasons to praise and admire 
             him. He closes his article urging that as the Senate now 
             considers the confirmation of a new Chief Justice, they 
             look to one of the issues that he felt Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist so ably stood for and that is the ability of new 
             Justices to help the Court earn the respect of all who 
             take part in its proceedings or are affected by its 
             rulings, which means everyone. ``Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist,'' Professor Tribe noted, ``was a master at that 
             mission. For that, and for the steadiness of his 
             leadership, I will always remember him with profound 
             gratitude and admiration.''
               We are all saddened by the loss of Chief Justice William 
             Rehnquist. As we mourn his death, regardless of our 
             political differences, we must remember how he selflessly 
             gave to the Court and the Nation. His work is an important 
             legacy that impacts every American's life and will shape 
             the lives of future generations. I join the Nation in 
             applauding his accomplishments, and I express my sympathy 
             for our collective loss.
               Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

               Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
             gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble).

               Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, not unlike the gentleman from 
             Wisconsin, I also appeared at the Supreme Court on 9/11 to 
             address the judicial conference. Just as I approached the 
             podium, the Chief Justice handed me a note which read: 
             ``The Pentagon has been bombed.'' I thought perhaps they 
             did not know about the World Trade Center because they had 
             been in session the entire morning, and I said, ``No, 
             Chief, it's the World Trade Center.'' He said, ``No, 
             Howard, it's the Pentagon here.'' My staff, Mr. Speaker, 
             admonishes me to this day for not having retained that 
             piece of paper. It would have been a nice personal 
             memento. Each time I saw the Chief after that, he or I 
             mentioned that exchange between us.
               Not unlike the gentleman from Wisconsin, I did not know 
             the Chief that intimately, but I think he was an 
             outstanding Chief Justice. Each time I saw him, he or I 
             mentioned that exchange between us on 9/11.
               If I could describe him very briefly, I would say a man 
             blessed with supreme intellect; a warm, cordial demeanor; 
             an outstanding Chief Justice; an outstanding jurist; an 
             outstanding citizen; an outstanding gentleman. He will 
             indeed be missed. I join my colleagues in extending our 
             sincere condolences to the family of this great man.

               Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
             gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot), the chairman of the 
             Subcommittee on the Constitution.

               Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, as chairman of the Constitution 
             Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee, I want to take 
             this opportunity to honor the late Chief Justice William 
             Hubbs Rehnquist. Our country was privileged to have Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist serve as a member of our Supreme Court 
             for 33 years, the last 19 years, as we know, as Chief 
             Justice. Once considered the maverick lone star Justice 
             for his solo dissents, he eventually led a majority which 
             perhaps most importantly favored a shift in power from 
             Washington back to the States where it belongs.
               Among other challenges he met during his tenure, Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist presided over the impeachment trial of a 
             President, President Clinton. Having served as one of the 
             House managers myself, I can say that he did so with an 
             evenhanded approach, showing fairness and dignity to both 
             sides. Also, notably, he was the last member of the Court 
             who voted on the landmark case of Roe v. Wade, dissenting 
             from that ruling that legalized abortion. I will always 
             appreciate his respect for the value of human life and his 
             commitment to this body and local government's making 
             decisions to protect life, such as the ban on partial-
             birth abortion.
               Through his opinions, the Chief Justice showed that an 
             active Court could uphold conservative policy through 
             judicial restraint. As we begin the process of finding a 
             replacement for Chief Justice Rehnquist, I hope that we 
             will remember the important impact of his presence on the 
             Court and his commitment to upholding the text and history 
             of the Constitution.
               His strength and dedication to our country could be seen 
             most recently when he fulfilled his duties of swearing in 
             our 43d President for the second time while battling 
             terminal thyroid cancer. Let us remember this, I believe, 
             historic Chief Justice for his love of the law and his 
             love for his country. Our thoughts and prayers are with 
             his family on this day.

               Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
             gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert).

               Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, Chief Justice Rehnquist was a 
             man of great intellect on a Court that is saturated with 
             great intellect. He was also a man of vast common sense. 
             Unfortunately, common sense was not so well and evenly 
             distributed on the Court. Nonetheless, as a gentle man, a 
             man of class, a man of integrity, he brought great wisdom 
             and great honor to the Court. As a former prosecutor, a 
             former district judge, a former chief justice of an 
             appellate court in Texas, I watched his actions, I read 
             his opinions and appreciated his great intellectual 
             honesty and appreciation for the Constitution. He was a 
             rare man, a man who brought great honor upon the Court, 
             upon this country, and upon the Constitution. He will be 
             sorely missed. It is with great respect that we extend our 
             sympathy and our sincere best wishes and our prayers to 
             the family and those closest to the Chief Justice. We all 
             mourn the loss of a very great American.

               Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I join all of my colleagues in 
             expressing our deepest condolences to the family of Chief 
             Justice William H. Rehnquist. I mourn his loss, and I 
             thank the gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Sensenbrenner, and 
             the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Conyers, for introducing 
             this resolution.
               I had the privilege yesterday of paying my respects to 
             the Chief Justice as he lay in repose at the Great Hall. 
             As I prayed, I thought of the great courage he displayed 
             in the last few months, and his devotion to duty, even in 
             the face of illness.
               As a Nation, today we honor his memory and a lifetime of 
             dedicated public service. Chief Justice Rehnquist was a 
             man of great intellect and passion for the Supreme Court 
             and its traditions, who was an outstanding leader and 
             administrator of the judiciary. He was not only a student 
             of history, an author of books on American history, but he 
             also wrote chapters in our Nation's history as Chief 
             Justice.
               As a law clerk to a great Justice, Robert Jackson, he 
             formed an early appreciation for the institution that he 
             would serve in a long and distinguished career. As Justice 
             John Paul Stevens noted, Chief Justice Rehnquist set an 
             exemplary example as leader of the Court. His colleagues 
             uniformly spoke of his fair and impartial leadership of 
             their proceedings, and of his efforts to prevent 
             disagreements from becoming personal.
               His legacy is his steadfast and proud defense of an 
             independent judiciary. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said 
             on Sunday: ``He regarded an independent judiciary as our 
             country's hallmark and pride, and in his annual reports, 
             he constantly urged Congress to safeguard that 
             independence.''
               I hope all of us in Congress will honor his legacy by 
             preserving an independent judiciary. It is our oath of 
             office to protect and defend the Constitution of the 
             United States--and that means protecting an independent 
             judiciary free of manipulation and intimidation.
               As the New York Times noted this morning, Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist disapproved of recent congressional attempts to 
             ``intimidate individual judges, strip federal courts of 
             jurisdiction to decide certain constitutional challenges, 
             and otherwise undermine the constitutional separation of 
             powers and checks and balances.'' In his last annual 
             report, the Chief Justice wrote that ``A judge's judicial 
             acts may not serve as a basis for impeachment. Any other 
             rule would destroy judicial independence.''
               An independent judiciary has served for more than two 
             centuries as the guardian of our constitutional liberties 
             and as the words on the Supreme Court building so nobly 
             state, has ensured ``equal justice under law.'' We must 
             preserve an independent judiciary and honor his memory by 
             doing so.
               It is with sadness and respect that I extend my 
             sympathies to Chief Justice Rehnquist's family and 
             friends. I hope it is a comfort that so many people are 
             praying for them at this sad time. He will long be 
             remembered and missed.

               Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to 
             pay tribute to one of the most influential jurists of the 
             20th century, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the 16th 
             Chief Justice of the United States, upon his passing on 
             the evening of Saturday, September 3, 2005.
               First appointed to the Supreme Court as an Associate 
             Justice by President Richard Nixon in 1972, Rehnquist 
             would go on to serve for 33 years, the final 19 of which 
             as Chief Justice. During his time on the Court, Rehnquist 
             earned the reputation as a conservative intellectual who 
             would challenge the status quo in the name of judicial 
             restraint and federalism principles. He respected the 
             Court's role as an independent body whose role was not to 
             legislate subjectively on the issues of the day; but 
             rather to serve as the objective arbiter of the rule of 
             law.
               Notwithstanding the politically charged nature of the 
             Court during the latter half of the 20th century, 
             Rehnquist was very well liked and respected by all his 
             colleagues, even those with whom he frequently disagreed. 
             In fact, Justice John Paul Stevens, the Justice with whom 
             Rehnquist most frequently disagreed, commented on ``the 
             efficiency, good humor and absolute impartiality that 
             [Rehnquist had] consistently displayed when presiding at 
             [Supreme Court] Conferences.'' This ability to work 
             closely with all of his colleagues was a testament to 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist's affability, professionalism and 
             evenhandedness.
               Not only will Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist be 
             missed as a jurist, he will also be missed as a loving 
             family man. Though his wife preceded him in death, he is 
             survived by three wonderful children to whom he no doubt 
             passed his strong work ethic, patriotism, and deep and 
             abiding respect for our American institutions.
               In closing Mr. Speaker, please let me extend my 
             condolences to Chief Justice Rehnquist's family and 
             friends on their loss. He was a great American and will be 
             missed by us all.

               Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
             time.

               Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance 
             of my time.

               The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). Pursuant to the 
             order of the House of today, the resolution is considered 
             read and the previous question is ordered.
               The question is on the resolution.
               The resolution was agreed to.
               A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

               The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Kirk). Under the Speaker's 
             announced policy of January 4, 2005, the gentleman from 
             Texas (Mr. Carter) is recognized for 60 minutes as the 
             designee of the majority leader.

               Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the recognition, 
             and I rise this evening to discuss a man and a history on 
             the bench, judicial bench, that probably will be recorded 
             as one of the great careers in the legal profession in the 
             history of the United States. I am referring to Chief 
             Justice William Rehnquist.
               Today we laid to rest Chief Justice William Rehnquist, 
             who has served this country and served it well for many, 
             many years. Chief Justice Rehnquist is going to be sorely 
             missed by the citizens of this country. His wisdom and his 
             leadership and his all-around ability to unite and work 
             with every faction of the Supreme Court has been an 
             inspiration to all of the citizens of this country.
               He served tirelessly with great wisdom, judgment, and 
             leadership. He leaves behind a legacy as one of the most 
             influential Chief Justices in our Nation's history; and 
             today, in sadness, we bid him farewell, and we say to 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist, a job well done.
               A native of Milwaukee, WI, William Rehnquist grew up in 
             the nearby suburb of Shorewood. His father, the son of 
             Swedish immigrant parents, worked as a paper salesman, and 
             his mother as a multilingual professional translator.
               I come from a part of Texas which has a large Swedish 
             heritage, and I am sure that Chief Justice Rehnquist got 
             his base principles established by that Swedish heritage 
             that he grew up in.
               After service in World War II with the Army Air Corps 
             from 1943 to 1946, and with the assistance of the GI bill, 
             Rehnquist earned bachelor's and master's degrees in 
             political science from Stanford University, finishing in 
             1948. In 1950 he received a master's degree in government 
             from Harvard. Rehnquist later returned to Stanford 
             University to attend law school, where he graduated first 
             in his class in 1952, even ahead of Justice Sandra Day 
             O'Connor, currently serving on the Court. He also served 
             as the editor of the Law Review.
               Rehnquist served as a law clerk for Associate Supreme 
             Court Justice Robert Jackson both in 1951 and 1952. 
             Following his clerkship, he settled in Phoenix, AZ, where 
             he was in private practice from 1953 to 1969.
               In 1964 he also served as a legal advisor to the Barry 
             Goldwater Presidential campaign.
               When President Nixon was elected in 1968, Rehnquist 
             returned to Washington, DC, to serve as Assistant Attorney 
             General in the Office of Legal Counsel. In this position 
             Rehnquist served as the Chief Legal Counsel to the 
             Attorney General. He served as Assistant Attorney General 
             in the Office of Legal Counsel until 1971, when President 
             Nixon nominated him to replace John Marshall Harlan on the 
             Supreme Court.
               During his time in the Court, Chief Justice Rehnquist 
             authored countless landmark decisions and thought-
             provoking dissents. He carefully reasoned his opinions and 
             insisted that the principle of federalism is an integral 
             part of our Nation's constitutional structure. His 
             opinions recognized that our government is one of 
             enumerated rights and dual sovereignty, with certain 
             functions and powers left to the States.
               His jurisprudence has shown that the first amendment 
             establishment clause does not dictate government hostility 
             toward religion. Rather, the government should act in a 
             manner which respects our freedom to worship as we please, 
             neither favoring nor disfavoring religion.
               The last 19 years have shown that Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist was a terrific choice to lead the Supreme Court. 
             Though some of his colleagues on the Court disagreed with 
             him at times, there is no doubt that they admired his 
             strong leadership and his likable personality and his 
             ability to build a consensus. While always a forceful 
             advocate for his views, the Chief Justice consistently 
             strove for consensus on the Court and treated his 
             colleagues with courtesy and respect.
               It is thanks to his personal attributes that even in an 
             age of 5 to 4 decisions, the Court never descended into 
             bitter infighting. Instead, Chief Justice Rehnquist led a 
             court united by friendship, committed to the law and 
             service to our country.
               One example of Chief Justice Rehnquist's commitment to 
             the law is his opinion in Dickerson v. The United States. 
             Although a long-time critic of Miranda v. Arizona, 
             Rehnquist nevertheless placed his past position aside and 
             wrote an opinion in Dickerson effectively affirming 
             Miranda.
               In 1999 Chief Justice Rehnquist lent his services to the 
             Senate when he became only the second Chief Justice in 
             history to preside over a Presidential impeachment in the 
             trial of President Clinton. During that difficult time, 
             with the Nation and some of its Senators locked in 
             partisan struggle, the Chief Justice's very presence 
             reminded us of the solemn legal duties the Constitution 
             requires of the Senate.
               A historian of the Supreme Court, Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist authored three books on the history of the Court 
             and the American legal system.
               As Chief Justice, Mr. Rehnquist led not only the Supreme 
             Court but the entire third branch of government. In that 
             role he was an eloquent advocate for a strong and 
             independent judiciary. In his annual reports on the 
             judiciary and other public pronouncements, Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist championed the interest of the judicial branch, 
             earning praise from judges of all jurisdictional stripes.
               At all times Chief Justice Rehnquist performed his 
             duties of office with nobility and courage. Even in his 
             recent sickness, he found the strength to administer the 
             oath of office to President Bush and to consider the 
             challenging cases that came before the Court.
               Peggy Noonan wrote of President Bush's inauguration:

               And the most poignant moment was the manful William 
             Rehnquist, unable to wear a tie and making his way down 
             the long marble steps to swear in the President. The 
             continuation of democracy is made possible by such 
             gallantry.

               Our Nation is deeply indebted to William Rehnquist. 
             Above all, the rule of law was paramount for Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist. He understood that our government cannot 
             survive without a judiciary that places the rule of law 
             above politics.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist has tirelessly served our Nation 
             for the last three decades, and he serves a permanent 
             legacy as one of the great Supreme Court Justices. The 
             next Chief Justice will surely have big shoes to fill.
               At this time, Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield as much 
             time as he wishes to consume to my colleague, the 
             gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks).

               Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank 
             you. We call you Judge Carter here in this institution. 
             Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter) has 
             earned a great deal of respect in this institution because 
             he is not only a man who brings judicial experience to 
             this body, but he is someone whom we can all trust. He is 
             someone who we know has a heart that burns with 
             patriotism, for love for his country, for love for his 
             fellow human beings and just a commitment to human 
             freedom.
               And I want you to know, Mr. Speaker, that it is my 
             precious honor to serve with a man like Judge Carter. You 
             know, and perhaps that is all too appropriate tonight as 
             we speak of judges, because we talk sometimes of judges 
             legislating from the bench. Maybe Judge Carter comes to 
             this body with just the kind of experience he needs to 
             have. But we are grateful that he is a man who did not 
             legislate from the bench, and that he understands the 
             difference between the judiciary and the legislative body.
               And with that, Mr. Speaker, I would just like to pay a 
             few words tonight of tribute to a towering figure in our 
             country, Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
               The era of the Rehnquist court has come to a close, and 
             William H. Rehnquist has stepped quietly into the arms of 
             God. Chief Justice Rehnquist was one of America's great 
             Chief Justices. This Nation has suffered a great loss with 
             his passing, and as twilight falls upon this remarkable 
             man's career, the most notable elements of his 
             extraordinary legacy must not be lost to revisionist 
             history, Mr. Speaker, because in his tireless defense of 
             the U.S. Constitution, Chief Rehnquist strongly advocated 
             for a judiciary that applies the law rather than 
             legislates from the bench.
               We, as Americans, should be very grateful for our 
             Founding Fathers and for the genius of the constitutional 
             system that they left to us. It was a framework that 
             protects human dignity and individual freedom by enforcing 
             limits on government power. It is incumbent upon us and 
             future generations to jealously guard that precious gift 
             bestowed upon us by our forebears.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist spent decades on the highest 
             court in the land acting as the Constitution's protector. 
             He was a constitutional originalist, defending the process 
             of interpretation of the law that is constrained by the 
             text and the original meaning of that great document.
               Mr. Speaker, there is a fundamental reason why we, as a 
             self-governing people, so carefully put pen to paper to 
             memorialize our Constitution and our laws and our great 
             founding documents. They are written words that have 
             become an agreement between the people and the government. 
             We write it all down to keep a record and an understanding 
             of the limits placed on government by the will of the 
             people.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist advanced this understanding that 
             at times the Federal courts must enforce limitations on 
             Federal power while recognizing the preeminent role of 
             democratically elected institutions at both the State and 
             Federal levels. Chief Justice Rehnquist was a valiant 
             defender of States rights in recognition of the 
             superiority of a federalist system when governing peoples 
             of divergent views, divergent faith and cultures.
               He was an influential man in leading the Court back 
             toward the original intent of the Constitution after 
             decades of abuse by a liberal activist Court born of the 
             Roosevelt era and the New Deal philosophy.
               Mr. Speaker, that New Deal activist Court actually 
             delivered such bizarre rulings as in Wickard v. Filburn, a 
             ruling that a man in Ohio who was growing wheat in his own 
             backyard as a means to feed his family and his own 
             livestock had somehow violated the Interstate Commerce 
             Clause of the U.S. Constitution because the quantity of 
             wheat that he grew could have actually been sold.
               Moreover, in their unanimous decision, this liberal 
             activist Court affirmed:

               If we assume it is never marketed, homegrown wheat 
             competes with wheat in commerce. The stimulation of 
             commerce is a use of the regulatory function quite as 
             definitive and quite as definitely as prohibitions or 
             restrictions thereon.

               Mr. Speaker, what a circuitous and false logic.
               The stage was then set of course by this activist Court 
             for massive expansion of Federal power. Year after 
             merciless year a liberal Supreme Court, drunk with self-
             imposed power, delivered an unprecedented assault upon the 
             rights of the States and of the people.
               During his years on the court, especially his early 
             years, Mr. Speaker, Justice Rehnquist was often called the 
             lone dissenter to outrageous decisions, even once 
             receiving a Lone Ranger doll awarded by his friends. But 
             yet his adherence to the Constitution, faithfully 
             expressed in some of his earliest dissents, had great 
             influence upon the Court as evidenced in later majority 
             opinions where he was vindicated in his previous 
             conclusions.
               In 1973, when the Supreme Court illegitimately bestowed 
             its imprimatur on abortion on demand, it was Justice 
             William Rehnquist who wrote a scathing dissent to that 
             majority opinion in Roe v. Wade. He said:

               To reach its results, the Court necessarily has had to 
             find within the scope of the 14th amendment a right that 
             was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the 
             amendment.

               How very eloquent.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist was also instrumental in 
             fighting back assaults on religious freedom in his efforts 
             to make clear that the Constitution ensures government 
             neutrality in matters of religious conscience, but not the 
             requirement to move religion altogether from the public 
             square. He understood the Constitution.
               In the 1995 case of United States v. Lopez, the 
             Rehnquist court marked the first time in over 50 years, 
             Mr. Speaker, that the Supreme Court upheld the rights of 
             States, ruling against the expansion of Federal power and 
             finding a Federal law in violation of that now woefully 
             distorted commerce clause of the Constitution.
               Chief Justice William Rehnquist was often found standing 
             in the breach of defense of the Constitution, endowing 
             this Nation through the years with a noble legacy of 
             resistance to a liberal, activist Court determined to make 
             its own law and enact its own agenda.
               Mr. Speaker, he gave the American people his last full 
             measure of devotion and stayed at his post through great 
             personal pain and sacrifice while he was fighting cancer. 
             To the very end, he led a brave and good-natured effort to 
             restore the Supreme Court to its ethical grounding.
               Mr. Speaker, as we bid loving farewell to this stoic 
             champion, I reflect upon the words of Alfred Lord Tennyson 
             in tribute:

               Though much is taken, much abides; and though we are not 
             now that strength in which the old days moved Earth and 
             Heaven; that which we are, we are, one equal-temper of 
             heroic hearts, made weak by time and fate, but strong in 
             will to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

               Mr. Speaker, when the final battle with illness and 
             physical weakness came to Chief Justice William H. 
             Rehnquist, he resolutely remained at his post for his 
             President, for his country, and for the future of all 
             mankind. He did not yield.

               Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for that 
             very well-presented picture of this great man whom we are 
             talking about here tonight.
               The gentleman is right. There was a time when William 
             Rehnquist stood alone for the rule of law and a strict 
             interpretation of the U.S. Constitution in a world where 
             lots of people that were of the other persuasion actually 
             made jokes about him.
               To us who are conservatives and respected his 
             intelligence, his wit, his humor, and his bulldoggedness, 
             he was someone whom we respected and we loved because when 
             he got ready to do his job, he did it.
               One of the things you can look at is, when your 
             colleagues who disagree with you have comments that are 
             positive about you, I think that speaks a lot about not 
             only his ability to stand his ground but his ability to 
             stand it with grace as a man who demanded and received 
             respect because of his behavior and because of the way he 
             handled himself.
               Now, Chief Justice William Brennan is well known for the 
             way he uses certain language. I am going to read a quote 
             from Justice Brennan, and some of it is a little rough, 
             but I think we will enjoy it. He is talking about Justice 
             Rehnquist.

               He is just a breath of fresh air. He is so damn 
             personable. He lays his position out, casts his vote. You 
             know exactly where he stands on every goddamn case. And 
             he's meticulously fair in assigning opinions. I can't 
             begin to tell you how much better all of us feel and how 
             fond all of us are of him personally.

               Another of his colleagues, Justice Lewis Powell said:

               In many ways he is the best-educated person I have ever 
             worked with, very familiar with the classics. He'll quote 
             them with confidence. Everybody agrees generally, I 
             suppose, that he's brilliant, but he has a good sense of 
             humor and he is very generous and he is principled.

               Former Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall said, 
             ``Rehnquist is a great Chief Justice.''
               All these people were people on the other side of most 
             of the issues with William Rehnquist, and yet they speak 
             of him as a colleague that they highly respect, and they 
             believe he handled himself very well.
               As we are talking about colleagues that we respect, I 
             see that we are joined today by the gentleman from east 
             Texas (Mr. Gohmert) and also one of my judicial 
             colleagues, coming to this august body from the judiciary 
             of Texas, which is getting to be a habit for quite a few 
             of our Congressmen, and we are glad to have him. I wonder 
             if the gentleman would like to step up and make a 
             statement about the Chief Justice and join in a colloquy 
             about the Chief Justice.

               Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure and an honor 
             to be here to talk about the great Chief Justice William 
             Rehnquist.
               The gentleman knows, those of us that really believed in 
             strict constructionism, that the Founders and writers of 
             the Constitution meant what they said, and we know this to 
             be a great man, a brilliant man. We do mourn in the 
             passing of the Chief Justice, 19 years, as the gentleman 
             pointed out, as the Chief Justice, nearly 34 years as a 
             Justice. That is incredible that he maintained his 
             humility, his sense of purpose, his servanthood-type 
             mentality.
               I just want to highlight some things. Under his 
             leadership the 10th and 11th amendments began to have more 
             meaning, as they were intended. For so long they had just 
             been forgotten. The 10th amendment is not an enumerated 
             power, basically it is reserved to the people in the 
             States.
               This is a man who had an intellect unsurpassed by 
             anybody on the Court, past or present, and yet sometimes 
             the intellect seems to get in the way and you cannot see 
             the forest for the trees. He saw the words in simplistic 
             brilliance. He knew they meant what they said and he said 
             so.
               In Alden v. Maine, Seminole Tribe v. Florida, U.S. v. 
             Printz, U.S. v. Lopez, that was one the Chief penned 
             himself, those were cases where he pointed these things 
             out.
               In the Lopez case--it is a great case, one of my 
             favorites--it had the powerful language that reins in the 
             commerce clause power that Congress has. And he explained 
             that commerce clause means what it says. You cannot just 
             keep reaching out and say a school is part of interstate 
             commerce. That is not the intention and everybody knows 
             it. And he helped rein in the Court to where it should be.
               Now, the Chief Justice wrote the 2005 opinion Van Orden 
             v. Perry that allowed the State of Texas to continue to 
             display a monument containing, among other things, the Ten 
             Commandments. As I sat there and listened to the oral 
             argument before the Supreme Court, and I am a member of 
             the Supreme Court bar, and it was an honor and privilege 
             to be sitting there, you look up and you see Moses holding 
             the Ten Commandment tablets and, here they are trying to 
             decide if it is OK for the State of Texas to have a 
             monument to the Ten Commandments.
               He understood the hypocrisy. He understood how silly it 
             was for people to try to be so intellectual, as a lady 
             back in Mount Pleasant where I grew up used to say, ``Some 
             people have a Ph.D. but the truth is they are still P-H-U-
             Ls. They are fools.'' But the Chief Justice had that kind 
             of delightful sense of humor as well.
               In the establishment clause he framed the issue very 
             well when he said:

               This case, like all establishment clause challenges, 
             presents us with the difficulty of respecting both faces. 
             Our institutions presuppose a Supreme Being. Yet these 
             institutions must not press religious observances upon 
             their citizens. One face looks to the past in 
             acknowledgment of our Nation's heritage, while the other 
             looks to the present in demanding a separation between 
             church and state. Reconciling these two faces requires 
             that we neither abdicate our responsibility to maintain a 
             division between church and state nor evince a hostility 
             to religion by disabling the government from, in some 
             ways, recognizing our religious heritage.

               At times, like the World War II monument where they just 
             did not include the part where Roosevelt said, ``So help 
             us God,'' like that was going to offend somebody, it 
             reminds me, I had a summer in the Soviet Union back in 
             college. Stalin wrote Trotsky completely out of the 
             history books. That is what Chief Justice Rehnquist was 
             saying. You cannot just rewrite history to suit yourself. 
             A Supreme Being, the acknowledgment of God, has been part 
             of our history, and it should not be ignored.
               The Chief quoted a case previously decided by the Court 
             in 1952 because he also believed in precedent, like we do, 
             like we did as judges; that is what we are supposed to do. 
             That has been placed far back as a rule for Justices to 
             follow. He understood that just because something, a 
             monument, a speech or a display, contains religious 
             symbols or words, it does not mean that it violates the 
             establishment clause.
               On the sensitive issue of abortion, the gentleman from 
             Arizona (Mr. Franks) pointed this out, he was steadfast. 
             He said the States have that right. They have the right. 
             So he dissented in Roe v. Wade; and again, he dissented in 
             Parenthood v. Casey. It was clear to the Chief, he 
             believed, that States had a right to place restrictions 
             unless they were prevented from doing so by clear language 
             of the Constitution, and that simply was not there.
               This same usurpation that Members of Congress just talk 
             about daily, this was a man who lived it. He did not 
             believe in usurpation of the State and local governments' 
             rights.
               As I reflect on the Court and awe and reference from 
             such a humble man of peace, man of life, I could not help 
             but think about the words in the Declaration of 
             Independence. We are created equal by our Creator, but it 
             is pretty clear a lot of us did not get an equal amount of 
             common sense.
               Everybody on the Supreme Court is brilliant, some of the 
             brightest minds in this country; and yet the common sense 
             was not equally passed around those nine Justices. So 
             things that made complete sense, common sense, were so 
             simple that it apparently flew right by some of the 
             pseudo-intellectuals. Here was a man who made the 
             complicated simple, as it should have been. He is a man 
             this country owes a great debt of gratitude to. He is a 
             man whom I will always have great respect for. He is a man 
             who should and could be a role model for all Americans. He 
             loved liberty more than self.
               He was a servant, and I thank God for Chief Justice 
             William Rehnquist. I thank God for the life he lived. I 
             thank God for the life he tried to make sure that others 
             would have as well, and our thoughts and prayers will 
             continue to be with his loved ones.
               I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter) for giving 
             me an opportunity to share in this tribute. It does weigh 
             heavy. It is important that we pay tribute to such a great 
             man.

               Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, I was thinking back. The 
             gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) and I both served in 
             the Texas judiciary, and I do not know if you were there 
             at the time or not and if you remember. At one point in my 
             22 years on the bench we had a State judicial conference. 
             Our guest speaker was a very personable and intelligent 
             professor of law from the University of Virginia. He 
             actually was smart enough to carry two full days of 
             education for judges by himself, and you have got to be 
             pretty good to do that.
               In one of these sessions, he was analyzing the 
             President's Supreme Court, and this was prior to Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist becoming Chief Justice, when he was 
             Justice Rehnquist, and he was talking about the makeup of 
             the U.S. Supreme Court at that point in time.
               He started by tracking the liberals on the Court, which 
             at that time was the vast majority; and he talked about 
             their capabilities and what direction they wanted to take 
             things. Finally he got down and said those of you who are 
             feeling very depressed because you do not have a liberal 
             bend toward the law, do not lose heart because you have a 
             champion, and he is equal to the task of all those we have 
             just discussed put together in his ability to analyze and 
             take forward his view of the U.S. Constitution.
               He said never sell short William Rehnquist. He knows 
             what he is doing; he knows where he wants to take the law; 
             and he will take it there. And believe me, as long as it 
             is a Republican in office, he should and will be the next 
             Chief Justice of the United States, and at that time he 
             will turn the corner on many of the decisions which we 
             have found to be very strange and not very well directed 
             toward the trial courts and the trial courts' abilities. 
             So do not lose heart. You have a champion and he is a 
             white knight and he will deliver for the conservative 
             view, the rule-of-law view of the Constitution.
               He certainly did. Even though he wrote dissents, 
             sometimes those dissents were so telling that they moved 
             the Court slowly. Absolutely a phenomenal intelligence and 
             ability to wordsmith, to word things so that they led us 
             in a direction we needed to go.

               Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, I 
             think about one of the last cases the Court decided under 
             his Chief Justice administration, the Kelo case. He was in 
             the dissent, and it brings to mind the quote, ``The price 
             of liberty is eternal vigilance.'' He did a great deal. He 
             was able to help turn the Court back toward having the 
             Constitution mean what it said.
               Yet, here again, the Kelo case, he dissented. He was, as 
             you say, very clear, very precise. He had Justices Scalia, 
             Thomas, and O'Connor with him in dissenting. They all four 
             dissented, and yet a majority of the Court turned around, 
             said you know what, we are going back to the day of 
             fiefdoms and kings and dukes. So whoever is better friends 
             with the ones in power, well, they can just flat take land 
             away from those that have, if they are going to promise to 
             provide more bounty to the ones in power. Phenomenal 
             decision, just an embarrassment. It should be for everyone 
             who sits on the bench anywhere.
               Yet, to the very end, he maintained his integrity, he 
             maintained his principle, he maintained the clarity of 
             mind to understand that not only is that not right, not 
             only is that not fair, not only is that un-American, it 
             violates the Constitution.

               Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, if I can reclaim my time, I 
             noticed that the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King), our 
             friend, has arrived in the Chamber. I would really like to 
             hear what he has to say about Chief Justice Rehnquist. So 
             I yield to our colleague and good friend from Iowa.

               Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. It 
             is an honor for me to stand on the floor here with two of 
             the three judges that we have from Texas to help guide us 
             down this constitutional path and my good friend, the 
             gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks), who is a pure 
             constitutionalist and whom I have the honor to serve with 
             on the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
               I have a lot of things to say about Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist, and it is an honor for me to have an 
             opportunity to say a few words here, but I would like to 
             first start by recapping some of his life. That is a life 
             just so well-lived and so impressive to see what he has 
             done and how he put it together piece by piece, almost 
             without flaw.
               Looking back through that life, we know that we have 
             lost a great public servant just last Saturday, and it 
             happened in the middle of the disaster down in the gulf 
             coast. So some of the media was swamped by those current 
             events. We need to raise this up and commemorate this 
             man's life in a special way.
               He was just a month short of his 81st birthday. He 
             battled cancer that eventually took his life, but he 
             battled it with the same determination that he battled for 
             principles that we all here hold so dear.
               The Chief Justice awed the Nation by never giving up, 
             and he never retired. He continued his service to our 
             Nation until the very end. He was consistent with his 
             lifetime of service, and he also was consistent with the 
             vision of the Founding Fathers in that these Justices 
             would be appointed for life. They were expected to serve 
             for life or until retirement. He served a full lifetime 
             for this country and he was consistent and true to his 
             principles all the way through. He was a noble and 
             honorable American who was part of the greatest 
             generation. Examining his lifetime and career gives us 
             insight into this powerful figure.
               He devoted the majority of his life to serving this 
             country in numerous capacities, and I take you back to 
             1943 to 1946 where he served in the U.S. Army Air Corps, 
             and there is no question he had an incredibly deep 
             intelligence.
               He attended top schools, earning numerous advanced 
             degrees, and was consistently at the top of his class, and 
             unquestionably served as a model for his fellow students.
               He received a B.A. and an M.A. in political science from 
             Stanford and another master's in government from Harvard. 
             He graduated first in his class from Stanford in 1952, 
             just two places ahead of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. He 
             served as a law clerk for Justice Robert Jackson on the 
             Supreme Court of the United States in the 1951 and 1952 
             terms and practiced law in Phoenix, AZ, from 1953 until 
             1969.
               He served as Assistant Attorney General in the Office of 
             Legal Counsel from 1969 until 1971. As Assistant Attorney 
             General for the Justice Department's Office of Legal 
             Counsel, it was one of his primary functions to screen 
             potential Supreme Court candidates.
               When Justice John Marshall Harlan retired, a search went 
             out for a replacement, and Attorney General John Mitchell, 
             who many of us remember was Rehnquist's boss at the time, 
             announced he had found someone suitable for the job. That 
             person was William Rehnquist whom Nixon appointed to the 
             Court. So at the tender age of 47, which at that time was 
             a young age for those appointments, and at this time as 
             well, he was confirmed as Associate Justice on December 
             10, 1971, by a vote of 68 to 26. I can only imagine there 
             are 26 votes out there that would like to have the 
             opportunity to reconsider that vote.
               His first day on the job was January 7, 1972. He served 
             on the Nation's highest court throughout seven 
             Presidencies. In 1986, Chief Justice Warren Burger 
             retired, and President Reagan nominated Justice Rehnquist 
             through to the reins of the Court as Chief Justice. There 
             was a confirmation debate and deliberation that ensued. He 
             was confirmed as Chief Justice on September 17, 1986, by a 
             vote of 65 to 33, another 33 that I believe would like to 
             have a chance to reconsider that vote in light of the 
             historical 33 years of service of Chief Justice Rehnquist.
               We have gotten to know a little bit more about him in 
             the last few days. His management style, his effort to be 
             fair, to be a giving and forgiving boss, but one that was 
             also a task master. As a result he was able to form a 
             cohesive Supreme Court body. Even though they had a lot of 
             different personalities and a lot of different kinds of 
             common sense they brought to their jurisprudence, Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist pulled them together. He left quite a 
             legacy.
               In elementary school, he was asked about his career 
             plans by his teacher, and what I think is one of the best 
             prophesies I have heard of a career in some time, he 
             replied, ``I'm going to change the government.'' Now when 
             some people say, I am going to change the government, they 
             mean they are going to grow government or they are going 
             to adapt government in light of modern contemporary 
             values.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist did change the government. He 
             fought a rear guard action to preserve our Constitution, 
             the text of the Constitution. He was a constitutionalist. 
             He was a model of judicial restraint. He stayed true to 
             the principle and the paramount principle which is strict 
             construction. No matter what path the other members of the 
             Court took, at the beginning of his career on the Supreme 
             Court, Justice Rehnquist was often a dissenter on a Court 
             filled with judicial activists. He held firm to the 
             guidance that the Constitution itself provides and was 
             eventually joined by allies who helped him hold on to some 
             of the meaning of our Constitution's text.
               He led the Court in preserving States rights, which was 
             referenced here, and I appreciate that discussion; but it 
             started with U.S. v. Lopez, which struck down a Federal 
             law banning guns near local schools. Now I approve of the 
             policy, but I more approve of his constitutional decision 
             in dissenting from the Congress' policy. In U.S. v. 
             Morrison, which struck down substantial parts of the 
             Violence Against Women Act, again something, a policy, 
             that I approved of, but a constitutional decision that I 
             agreed with, and I appreciate that restraint.
               He was not yet there on the Court when Griswold v. 
             Connecticut in 1965 established a right to privacy. I wish 
             he had been there on that day because that was the day 
             that the Court turned into an extreme activist Court, 
             established this right to privacy that had never been 
             found in the Constitution before. It was discovered in the 
             emanations and penumbras of the Constitution, meaning that 
             we laypersons could not divine that. In fact, maybe some 
             of the judges here could not have found that right in the 
             Constitution either.
               He was a staunch defender of the right to life. He 
             authored Rust v. Sullivan, where the government can 
             withhold funds from clinics that advocate abortion. He 
             strongly dissented in Roe v. Wade; Planned Parenthood v. 
             Casey, which reaffirmed Roe v. Wade; and in Stenberg v. 
             Carrhart, which was the constitutional decision that found 
             a right to partial birth abortion. Chief Justice Rehnquist 
             held the line against that. He needed more help on the 
             Court. Almost every day he was there he needed more help 
             on the Court. He firmly rejected the extra constitutional 
             right to privacy that his colleagues created.
               Chief Justice Rehnquist also did something many shy away 
             from today. He recognized that the free exercise clause of 
             the first amendment is just as important as the 
             establishment clause.
               He authored the 2002 case that upheld school vouchers in 
             Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, and strongly dissented in the 
             2000 case that held that public schools could not allow 
             organized prayer at sporting events, even if the speaker 
             is a student, and that was Santa Fe Independent School 
             District v. Doe.
               He joined the majority in Agostini v. Felton in 1987, 
             which allowed public school teachers to provide remedial 
             education in parochial schools.
               Rehnquist dissented from the Court's 1985 decision that 
             moments of silence in public schools are unconstitutional. 
             That was Wallace v. Jaffree.
               And in 2003, he strongly dissented in the Court's 
             affirmative action cases, Strutter and Gratz, which we 
             remember.
               And I sat in on those cases and I remember watching him 
             sitting on the bench as he deliberated on those 
             presentations and oral arguments. He condemned the racial 
             preference policies as a sham and a naked effort to 
             achieve racial balancing. His position in 2003 matched 
             that of the majority he joined in the 1978 Bakke case, 
             which held that Federal law does not permit a university's 
             consideration of race in admissions.
               He was consistent from 1978 until 2003. He was 
             consistent until the last day of his life. Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist opposed the reading of ``public use'' as being 
             substituted for ``public benefit'' in this summer's Kelo 
             eminent domain decision, which we have had much discussion 
             about here on the floor of this Congress. And I think all 
             of us have engaged in that. He argued the fifth amendment 
             means what it says.
               And I would support the statement that those 12 words in 
             the fifth amendment of the Constitution, ``nor shall 
             private property be taken for a public use without just 
             compensation,'' are some of the clearest and cleanest 
             words that we have in the entire Constitution, yet the 
             majority of the Court, with Chief Justice Rehnquist and 
             Justice O'Connor dissenting, held otherwise. I do not 
             believe that the fifth amendment could be written more 
             precisely, more concisely, and I would challenge the 
             attorneys that we have across this country to write that 
             better than it has been written.
               Both the personal and case histories I have discussed 
             here show that Chief Justice Rehnquist, whose passing we 
             mourn, whose legacy we celebrate tonight, was a man of 
             great principle and honor. I firmly believe that without 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist's presence on the Court for the 
             last 33 years, our Constitution would be unrecognizable. 
             It is to him that we owe our deepest thanks for preserving 
             our Constitution for future Americans to fully restore to 
             its original text.
               I would say that there was a time in my life when I had 
             the privilege and honor to sit in the presence of this 
             great man. I am not going to pose the question here into 
             this Record tonight, but I posed a question to Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist that caused him to deliberate for quite 
             some time, and he finally answered, ``I am going to elect 
             not to answer that question.'' Now, I do not believe he 
             elected not to answer the question because he did not know 
             the answer. I believed he elected not to answer the 
             question because of how the answer would reflect on the 
             other members of the Court.
               He had an ability to do a calculation on a question or a 
             problem and boil it down to the root quicker than anyone 
             whom I have watched process these heavy legal questions.
               He was a giant of a man. He lived a life that was well 
             lived, and we are here to celebrate tonight and give great 
             honor to a man who hung on to this Constitution as dearly 
             and as strongly as anyone has been charged with when they 
             take the oath to uphold this Constitution.
               It has been an honor to be a citizen of this country for 
             the 33 years that he has served us so well. It has been an 
             honor to have worked with him, to have been in his 
             presence, and to deliberate with him on those occasions, 
             and an honor to be in the courtroom to hear the oral 
             arguments and an honor to read the opinions that he has 
             given us. He has left us a legacy.
               He has also left us a duty and a responsibility to pick 
             up this ball now, and where he has held onto this 
             Constitution, it is our job to carry forward and 
             reestablish the text of this Constitution that he held so 
             dear, and that we all hold so dear.
               Our prayers go out to the family. Our prayers of 
             gratitude for the lifetime, the legacy of Chief Justice 
             William Rehnquist will continue into the future.
               As I say, it has been an honor to be serving in this 
             government with a man like that, and I hope and pray that 
             we will be able to carry on the legacy that he left for 
             us.

               Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his 
             comments, and I was thinking as he was speaking, and he 
             gave an excellent presentation of the Chief Justice, but 
             we are joined here in the Chamber today by two men who 
             basically made their entire life a part of dealing in the 
             justice system both as members of the bar, members of the 
             bench, and who also built, basically from scratch, from 
             what I know of both of them, very successful businesses, 
             overcoming insurmountable obstacles. And then, when they 
             had the ability to continue to go out and make those 
             businesses thrive, they volunteered to come to Washington 
             and become a part of the justice system, a part of the 
             legislative branch of our government. This defines the 
             kind of man that Chief Justice Rehnquist personally 
             reached out to, kind of everybody.
               He wrote the opinions of those of us who honor our 
             heritage, who honor the language that our forefathers 
             wrote into the Constitution and think that if that is what 
             it says, that is what it says. It does not take a genius 
             to read the paper and say that is what it says. And with 
             all his skill and writing ability, really you can cut it 
             down to the fact that that is the way he looked at it. He 
             said, Wait a minute, let us read the Constitution. That is 
             what it says. It speaks volumes that Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist was able to do that in such a talented manner 
             and in such a manner that challenged legal scholars across 
             the country.
               One of his opponents from Harvard University made a 
             comment about him, something to the effect that no matter 
             what you thought of him, whether you agreed with his 
             ideology, he said, I have to give Rehnquist an A. That is 
             the kind of talent he had. He could take the causes that 
             those of us working in the trenches, the trial judges, and 
             we liked to say there is a difference between trial judges 
             and appellate judges. We shoot from the hip and make those 
             decisions and then they get to grade our papers. Of 
             course, Judge Gohmert has been both, so he has experience 
             in both those areas, but I am just an old trial judge.

               Mr. GOHMERT. If the gentleman will yield, I might just 
             say that it is easier to grade papers after people have 
             shot from the hip.

               Mr. CARTER. Well, at least you know they are shooting 
             from the hip.

               Mr. GOHMERT. But we all loved, I think, his simplicity. 
             Even toward the end of this great man's life, I remember 
             seeing on television the reporters all after him, asking 
             are you going to resign or are you going to retire? And he 
             came back, this man of brilliance yet simplicity, and 
             said, ``It is for me to know and for you to find out.'' 
             That is the kind of man he was even to the end, cute, 
             humble, and a lot of fun.

               Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, if the judges would 
             yield, there is another anecdote that is worth mentioning, 
             and I do not know if it has been passed along here 
             tonight, but I think it demonstrates his sense of humor. 
             And sometimes it was self-deprecating and sometimes it was 
             succinct.
               Several years after he had been appointed to the bench, 
             he was asked what it is like to serve here on the Supreme 
             Court. He said, ``Well, you spend the first 2 years here 
             wondering how you got here, and the rest of your time 
             wondering how they got here.''

               Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
             sharing that, and I now yield to my colleague, the 
             gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks).

               Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Speaker, I think my primary 
             reason for being here tonight was just to not let this 
             man's towering contribution to the judicial process slip 
             away into history. There is an old quote by Dostoyevski. 
             He said, ``He who controls the present, controls the past. 
             And he who controls the past, controls the future.''
               Of course, as somebody was saying, there are a lot of 
             revisionists out there trying to rewrite history in order 
             to affect the future, but this man's history is very 
             important to our country. I will make a prediction tonight 
             that a lot of the decisions, where he found himself in 
             dissent, in the next 20 or 30 years will turn in the other 
             direction, and we will see that this man was before his 
             time.
               There is a saying that if you fail without succeeding, 
             if you struggle without succeeding, it is so someone else 
             might succeed after you. And if you succeed without 
             struggling, which I think some of our modern-day Justices 
             are going to do, it is because someone has struggled and 
             succeeded before you. This man, I believe, is going to be 
             vindicated in society, because he did not find a lot of 
             these hidden things that the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. 
             King) talked about.
               We have seen judges say that somehow the words in the 
             Pledge of Allegiance, ``under God,'' might be 
             unconstitutional; or that it is unconstitutional to 
             protect a 9-year-old girl from Internet pornography, or it 
             is unconstitutional to protect an unborn child from 
             partial-birth abortion. With regard to all of these insane 
             notions, he did not see them.
               One woman said, Maybe these judges who find all these 
             things ought to be out looking for Osama bin Laden if they 
             are that good at finding things that are not there.
               This judge saw the Constitution for what it was. He did 
             not try to make a new revolution. He simply tried to 
             affirm the one we already had. I think that tonight we 
             celebrate the life of a man who many Justices of the 
             future will stand on his shoulders and look back and say, 
             you know, Chief Justice Rehnquist was right, Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist was correct.
               The ship of state turns slowly sometimes, but this man 
             had his hand on the rudder long before the rest of us even 
             knew. And I again just wanted to join with all of my 
             colleagues and honor this man's life.

               Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his 
             comments, and let me say this. As we discuss Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist and what he has accomplished and the legacy he 
             brings to the United States of America, we are doing this 
             on the very eve of the beginning of the new selection of a 
             Chief Justice of the United States. It is, I think, 
             appropriate to realize that as Chief Justice Rehnquist was 
             serving 33 years on the highest court in this land, he 
             also was writing history books to record history.
               He knew just what my colleague said, the gentleman from 
             Arizona (Mr. Franks), that it is important that we 
             remember the history as it was, not revise it to make it 
             what we want it to be. So he wrote three history books 
             about the Court so we could say, Well, what does history 
             tell us about that event at that time? And so the Chief 
             Justice, the great researcher, has given us the research 
             and a direction on the history as it pertains to the 
             Court, something the other Justices of the Court that will 
             follow can turn to as additional information to get a 
             picture of where the Court was coming from as it made 
             rulings.
               It is very important, and I hope our colleagues in the 
             Senate, as they look at the confirmation of Judge Roberts, 
             are looking at the history of the U.S. Supreme Court and 
             the legacy of William Rehnquist.

               Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, there is a point that 
             comes to mind, and I can get it quickly made. This right 
             to privacy that was in the emanation's penumbras, in the 
             shadows, was something that was never recognized by Chief 
             Justice Rehnquist. That right to privacy will be presented 
             to Judge Roberts, and he will be asked. In fact, he will 
             be demanded to recognize that right to privacy as a 
             condition of his confirmation over in the Senate, a very 
             right to privacy that Chief Justice Rehnquist never 
             recognized.
               That is how they are going to try to amend the 
             Constitution and the confirmation process over in the 
             Senate. I think it is important to recognize that the 
             legacy of Chief Justice Rehnquist should be preserved in 
             the confirmation process in the Senate as well.

               Mr. CARTER. I wonder how you can be unqualified to serve 
             by not recognizing that right, when there are members 
             sitting on the Court at this time who do not recognize 
             that right.
               The point of a Supreme Court is that there are multiple 
             points of view, and you should not be requiring only one 
             point of view on the U.S. Supreme Court. To make a 
             confirmation hearing dependent upon one point of view 
             absolutely flies in the face of justice in America.

               Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, I appreciated hearing from my 
             colleague from Iowa regarding his saying in elementary 
             school that he wanted to change the government. I think 
             about the example of the emperor who had no clothes, yet 
             all the crowd got swept up in seeing clothes that were not 
             there and saying, Oh, are the clothes not beautiful? They 
             were not there. Chief Justice Rehnquist was one of those 
             if he had to stand alone and say they are not there, there 
             are no clothes, he did it.
               Just in conclusion, I think about the end of Frost's 
             poem: Two roads diverged in the woods for Chief Justice 
             Rehnquist many years ago, and he took the one less 
             traveled by, and that has made all the difference. It has, 
             in fact, changed a Nation for the good.

               Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank the 
             gentleman. One of the downfalls of appearing in the 
             Congress with the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) and 
             the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks) and the gentleman 
             from Iowa (Mr. King) is these guys are great in quoting 
             all these things off the top of their head, and that is 
             hard for an old trial judge who is just used to shooting 
             from the hip. I do enjoy the wonderful quotes these guys 
             pull out and quote them right. It is a blessing to have 
             them as Members of our Congress.
               Mr. Speaker, you have been very patient today as we 
             honor our passing Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, as 
             we laid him to rest today. We thank you for your patience 
             in allowing us to express our opinions about him.
                                            Thursday, September 8, 2005
               Mr. SCHIFF. Madam Speaker, as we honor Chief Justice 
             William Rehnquist's life, we pause to reflect on his 
             service to our country, a record of service that was 
             colored with honor, dignity, and distinction.
               Many commentators are focused on his success ushering in 
             a quiet, conservative revolution on the Court. Another 
             remarkable facet of Rehnquist's legacy, however, is found 
             in a much more understated role of the Chief Justice, that 
             of the judiciary's chief advocate and ambassador. The 
             hallmark of his style, no matter how volatile the issue or 
             context, from abortion to impeachment, was one of 
             respectful debate, a quality that garnered an enormous 
             degree of loyalty and respect among his fellow Justices, 
             litigants, and Court watchers.
               But the Chief Justice not only worked to foster respect 
             and collegiality within the walls of the Court; he did 
             more. For the last 2 years of his tenure, Rehnquist turned 
             his focus to a matter that has also been a source of 
             growing concern for many, the deterioration in relations 
             between the Congress and the courts. As the Chief Justice 
             reported in his year-end analysis of the state of the 
             judiciary, and again in his customarily understated way, 
             ``During the last year, it seems that the traditional 
             interchange between the Congress and the Judiciary broke 
             down.''
               This hostility long preceded congressional intervention 
             in the tragic case of Terri Schiavo and has taken many 
             forms beyond the most simple and pernicious, that of 
             defunding the courts. It includes measures stripping the 
             courts of jurisdiction to hear particular cases, 
             condemning the courts for the citation of certain 
             precedent, and splitting circuits out of a dislike for 
             their jurisprudence.
               One constitutional amendment would even change the 
             Framers' design-of-life tenure for lower Federal courts 
             and subject judges to costly campaigns and retention 
             elections. If Members think political campaigning by 
             elected officials and the growth of 527 organizations and 
             other independent expenditure efforts are already out of 
             control, just imagine adding negative attack ads in 
             judicial races around the country: ``Call Judge Jones and 
             tell him to stop coddling criminals'' or ``Call Judge 
             Smith and ask him why he denied relief to widows and 
             orphans.'' One can just imagine what the judicial ads 
             might look like.
               Even though many of these legislative initiatives have 
             yet to pass, we are already witnessing the direct 
             consequences to our court system. In recent years there 
             has been a marked decline in the level of interest and 
             service on the bench among highly qualified attorneys. 
             Judges are leaving the bench to return to private 
             practice. Reckless talk in the House Committee on the 
             Judiciary about the potential impeachment of judges not 
             for unethical conduct but out of a disagreement with their 
             decisions has only added to the chilling effect on the 
             courts and people's willingness to serve.
               Ultimately, this protracted war against the judicial 
             branch will only denigrate both Congress and the courts. 
             This is not the first time relations between the two 
             branches have been at a dangerously low ebb, nor was 
             Rehnquist the first Chief Justice to express alarm. Former 
             Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes admonished the Congress 
             of his day that ``in the great enterprise of making 
             democracy workable, we are all partners. One member of our 
             body politic cannot say to another `I have no need of 
             thee.' ''
               Increasingly, however, the Congress has been saying just 
             that, and Rehnquist was among the first to spot the 
             danger. When the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert) 
             and I formed a bipartisan caucus to improve relations with 
             the courts, Chief Justice Rehnquist was the first to sit 
             down with us. We invited him to meet with our caucus. He 
             came to the Hill, sat down with us, and it was a very 
             important meeting and interchange. After presiding over 
             the High Court for the last two decades, he was clearly 
             disturbed at the turn of events in relations between the 
             branches and the resulting attack upon the independence of 
             the judiciary.
               Why does it matter if the Congress and the courts are at 
             war? Because if the separation of powers has eroded and an 
             independent judiciary is impaired, decisions become 
             increasingly politicized. Public confidence in the rule of 
             law erodes and people begin taking law into their own 
             hands: 174 years ago, Supreme Court Chief Justice John 
             Marshall warned, ``The greatest scourge an angry Heaven 
             ever inflicted upon an ungrateful and sinning people was 
             an ignorant, a corrupt, or a dependent judiciary.''
               During the confirmation hearings of John Roberts next 
             week, there will be a great many important questions asked 
             about Roberts' judicial philosophy, his views on 
             individual rights and freedoms. But I hope that at least 
             one Senator will ask whether Roberts, a prodigy of and 
             potential successor to Rehnquist, will aspire to succeed 
             not only his mentor's conservative revolution but his all 
             too solitary work to repair the damage to the historic and 
             vital comity between the Congress and the courts.
                                            Tuesday, September 20, 2005
               Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman 
             from Arizona (Mr. Franks) for yielding to me. It is an 
             honor for me to join him here on the floor again tonight. 
             The last time, as I recall, the gentleman from Arizona 
             (Mr. Franks), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter), and 
             also the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) and I were 
             here together was to celebrate the life of Chief Justice 
             William Rehnquist. That was a somber moment, a moment of 
             reverence and respect and reminiscing; but also, we came 
             away from that evening and we came away from that week 
             with a sense of the legacy that was left by the years on 
             the bench by Chief Justice Rehnquist. . . .
?

               
                              A Service of Celebration

                                And Commitment to God

                                   Of the life of

                               William Hubbs Rehnquist

                         Chief Justice of the United States

                                      1924-2005

             St. Matthew's Cathedral

             1725 Rhode Island Ave., N.W.

             Washington, D.C.

             Wednesday, September 7th

             2:00 p.m.

             The Reverend George W. Evans, Jr., D.D.

             The Reverend Jeffrey M. Wilson

             Lutheran Church of the Redeemer, McLean, VA

             The Reverend Jan P. Lookingbill

             Emmanuel Lutheran Church, Bethesda, MD

             Theodore Cardinal McCarrick

             Archbishop of Washington
             The Service


                     I.  Prelude

                              ....................  Selections from ``Water Music''--Handel
                              ....................  ``Joyful, Joyful, We Adore Thee''--Beethoven
                              ....................  ``Jesu, Joy of Man's Desiring''--Bach
                              ....................  ``How Lovely Is Thy Dwelling Place''--Brahms

                    II.  The Procession (Please stand)

                              ....................  ``God of Our Fathers''
                              ....................  (At the end of the procession, please be seated)
                              ....................  Solo: ``Amazing Grace''                               Denny Clark, tenor

                   III.  The Call To Worship:

                              ....................  Welcome Remarks:      Theodore Cardinal McCarrick

                              ....................  (Please stand)
                              ....................  Pastor Wilson: Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the source of all Mercy and
                                                     the God of all consolation. He comforts us in all our sorrows so that we can comfort others in
                                                     their sorrows with the consolation we ourselves have received from God.

      ....................  Congregation: Thanks be to God.

        ....................  Hymn:      ``A Mighty Fortress Is Our God''        Congregation
        ....................  EIN' FESTE BURG. 8 7, 87, 6 6, 6 6, 7.
      ....................      Broadly, with vigor

      ....................  1. A mighty fortress is our God, A bulwark never failing;
      ....................    Our helper he amid the flood Of mortal ills prevailing:
      ....................    For still our ancient foe Doth seek to work us woe;
      ....................    His craft and power are great, And, armed with cruel hate,
      ....................    On earth is not his equal.

     ....................  2. Did we in our own strength confide
 Our striving would be losing;
     ....................    Were not the right Man on our side, The Man of God's own choosing.
    ....................    Dost ask who that may be? Christ Jesus, it is he;
    ....................    Lord Sabaoth his Name, From age to age the same,
     ....................    And he must win the battle.

    ....................  3. And though this world, with devils filled, Should threaten to undo us;
    ....................    We will not fear, for God hath willed His truth to triumph through us:

    ....................    The prince of darkness grim, We tremble not for him;
    ....................    His rage we can endure, For lo! his doom is sure,
    ....................    One little word shall fell him.

   ....................  4. That word above all earthly powers, No thanks to them, abideth;
   ....................    The Spirit and the gifts are ours Through him who with us sideth:
   ....................    Let goods and kindred go, This mortal life also;
   ....................    The body they may kill: God's truth abideth still,
   ....................    His kingdom is forever.

   ....................   Martin Luther, 1483-1546
   ...................    Tr. Frederick H. Hedge, 1805-1890
   ...................    Based on Psalm 46






.................  Pastor: When we were baptized in Christ Jesus, we were baptized into his death. We were buried 
therefore with him by Baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised 
from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might live a new 
life. For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we 
shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. 

  IV. The Liturgy of the Word:

 ....................  The Kyrie:
...................  Cantor:  In peace let us pray to the Lord.
...................  Congregation: Lord, have mercy.
....................  Cantor:  For the peace from above and for our 
salvation, let us pray to the Lord.
..................  Congregation:  Lord have mercy.
....................  Cantor:  For the peace of the whole world, for the well-being of the Church of God, and for the  unity of all, let us pray to the 
Lord.
...................  Congregation:  Lord have mercy.
....................  Cantor:  For this holy house, and for all who 
offer here their worship and praise, let us pray to
                                                     the Lord.
 ...................  Congregation:  Lord have mercy.
....................  Cantor:  Help, save, comfort, and defend us, gracious Lord.
...................  Congregation:  Amen.

....................  The Gloria:
...................  Cantor:  Glory to God in the highest, and peace to 
his people on earth.
 ..................  Congregation:  Lord God, heavenly King, almighty God 
and Father:
 .................  We worship you, we give you thanks, we praise you for 
your glory.
 .................  Lord Jesus Christ, only Son of the Father,
 .................  Lord God, Lamb of God: You take away the sin of the world;
..................  Have mercy on us.
 ................  You are seated at the right hand of the Father; receive 
our prayer.
...................  For you alone are the Holy One, you alone are the Lord,
...................  You alone are the Most High, Jesus Christ, with the 
Holy Spirit, 
..............   In the glory of God the Father. Amen.
..................  Pastor:  The Lord be with you.
..................  Congregation:  And also with you.
..................  Pastor:  Let us pray.

        V.    The Readings:  (Please be seated)

...................  Psalms 61: 1-5 
  V. Samuel Laurin, III
 ..................  Isaiah 40: 25-31                                      Pastor Lookingbill
....................  ``Faith of Our Fathers''                              Choir
................  Remembrance:   Justice Sandra Day O'Connor


             Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor: We are here to 
             celebrate the life of a great Chief Justice, and to thank 
             God for blessing this country with his presence for 80 
             years. The last 33 of those 80 years were spent at the 
             U.S. Supreme Court--14 as an Associate Justice, 19 as 
             Chief Justice.
               I met Bill Rehnquist when I was a freshman at Stanford 
             University in 1946. He was serving as a ``hasher'' at my 
             dormitory during the evening meal. He amazed all the young 
             women by carrying such heavy loads of dishes on his tray. 
             I guess that is how he learned to carry all those heavy 
             loads in all the years that followed.
               He and I enrolled at Stanford Law School in 1950. He was 
             clearly the brightest student in our class--always 
             prepared and always willing to express his views when 
             asked. He had conservative views backed up by brilliant 
             analyses. Outside class we enjoyed bridge games, charades, 
             and occasional movies. Bill was always fun to be around 
             and he had a fine sense of humor. Little did either of us 
             expect to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court one day.
               Our class was very excited when he was selected by 
             Justice Robert Jackson to be a law clerk at the Supreme 
             Court. At that time not many Stanford law graduates were 
             invited to clerk at the Court.
               Bill married another undergraduate classmate of mine, 
             Nan Cornell. She also was very bright and engaging. After 
             finishing his law clerk's position, Bill and Nan settled 
             in Phoenix. They wanted a city that was both the political 
             and economic center of the State, and Phoenix suited them. 
             They became parents of Janet, Jim, and Nancy. When John 
             and I moved to Phoenix after John's military service, we 
             enjoyed seeing the Rehnquists on a regular basis. We had a 
             play reading group, and a bridge group. We went on family 
             desert outings.
               Bill was a successful lawyer in a civil practice, and 
             was active in the Arizona Republican Party. When he was 
             offered the post of Assistant Attorney General, Office of 
             Legal Counsel in 1969, the Rehnquists moved to northern 
             Virginia and their children entered the public school 
             system. Two years later President Nixon appointed Bill 
             Rehnquist as an Associate Justice of the Court. I came to 
             Washington to attend the joint investiture of Justice 
             Lewis Powell and Justice William Rehnquist on January 7, 
             1972. It was a proud and poignant moment.
               As a member of the Court, Justice Rehnquist found 
             himself frequently in dissent in the post-Earl Warren 
             years. In 1986 President Reagan wisely nominated Justice 
             Rehnquist for Chief Justice upon the retirement of Chief 
             Justice Warren Burger, and as Chief, Bill Rehnquist served 
             ably both as an administrator and as a member of the 
             Court. He had no pretenses at all and was always friendly 
             to Justices and staff alike. His sense of humor never left 
             him and he could break up a tense moment with a funny 
             story, quip, or poem. On the last day of our public 
             session, June 27, the Chief noted the seven separate 
             opinions issued in a contentious Ten Commandments case and 
             joked, ``I didn't know we had so many Justices.'' It drew 
             hearty laughter from the spectators. He never twisted arms 
             to get a vote on a case. He relied on the power of his 
             arguments and he was always fair.
               Occasionally he surprised us. One day as we gathered in 
             our Conference Room to shake hands before going in the 
             Courtroom, he appeared with four gold stripes on the 
             sleeve of his robe. We thought it must be a joke. ``Where 
             did those come from?,'' we asked. ``Oh, I had the 
             seamstress sew on one stripe for every 5 years I have been 
             on the Court,'' he said. ``Just like the Lord Chief 
             Justice in Gilbert and Sullivan.'' And the stripes stayed. 
             He could have added more but never did.
               Despite the workload, the Chief authored four fine books 
             and a number of articles. These works also deserved some 
             gold stripes. He was a first-rate historian and wrote with 
             an engaging style.
               I grew up on a ranch. The really expert riders of horses 
             let the horse know immediately who is in control but then 
             they guide the horse with loose reins and very seldom use 
             the spurs. So it was with our Chief. He guided us with 
             loose reins and used the spurs only rarely to get us up to 
             speed with our work. Efficiency was very important to the 
             Chief.
               His annual reports on the state of the judiciary were 
             masterful. His handling of the impeachment proceedings 
             against President Clinton was also expert. He presided 
             over all our Conferences with dispatch. He did not 
             encourage longwinded debates among us, but he gave each 
             Justice time to say what was needed. Because be was 
             concise he thought we should be also.
               Thanks to him relations among the members of the Court 
             have been remarkably harmonious considering our different 
             viewpoints. He has enabled the Court to serve the role 
             envisioned for it by the Framers of the Constitution. He 
             lived his life fully--enjoying his family, his beloved 
             wife, Nan, his three fine children, and his grandchildren. 
             He was a faithful member of the Lutheran Church--no doubt 
             due to his Swedish ancestry. He was a beloved friend and 
             colleague, and a public servant in the finest tradition. 
             He was courageous at the end of his life, just as he was 
             throughout his life. And he never lost his sense of humor. 
             As he was being examined in the emergency room of a local 
             hospital in the final week of his life, the examining 
             physician asked who was his primary care doctor. ``My 
             dentist,'' he struggled to say, with a twinkle in his eye.
               The Chief was a betting man. He enjoyed making wagers 
             about most things: The outcome of football or baseball 
             games, elections, even the amount of snow that would fall 
             in the courtyard at the Court. If you valued your money, 
             you would be careful about betting with the Chief. He 
             usually won. I think the Chief bet he could live out 
             another term despite his illness. He lost that bet, as did 
             all of us, but he won all the prizes for a life well 
             lived.
               We love you, Chief.
               Now, as the Chief would say, ``Counsel, the red light is 
             on. Your time is up.''




                              ....................  Remembrance:                                     President George W. Bush


             President George W. Bush: Jim and Janet and Nancy; members 
             of the Rehnquist family; colleagues of the Chief Justice. 
             This afternoon the people of the United States mourn the 
             passing of the leader of a branch of the government, the 
             eight Justices of the Court pay final homage to their 
             Chief and friend, and a loving family bids farewell to a 
             kind and gentle soul.
               William Hubbs Rehnquist accomplished many things in his 
             good life, and rose to high places. And we remember the 
             integrity and the sense of duty that he brought to every 
             task before him. That character was clear in the young man 
             of 18 who signed up for the Army Air Corps during the 
             Second World War. The Nation saw that character in his 
             more than three decades of service on our highest court. 
             And the Nation saw it again last January 20, when the 
             Chief Justice made his way onto the inaugural platform. 
             Many will never forget the sight of this man, weakened by 
             illness, rise to his full height and say in a strong 
             voice, ``Raise your right hand, Mr. President, and repeat 
             after me.''
               It was more than a half-century ago that Bill Rehnquist 
             first came to the Supreme Court as a law clerk. As he 
             would later recount the story, he made that trip from 
             Milwaukee, in the middle of the winter in an old blue 
             Studebaker with no heater. He recalled that as he began 
             the journey, he patted that car and thought, don't let me 
             down, baby.
               After a year-and-a-half in the Chambers of Justice 
             Robert Jackson, Bill Rehnquist left Washington, DC, and 
             headed for Phoenix with an even greater love for the law--
             and with something more: a beautiful fiance named Natalie 
             Cornell. She would share his walk in life for nearly 40 
             years. All who knew the Chief know how he cherished Nan 
             and their time together, and how much he missed his wife 
             in the years without her.
               In every chapter of his life, William Rehnquist stood 
             apart for his powerful intellect and clear convictions. In 
             a profession that values disciplined thought and 
             persuasive ability, a talent like his gets noticed in a 
             hurry. Still in his forties, he became the 100th Justice 
             of the Supreme Court, and one of the youngest in modern 
             times.
               After he moved to the center chair, William Rehnquist 
             led the Court for nearly two decades, and earned a place 
             among our greatest Chief Justices. He built consensus 
             through openness and collegiality. He was a distinguished 
             scholar of the Constitution and a superb administrator of 
             the judicial conference. He understood the role of a judge 
             and the place of courts in our constitutional system. He 
             was prudent in exercising judicial power, and firm in 
             defending judicial independence.
               On the bench and as a leader of the Federal courts, 
             Chief Justice Rehnquist was always a calm and steady 
             presence. In his thinking and in his bearing, he 
             personified the ideal of fairness, and people could sense 
             it. Inside the Court, no man could have been a finer 
             steward of the institution, its customs, and its history.
               As long as William Rehnquist was presiding, colleagues 
             and advocates knew that the proceedings would be orderly, 
             on time, businesslike, and occasionally humorous. Once 
             during an oral argument, a lawyer criticized his 
             opponent's position by saying, ``I doubt very much it will 
             fool this Court.'' The Chief Justice replied, ``Don't 
             overestimate us.''
               In his time on the Court, William Rehnquist served with 
             16 other Justices, and by all accounts, each one of his 
             colleagues regarded the man with respect and affection. 
             Justice William Brennan once said to a visitor, ``I cannot 
             begin to tell you . . . how fond all of us are of him 
             personally.''
               Throughout this city of government, people saw William 
             Rehnquist in that same way. He carried himself with 
             dignity, but without pretense. Like Ronald Reagan, the 
             President who elevated him to Chief Justice, he was kindly 
             and decent, and there was not an ounce of self-importance 
             about him. It is a rare man who can hold a prominent 
             position in Washington, DC, for more than 30 years and 
             leave behind only good feelings and admiration. That's 
             what William Rehnquist did.
               His law clerks knew him as a demanding boss who pressed 
             them, as one said, to ``read carefully, write clearly, and 
             think hard.'' But the clerks also became an extension of 
             the Chief's family, joining him for walks around the 
             Capitol, or for lunch or dinner, or games of tennis or 
             charades. His clerks remember those times with fondness. 
             And even more, they remember his vast store of knowledge 
             and his daily example of clear thinking and character. To 
             work beside William Rehnquist was to learn how a wise man 
             looks at the law and how a good man looks at life.
               The Chief Justice was devoted to his public duties, but 
             not consumed by them. He was a renaissance man, a man who 
             adored his family, a man who always kept things in 
             balance. He read works of history and wrote a few fine 
             ones of his own. He knew how to paint, and he knew how to 
             win at bridge and poker. He had a passion for the 
             classics, for astronomy, and for college basketball. He 
             enjoyed music, and having stood next to him during the 
             national anthem, I can tell you the man loved to sing.
               William Rehnquist often reminded young lawyers of the 
             ancient insight that time is the most valuable thing a man 
             can spend. He spoke with feeling about the need to choose 
             wisely, doing your job well, and never forgetting the 
             other important things that also take time: love for one 
             another, being a good parent to a child, service to your 
             community. He might have added the importance of being a 
             loving grandfather, because he was clearly that, too.
               The 16th Chief Justice of the United States was given 80 
             years of life. He filled those years with purpose, a 
             gracious spirit, and faithful service to God and country 
             to the very end. He now goes to his rest beside his 
             beloved Nan. And William H. Rehnquist leaves behind the 
             gratitude of our whole Nation. We're proud of our Chief 
             Justice, and America honors his memory. May God bless him.




...................  Hymn: ``America The Beautiful''                              Congregation
...................  (Please stand)

.................  O beautiful for spacious skies, For amber waves of grain,
................  For purple mountain majesties Above the fruited plain!
................  America! America! God shed his grace on thee
................  And crown thy good with brotherhood From sea to shining sea.

...............  O beautiful for heroes proved In liberating strife.
...............  Who more than self their country loved And mercy more than life!
.................  America! America! May God thy gold refine
 ...............  Till all success be nobleness And every gain divine!

...............  O beautiful for patriot dream That sees beyond the years
.................  Thine alabaster cities gleam Undimmed by human tears!
................  America! America! God shed his grace on thee
.............  And crown they good with brotherhood From sea to shining sea!






..................  (Please be seated)
...................  Poetry Reading:  Donald C. McLean
 Rembrance:          James Cornell Rehnquist
 ..................  Remembrance: Nancy Rehnquist Spears
....................  Remembrance: Natalie Ann Rehnquist Lynch
....................  The Gospel: Matthew 5: 1-16 Pastor Lookingbill
....................  (Please stand)






...................  Hymn: ``Guide Me O Thou Great Jehovah''        Congregation
...................  CWM RHONDDA. 8 7, 8 7, 8 7.     John Hughes, 1873-1932
...................      Broadly, in moderate time

...................  1. Guide me, O thou great Jehovah,
..................    Pilgrim through this barren land;
...................    I am weak, but thou art mighty,
...................    Hold me with thy powerful hand;
..................    Bread of heaven, Bread of heaven,
..................    Feed me till I want no more,
..................    Feed me till I want no more.
.................    2. Open now the crystal fountain
...................    Whence the healing stream doth flow;
................     Let the fire and cloudy pillar
.................    Lead me all my journey through;
.................    Strong deliverer, Strong deliverer,
.................    Be thou still my strength and shield,
.................    Be thou still my strength and shield. Amen.
...................  3. When I tread the verge of Jordan,
.................    Bid my anxious fears subside;
.................    Death of death and hell's destruction,
.................    Land me safe on Canaan's side;
.................    Songs of praises
.................    I will ever give to thee. Amen.
                    William Williams, 1717-1791
                              ....................                                        Tr. from the Welsh by the author
                              ....................                                           and Peter Williams, 1722-1796






...................  Sermon:   Pastor Evans 

..................  Hallelujah (''Messiah'')--Handel                             Choir
....................  (Please stand)






VI.                   The Creed:

....................  Pastor:  God has made us our Baptism into 
Christ. Living together in trust and hope, we  confess our faith.
...................  Congregation:  (Please stand)
....................  I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator 
of heaven and earth.
....................  I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord. 
....................  He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit 
and born of the virgin Mary.
....................  He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, 
died, and was buried.
....................  He descended into hell. On the third day He 
rose again. 
...................  He ascended into heaven, and is seated at the 
right hand of the Father. 
....................  I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy 
Catholic Church, 
..................  The communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins,
....................  The resurrection of the body, and the life 
everlasting. Amen. 

    VII.                  The Prayers:

....................  The Pastor shall lead the congregation in prayer.
The congregation is invited to sit or kneel as                              they feel comfortable. 

...................  The Lord's Prayer.

 VIII.                 The Commendation:                                            The Clergy....................  (Please be seated)

....................  Pastor:  Into your hands, O merciful Savior, 
we commend your servant William Hubbs Rehnquist.
Acknowledge, we humbly beseech you, a sheep of your own fold, a lamb 
of your own flock, a sinner of your own redeeming. Receive him into 
the arms of your mercy, into the blessed rest of everlasting                                                      peace, and into the glorious company of the saints in light. 
...................  Congregation:  Amen. 
...................  Pastor:  Let us go forth in peace. 
.................  Congregation: In the name of Christ. Amen.






  IX.                   The Benediction: (Please rise)






....................  Hymn: ``For All the Saints''     Congregation

..................  1. For all the saints who from their labors rest,
..................    all who by faith before the world confessed,
..................    your name, O Jesus, be forever blest.
....................    Alleluia! Alleluia!
..................  2. You were their rock, their fortress, and their might;
...................    you, Lord, their captain in the well-fought fight;
....................     you, in the darkness drear, their one true light.
....................    Alleluia! Alleluia!
...................  3. Oh, may your soldiers, faithful, true, and bold,
.................    fight as the saints who nobly fought of old
.................    and win with them the victor's crown of gold.
...................    Alleluia! Alleluia!
.................  4. Oh, blest communion, fellowship divine,
....................    we feebly struggle, they in glory shine;
...................    yet all are one within your great design. ..................    Alleluia! Alleluia!
..................  5. And when the strife is fierce, the warfare long,
.................    steals on the ear the distant triumph song,
...................    and hearts are brave again and arms are strong.
....................    Alleluia! Alleluia! 
...................  6. The golden evening brightens in the west;
...................     soon, soon to faithful warriors comes their rest;
..................     sweet is the calm of paradise the blest.
...................    Alleluia! Alleluia!
...................  7. But then there breaks a yet more glorious day: 
the  saints triumphant rise in bright array;
...................    the King of glory passes on his way.
..................    Alleluia! Alleluia!
....................  8. From earth's wide bounds, from ocean's farthest coast, through
.................    gates of pearl streams in the countless host,
................     singing to Father, Son, and Holy Ghost:
....................    Alleluia! Alleluia!

.................. Text: William W. How, 1823-1897, alt.
....................Music: SINE NOMINE. R. Vaughan Williams, 1872-1958 






 X. Recessional: ``Crown Him With Many Crowns''

....................  Please remain standing and in your seats while the family and the President depart.



 Thank You: A special thank you to Donald McCullough (Music Director 
of the Master Chorale of Washington and former Music Director at 
the Lutheran Church of the Redeemer in McLean, Virginia 
(Chief Justice  Rehnquist's church) for coordinating the music for 
this service. Special thanks also to Jennifer Goltz, Music Director 
of St. Matthew's, for her assistance and to all the                                musicians who participated in this service. 


  [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 23500.002


