[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 68 (Monday, May 14, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3117-S3123]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
NOMINATION OF GEORGE LEVI RUSSELL III, TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT
JUDGE FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
______
NOMINATION OF JOHN J. THARP, JR., TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will
proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations,
which the clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read the nominations of George Levi Russell,
III, of Maryland, to be United States District Judge for the District
of Maryland, and John J. Tharp, Jr., of Illinois, to be United States
District Judge for the Northern District of Illinois.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 60
minutes of debate equally divided in the usual form.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time run
until 5:30 p.m. on the nominees, which would be approximately 50
minutes, but that time be divided in the usual form.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. President, last week, 5 months into the year, the Senate finally
was allowed to finish clearing the backlog of 19 judicial nominees who
were needlessly stalled since last year by Senate Republicans. Today
the Senate is being allowed to consider two of the 19 judicial nominees
now awaiting final Senate action. George Levi Russell is nominated to
fill a judicial emergency vacancy in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Maryland and John Tharp to fill a judicial emergency
vacancy in the Northern District of Illinois. These nominees have the
support of their home State Senators and were reported 3 months ago
with the bipartisan majority of the Judiciary Committee.
I hope the fact that the majority leader was able to obtain consent
to move these nominations signals that the Senate is being allowed to
return to regular order, and that the majority leader will be able to
schedule a vote without further delay on the nomination of Paul Watford
of California to fill a judicial emergency vacancy on the Ninth
Circuit. His nomination was reported before those being considered
today and has been skipped in the order. He is a fine nominee with
outstanding qualifications and bipartisan support.
Last week, we were finally able to confirm Judge Jacqueline Nguyen of
California to fill a judicial emergency vacancy on the Ninth Circuit
after a needless 5-month delay. Her nomination had been reported
unanimously by the Judiciary Committee and was confirmed by a vote of
91 3. It took the filing of 17 cloture petitions in March to get Senate
Republicans to agree to consider her nomination.
The Ninth Circuit is still in dire need of judges. With nearly three
times the number of cases pending as the next busiest circuit, we
cannot afford to further delay Senate votes on the other two
nominations to the Ninth Circuit. Paul Watford of California passed the
Committee more than 3 months ago. Andrew Hurwitz of Arizona passed the
Committee more than 2 months ago. There is no good reason for Senate
Republicans to further delay votes on these Ninth Circuit nominees. The
61 million people served by the Ninth Circuit are not served by this
delay. The circuit is being forced to handle more than double the
caseload of any other without its full complement of judges. The Senate
should be expediting consideration of Paul Watford and Justice Andrew
Hurwitz, not delaying them.
[[Page S3118]]
The Chief Judge of the Ninth Circuit, Judge Alex Kozinski, a Reagan
appointee, along with the members of the Judicial Council of the Ninth
Circuit, wrote to the Senate months ago emphasizing the Ninth Circuit's
``desperate need for judges,'' urging the Senate to ``act on judicial
nominees without delay,'' and concluding ``we fear that the public will
suffer unless our vacancies are filled very promptly.'' The judicial
emergency vacancies on the Ninth Circuit are harming litigants by
creating unnecessary and costly delays. The Administrative Office of
U.S. Courts reports that it takes nearly 5 months longer for the Ninth
Circuit to issue an opinion after an appeal is filed, compared to all
other circuits. The Ninth Circuit's backlog of pending cases far
exceeds other Federal courts. As of the end of 2011, the Ninth Circuit
had 14,041 cases pending before it, far more than any other circuit.
If caseloads were really a concern of Republican Senators, as they
contended last year when they filibustered the nomination of Caitlin
Halligan to the D.C. Circuit, they would not be delaying the
nominations to fill judicial emergency vacancies in the Ninth Circuit.
If caseloads were really a concern, Senate Republicans would consent to
move forward with votes on Paul Watford and Andrew Hurwitz without
these months of unnecessary delays.
Paul Watford was rated unanimously well qualified by the ABA's
Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, the highest rating
possible. He clerked at the United States Supreme Court for Justice
Ruth Bader Ginsburg and on the Ninth Circuit for now Chief Judge Alex
Kozinski. He was a Federal prosecutor in Los Angeles. He has the
support of his home State Senators and bipartisan support from noted
conservatives such as Daniel Collins, who served as associate deputy
attorney general in the Bush administration; professors Eugene Volokh
and Orin Kerr; and Jeremy Rosen, the former president of the Los
Angeles chapter of the Federalist Society.
Justice Hurwitz is a respected and experienced jurist on the Arizona
Supreme Court. His nomination has the strong support of both his
Republican home state Senators, Senator John McCain and Senator Jon
Kyl, who introduced him to the Judiciary Committee at his hearing in
January. Senator Kyl said of Justice Hurwitz:
It is very easy to see and it is obvious to those of us who
have been in Arizona a long time why Justice Hurwitz was
awarded the ABA's highest rating, unanimous well qualified.
So it will be my privilege to support his nomination, and I
am honored to be able to introduce him to the panel today.
Given that both nominees are superbly qualified mainstream nominees
with bipartisan support, the long delays that have plagued these
nominations are hard to understand.
While discussing the Ninth Circuit, I should also clear up the
history of President Bush's Ninth Circuit nominees. Senate Democrats
did not oppose Randy Smith joining the Ninth Circuit. Judge Smith was
confirmed unanimously by a vote of 94 0. His nomination was
unnecessarily complicated and delayed by President Bush who initially
insisted on nominating Judge Smith to a California seat on the Ninth
Circuit. He is not a Californian and was not supported by the
California Senators. When President Bush took my advice and renominated
Judge Smith to fill an Idaho vacancy on the Ninth Circuit at the
beginning of 2007, he was confirmed quickly.
Carolyn Kuhl was another nominee President Bush tried to ram through
the Senate in spite of the opposition of her home State Senators. It
was Senate Republicans and the Republican chairman who blatantly
disregarded Senate Judiciary procedure by proceeding with that
nomination despite the objection of both home State Senators. At the
time I noted that this was a provocative step that ratcheted up
partisanship and the use of judicial nominees for partisan political
purposes. By contrast, I have respected objections of Republican home
State Senators, even when they change their position from support to
opposition, as happened recently with a Kansas nominee to the Tenth
Circuit.
Senate Democrats opposed William Gerry Myers because he was an
ideologue who spent over 20 years of his career as a lobbyist and as an
outspoken antagonist against long-established environmental
protections. Mr. Myers' advocacy often took positions that were legally
unsupportable. Mr. Myers' record as a partisan ideologue was not offset
by other qualifications to be a court of appeals nominee; he received a
partial not qualified rating from the American Bar Association, had
never tried a jury case, nor had he served as counsel in any criminal
litigation.
The fact is, even after the Senate was forced to invoke cloture to
overcome Republican filibusters of President Clinton's nominations of
Richard Paez and Marsha Berzon to the Ninth Circuit, the Senate
proceeded to confirm seven of the nine Ninth Circuit nominees of
President Bush. We reduced vacancies on the Ninth Circuit during
President Bush's two terms to only a single vacancy. Four of President
Bush's Ninth Circuit nominees were confirmed during his first 4-year
term: Judge Richard Clifton, Judge Jay Bybee, Judge Consuelo Callahan,
and Judge Carlos Bea. By contrast, Senate Republicans are opposing our
moving forward to consider and confirm Paul Watford and Andrew Hurwitz,
who are both strongly supported by their home State Senators, to fill
judicial emergency vacancies, and they filibustered the nomination of
Goodwin Liu, who also had the strong support of his home State
Senators.
The American people deserve better. Our courts need qualified Federal
judges, not vacancies, if they are to reduce the excessive wait times
that burden litigants seeking their day in court. It is unacceptable
for hardworking Americans who turn to their courts for justice to
suffer unnecessary delays. When an injured plaintiff sues to help cover
the cost of his or her medical expenses, that plaintiff should not have
to wait 3 years before a judge hears the case. When two small business
owners disagree over a contract, they should not have to wait years for
a court to resolve their dispute.
We have much more work to do to help resolve the judicial vacancy
crisis that has persisted for more than 3 years. When the Majority
Leader and the Republican leader came to their interim understanding in
March, it resulted in votes on 14 of the 22 judicial nominations then
awaiting final consideration. Because the arrangement took months to
implement what the Senate could have done in hours, the backlog of
judicial vacancies and judicial nominees continues. Today we are almost
back to where we started with 19 judicial nominees awaiting action.
We are still lagging far behind what we accomplished during the first
term of President George W. Bush. During President Bush's first term we
reduced the number of judicial vacancies by almost 75 percent. When I
became Chairman in the summer of 2001, there were 110 vacancies. As
Chairman, I worked with the administration and Senators from both sides
of the aisle to confirm 100 judicial nominees of a conservative
Republican President in 17 months.
We continued when in the minority to work with Senate Republicans to
confirm President Bush's consensus judicial nominations well into 2004,
a Presidential election year. At the end of that Presidential term, the
Senate had acted to confirm 205 circuit and district court nominees. In
May 2004, we reduced judicial vacancies to below 50 on the way to 28
that August. Despite 2004 being an election year, we were able to
reduce vacancies to the lowest level in the last 20 years. At a time of
great turmoil and political confrontation, despite the attack on 9/11,
the anthrax letters shutting down Senate offices, and the ideologically
driven judicial selections of President Bush, we worked together to
promptly confirm consensus nominees and significantly reduce judicial
vacancies.
In October 2008, another Presidential election year, we again worked
to reduce judicial vacancies and were able to get back down to 34
vacancies. I accommodated Senate Republicans and continued holding
expedited hearings and votes on judicial nominations into September
2008. We lowered vacancy rates more than twice as quickly as Senate
Republicans have allowed during President Obama's first term.
By comparison, the vacancy rate remains nearly twice what it was at
this point in the first term of President Bush, and has remained near
or above 80 for nearly three years. Again, if we could move forward to
Senate votes on the 19 judicial nominees ready for final
[[Page S3119]]
action, the Senate could reduce vacancies below 60 and make progress.
The Senate needs to consider these judicial nominees if we are to
make real progress in reducing the burden of judicial vacancies. That
is what we did in the most recent Presidential election years of 2004
and 2008 and what we should be doing this year. We have a long way to
go. We need to work to reduce the vacancies that are burdening the
Federal judiciary and the millions of Americans who rely on our Federal
courts to seek justice. Let us work in a bipartisan fashion to confirm
these qualified judicial nominees so that we can address the judicial
vacancy crisis and so they can serve the American people.
Today, we can finally fill two judicial emergency vacancies with
excellent nominees. George Levi Russell III is nominated to fill a
judicial emergency vacancy on the District of Maryland, where he has
been an active member of the legal community for over 20 years.
Currently an Associate Judge in the Circuit Court of Maryland for
Baltimore City, he previously spent 10 years as an Assistant U.S.
Attorney in the District of Maryland, serving in both the criminal and
civil divisions. Judge Russell's nomination has the strong support of
the Maryland Senators, Senators Mikulski and Cardin.
John ``Jay'' Tharp is nominated to fill a judicial emergency vacancy
on the Northern District of Illinois. This is the second time Mr. Tharp
has been nominated to that position, having also been nominated by
President George W. Bush in July 2008. A former Captain in the Marine
Corps, Mr. Tharp is currently a partner in the Chicago office of Mayer
Brown LLP. He began his legal career as a Federal prosecutor in the
Northern District of Illinois and clerked for Judge Joel Flaum on the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. The ABA Standing
Committee on the Federal Judiciary unanimously rated Mr. Tharp well
qualified, its highest rating. Mr. Tharp's nomination has the
bipartisan support of Illinois' Democratic Senator Dick Durbin and
Republican Senator Mark Kirk.
Both Judge Russell and Mr. Tharp were favorably reported by the
Judiciary Committee on February 16th of this year. I look forward to
their confirmations today.
Mr. President, using the time allocated to the majority, I ask
unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(The remarks of Senator Leahy are printed in today's Record under
``Morning Business.'')
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum and ask
unanimous consent that the remaining time between now and 5:30 be
equally divided.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
At the request of Mr. Durbin, the following statement was ordered to
be printed in the Record.
Mr. KIRK. Mr. President, I wish to offer my strong endorsement
for the nomination of John ``Jay'' Tharp to the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of Illinois.
Jay Tharp will be an outstanding addition to the Federal bench. He
made a name for himself as an assistant U.S. attorney whose cases
included political corruption and money laundering. His impressive
tenure in that office includes service in the General Crimes Division
and the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force. Since leaving the
U.S. Attorney's office in 1997, Tharp has worked at Mayer Brown LLP,
where he was made partner in 1999. He is currently coleader of Mayer
Brown's securities litigation and enforcement practice.
I want to thank Senator Durbin for his continued dedication and hard
work to ensure the Senate's timely confirmation of both Illinois
judicial nominees, Jay Tharp and John Lee.
Under Senate tradition for Illinois, the senator from the party not
in control of the White House makes nomination recommendations to the
White House for one Federal district court judgeship for every three of
the party in power. The arrangement is intended to ensure the orderly
filing of Federal judge vacancies on the Illinois bench. Under that
tradition, John Tharp was my first recommendation.
Jay served our country in the Marine Corps from 1982 to 1988,
achieving the rank of Captain and earning the Navy Achievement Medal
and the Navy Distinguished Midshipman Award. He subsequently attended
Northwestern University Law School on a full merit John Henry Wigmore
Scholarship. While at Northwestern, Jay served as book review editor of
the Northwestern Law Review. He graduated magna cum laude in 1990.
Last week, the Senate voted to confirm John Lee to fill one of the
vacancies for the Northern District. Senator Durbin and I worked
closely to recommend both Jay Tharp and John Lee and today's vote on
Jay's nomination will hopefully conclude the process to fill these two
vacancies.
I would also like to thank my Judicial Review Advisory Board, chaired
by Peter Baugher of Schopf & Weiss LLP, for their hard work in
selecting Jay Tharp. In February 2011, I formed this 14-member
bipartisan, Statewide screening committee and charged it with
identifying ``the strongest applicants from Illinois for consideration
by the President and U.S. Senate.''
My Advisory Board received nearly 50 applications, met five times,
and spent over 300 man-hours to review judicial candidates. The
Advisory Board's review process included personal interviews as well as
calls to colleagues, opposing counsel, and judges.
I urge my colleagues to support Jay Tharp's nomination.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, pending before the Senate is the
nomination of Jay Tharp to serve on the District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois. Senator Kirk and I have agreed on a bipartisan
approach to this. We each have appointed bipartisan committees who
review prospective applicants and then make recommendations. We each
have a veto over the other's recommendation, so it is totally
bipartisan. In the case of Jay Tharp, there was no veto--certainly not
by me--and in this case, he was sponsored by Senator Kirk. He is an
extraordinarily talented individual.
The reason I have entered into the Congressional Record the official
statement of Senator Kirk is because, obviously, he can't be here. He
is in rehab at this point from a stroke he suffered in January, and
there was an encouraging video released last week showing the progress
he is making. We are all anxious for him to return. I promised him in a
phone conversation last week that I would move this nomination as
quickly as possible so that his nominee is approved. His statement now
in the Record speaks to his feelings about Jay Tharp's nomination, and
it speaks for itself. I will now add my own comments.
I am glad Mr. Tharp is finally getting a vote in the Senate. It has
taken a long time. In fact, it has taken too long for this day to come.
Nominees who are noncontroversial, eminently qualified, who go through
the committee without even a hint of resistance from Democrats or
Republicans shouldn't have to sit on this calendar for week after week
and month after month. It has now become standard around here, as have
these mind-numbing filibusters become standard around here, and it
isn't fair.
It isn't fair first to the country to leave vacancies on the Federal
bench, creating hardships in courts around the Nation where people come
to the courthouse expecting timely consideration of important matters,
from criminal charges to civil litigation.
It isn't fair to the nominees. It really takes a pretty stalwart
individual to put their name up to be a Federal judge because they are
going to go through three or four different levels of investigation and
some pretty serious investigation by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, for example. That is part of the process. There are
investigations by the White House, by the Senators' offices, by the
Senate Judiciary Committee. So it is not an easy undertaking. There
might have been a time--I know there was--when these nominations were
made in 48 hours with hardly a question asked. It doesn't happen
anymore. Hard questions are asked, and then comes the
[[Page S3120]]
suspense of starting the process and waiting for it to end. These poor
nominees sit there with their professional and personal lives on hold,
having said they are prepared to step forward and serve a lifetime
appointment on the Federal judiciary, and then they wait day after
weary day, week after weary week, month after month, sitting on this
Executive Calendar so that at some point there will be a bargaining
session and some names will go forward and some won't.
This is what happened to Jay Tharp, but it shouldn't have, nor should
it have happened to John Lee, the nominee who was approved last week
for Illinois. Both nominees are extraordinarily qualified and should
have gone through without this resistance, but this reflects what is
happening in the Senate.
What is interesting about Jay Tharp is that every aspect of his
nomination has been bipartisan. As I said, Senator Kirk put him through
a bipartisan process for selection, and Senator Kirk reviewed and
approved all of the candidates and then recommended him. It was last
November 10 that the White House sent two nominations to the Senate to
fill vacancies: John Lee, who was approved last Monday, and Jay Tharp,
who we will be considering this evening.
John Lee was my choice; Jay Tharp was Senator Kirk's choice. We
agreed, as I said, on both nominees. They were both nominated on the
same day. They appeared together at the hearing before the Judiciary
Committee in January. Both were reported out of the committee in
February--about 3 or 4 months ago--in a bipartisan voice vote.
It was my hope we could bring them to a quick vote. There was an
urgent need to fill the vacancies. We had been contacted by the chief
judge of the district in Chicago, Jim Holderman. He had written to both
of us, Senator Kirk and myself, and asked: Please move on these judges.
I felt an obligation, after Senator Kirk's illness, to try to get
this job done. I knew Senator Kirk would be here in person if it were
humanly possible. I put his statement in the Record. I know how
strongly he feels about the qualities of Jay Tharp.
Unfortunately, for reasons hard to understand, this has dragged on
for almost 6 months since their nominations were sent to the Senate. Up
until a few years ago, this, as I said, was not the way things were
handled--not when it came to bipartisan nominees who were coming out of
the committee with no controversy. That certainly is the case now. We
now see routine objections. There is a presumption that something must
be wrong with a nominee, and we will just sit on it for weeks and
months. That is not good. It is not fair to the nominees. It is not
fair to the process. It certainly is not good for the judiciary.
Under the last nominations agreement negotiated in March, for some
reason John Lee made the cut, Jay Tharp did not. I appealed to Senator
Kyl, to Senator McConnell. I sent a letter in writing and spoke to it
on the Senate floor.
This is Senator Mark Kirk's first nomination for a Federal judgeship,
and I know how important it is to him. I thank those who were
responsible for bringing it forward today. I am sure he will be
relieved. I know Jay Tharp will be relieved when this is over.
I have been very happy to stand and support Jay Tharp, as well as
John Lee. They are both extraordinary individuals. There are other
well-qualified nominees sitting on this Senate calendar in a similar
circumstance. After today's votes, there will be 17 nominees pending on
the calendar, and nearly all of them--almost all of them--were voted
out of committee without any dissenting votes, with the exception of
Senator Lee of Utah, who votes customarily against all judicial
nominees. These nominees, but for a few, have not had any controversy.
Six of these nominees are in areas designated as judicial emergencies,
including two nominees for seats in the Ninth Circuit--Paul Watford and
Andrew Hurwitz, who are extraordinarily well qualified.
I hope my Republican colleagues will give us a break. These people
deserve to get their moment on the Senate floor. They deserve a vote,
and the areas they are going to serve deserve a full complement of
competent jurists.
It is time to restore sanity, comity, and good faith to the way we
treat judicial nominations on the Senate floor. That should start
today.
Let me discuss Jay Tharp's background for the record. He was
nominated when a judgeship opened up after Judge Blanche Manning took
senior status. He is currently a partner in the Chicago office of Mayer
Brown, where he is the co-leader of the firm's securities litigation
and enforcement practice.
He was born into a military family--he is very proud of it--as the
son of a lieutenant colonel in the Marine Corps.
Jay Tharp attended Duke University on an ROTC scholarship. He
received his undergraduate degree summa cum laude and was commissioned
as a second lieutenant in the Marine Corps.
He served on Active Duty with the Marines for 6 years, achieving the
rank of captain and earning the Navy Achievement Medal and the Navy
Distinguished Midshipman Award.
After his military service, he attended Northwestern University Law
School. He graduated magna cum laude and served on their Law Review.
Upon graduation, he was a clerk for Judge Joel Flaum on the Seventh
Circuit, and then worked as an assistant U.S. attorney in Chicago for 6
years.
After his tenure as a Federal prosecutor, he joined Mayer Brown,
where his practice has been in complex commercial litigation and
criminal investigations. He has received numerous recognitions. He has
served as an adjunct professor of trial advocacy at Northwestern
University Law School, and he is a member of the Law Fund Board at
Northwestern, which oversees fundraising efforts.
In short, Jay Tharp is a picture-perfect nominee for the Federal
bench. He has the qualifications, temperament, and integrity to serve
the Northern District well. I urge my colleagues to support his
nomination.
I just say to Jay Tharp, the day has come, finally. I am sorry you
got caught up in what has become a tiring political exercise, where
people are just stuck on a calendar waiting for something to happen
which springs them loose. This evening will be your opportunity.
I hope the Senate--and I know Senator Kirk will join me in saying
this--will give Jay Tharp the unanimous vote he deserves. He is an
extraordinarily well-qualified nominee, and I am happy to support his
nomination.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I will be urging the people in my caucus
to vote for these nominees, both of them. Today, the Senate is expected
to confirm these two nominees: Judge Russell to the District of
Maryland and Mr. Tharp to the Northern District of Illinois. As I said,
I support the nominees, and I do, in fact, expect that both of them
will be confirmed.
We continue to confirm the President's nominees at a brisk pace. In
fact, with today's confirmations, we will have confirmed 145 of
President Obama's district and circuit court nominees. I would like to
put this in perspective.
We confirmed two Supreme Court nominees during President Obama's term
so far. Everyone knows it takes a tremendous amount of time and
resources to consider Supreme Court nominees.
The last time the Senate confirmed two Supreme Court nominees was
during President Bush's second term. During President Bush's entire
second term, the Senate confirmed only 120 district and circuit court
nominees.
Compare that, if you will, to the 145 district and circuit court
nominees we have confirmed so far since President Obama has become
President. Let me say that same thing a different way. We have
confirmed 25 more nominees for President Obama than we did for
President Bush in a similar time period. Of course, President Obama's
term is not over yet.
With these facts in mind, I hope my colleagues will understand why I
get a little frustrated when I hear all of these complaints about how
we are not confirming enough nominees. The fact is President Obama is
being treated much more fairly than Senate Democrats treated President
Bush.
It is especially frustrating to hear the other side complain about
the vacancy rate. The fact is the Senate is
[[Page S3121]]
doing its job. We are confirming the nominees who are sent to us. Of
course, we cannot confirm nominees who are not up here from the White
House. If there is a problem, then it rests with the President.
Right now, there are 77 judicial vacancies. But the President has
made only 29 nominations. That means 48 vacancies or over 60 percent--
actually, nearly 63 percent--have no nominee. Stating it another way,
there are currently 44 million Americans living in districts with
vacancies where the President has not submitted a nominee to the
Senate.
I suspect the President neglected to share that statistic with all
the groups he summoned to the White House 1 week ago today to discuss
judicial nominees, probably with the point of getting those
organizations to put more pressure on the Congress to approve more
nominees, and somehow approve nominees who are not even here yet for us
to approve.
I could go on, but I do not intend to. I do not like to get into this
back-and-forth with the other side. But it gets a little tiresome to
hear the same misleading statements over and over. I want to set the
record straight, and I have done that.
I congratulate the nominees who will be confirmed tonight. Both the
nominees and their families should be proud.
George Levi Russell III, presently serving as an associate judge to
the Circuit Court of Maryland, is nominated to be U.S. District Judge
for the District of Maryland. Judge Russell received his BA from
Morehouse College in 1988 and his JD from the University of Maryland
School of Law in 1991. Upon graduation from law school, he clerked for
Hon. Robert M. Bell, chief judge for the Court of Appeals of Maryland.
Judge Russell then worked as an associate at the law firms Hazel and
Thomas, P.C. and Whiteford, Taylor, and Preston, where he handled cases
involving personal injury, product liability, and medical malpractice.
In 1994, Judge Russell became an assistant U.S. attorney for the U.S.
Attorney's Office for the District of Maryland. He worked in the civil
division for 5 years, defending government agencies in discrimination,
automobile accident, and medical malpractice cases. In 2000, Judge
Russell rejoined the private sector for 2 years, working at the law
offices of Peter G. Angelos, where he represented plaintiffs in class
action and private personal injury cases. In 2002, he returned to the
U.S. Attorney's Office and joined the criminal division for 5 years.
There Judge Russell prosecuted those accused of violent crimes and
narcotics cases.
In 2007, then-Governor Robert Ehrlich appointed Judge Russell to be
an associate judge on the Circuit Court of Maryland for Baltimore City.
In November 2008, he was elected to a 15-year term. Judge Russell has
sat on each of the four dockets of this court: criminal, civil, family,
and juvenile.
The ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary has given Judge
Russell a rating of Substantial Majority ``Qualified'' and Minority
``Not Qualified'' for this position.
John J. Tharp, Jr., is nominated to be U.S. district judge for the
Northern District of Illinois. Mr. Tharp was first nominated to this
position by President Bush in 2008. Mr. Tharp received his BA from Duke
University in 1982 and his JD from Northwestern University School of
Law in 1990. Mr. Tharp served in the U.S. Marine Corps from 1982 to
1988, became a captain in 1987, and has received several military
honors. Following graduation from Northwestern University School of Law
in 1990, Mr. Tharp began his legal career as a clerk for Judge Flaum on
the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. After working as an associate at
Kirkland & Ellis for a year, he joined the U.S. Attorney's Office for
the Northern District of Illinois, Chicago, as a Federal prosecutor
where he served in the Criminal Receiving and Appellate Division,
General Crimes Division, and Organized Drug Enforcement Task Force. He
handled cases involving narcotics and money laundering investigations,
financial frauds, political corruption, tax crimes, bank robberies, and
firearms offenses.
In 1997, Mr. Tharp left the U.S. Attorney's Office and moved to his
current firm, Mayer Brown, where his practice focuses on civil
concerns, including tort, contract, intellectual property, environment,
tax, and unfair competition claims, securities fraud, professional
liability, and governmental investigations.
In 2009, Mr. Tharp's firm selected him to serve as coleader of the
securities enforcement practice. In 2010, that group merged with the
securities litigation group, and he continues to serve as coleader of
the combined Mayer Brown securities litigation and enforcement
practice. He has an ABA rating of Unanimous ``Well Qualified.'''
I urge my colleagues to support these nominees. I think they probably
will be supported overwhelmingly.
I yield the floor.
Mr. CARDIN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I am so proud to be here on the floor of
the Senate to support the nomination of Judge George Russell III. He is
nominated to the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, and
he has the enthusiastic support of Senator Cardin and myself. Senator
Cardin will speak right after me.
I thank Senators Leahy and Grassley for moving this nomination, and I
thank Senators Reid and McConnell for their cooperation.
I take my advice-and-consent responsibilities very seriously. When I
consider someone for the Federal bench, I have four criteria: absolute
personal integrity, judicial competence and temperament, a commitment
to core constitutional principles, and a history of civic engagement in
Maryland.
I cite these standards because I mean it. I must say Judge Russell--
he is currently on the Circuit Court of Baltimore City--brings the
right values to the bench. He has the necessary experience. He has seen
the legal system from all perspectives and brings forth a top-notch
background.
He is nominated to fill the seat of Judge Peter Messitte, who took
senior status 3 years ago. I think it is a matter of urgency to confirm
Judge Russell because of the backlog we have in our Maryland Federal
court.
Prior to taking the bench, Judge Russell spent his legal career as a
litigator. He spent 10 years as an assistant U.S. attorney in Maryland.
He handled both criminal and civil cases. While there he was also a
community outreach coordinator. What does that mean? For an assistant
U.S. attorney, it meant he worked with the community creating vital
programs to reduce violent crimes.
As a young attorney, Mr. Russell also served as a law clerk for Judge
Robert Bell. Judge Bell is the chief judge of the Maryland Court of
Appeals. I might add, Judge Bell enthusiastically endorses this
Nominee.
Judge Russell is a man born and raised in Baltimore. He graduated
from the University of Maryland School of Law and has spent his entire
career in Maryland. His father, also a judge, was a legal pioneer in
Maryland, serving as the city's first African-American circuit judge.
This judge, Judge Russell, has public service in his DNA, both
working as a U.S. attorney and on the Federal bench and also in his
connection to the everyday life of people. He has been on the board of
directors of the Enoch Pratt Library, Big Brothers and Big Sisters, and
the Community Law Center. He has often been recruited to be a
motivational speaker, an inspirational speaker, particularly to high
school and middle school students to encourage them to stay in school
and off the street. He has particularly been enthusiastic about
mentoring young attorneys and law students.
The reason I talk about his civic engagement is that we want judges
who do not live in a bubble. It is great to be a legal scholar, it is
great to know the law inside and out, but a great judge knows people.
This man, Judge George Russell III, by being out there--whether it is
making sure the library is there for young people who want to move up;
Big Brothers and Sisters, to keep young people out of trouble; or
working at the Community Law Center--he
[[Page S3122]]
has involved himself in the gritty aspects of Baltimore City. He is a
devoted public servant. He comes with a great background.
He brings together recommendations from both the public and private
sector. I urge my colleagues to endorse the nomination of Judge
Russell. I ask their support in voting for him.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, first, I thank Senator Mikulski for her
leadership on the process we have used in Maryland on filling judicial
vacancies. I am very proud to work with Senator Mikulski in a process
that screens lawyers who are interested in becoming Federal judges in
order that we can get the very best to recommend to the President.
We think the President has chosen the very best in Judge Russell to
fill the district court vacancy for the District of Maryland. But I
really wanted to applaud my colleague in the Senate for the seriousness
that we both take on filling these vacancies. We understand these are
lifetime appointments. We want to make sure we get individuals who have
the qualifications, who have the temperament, who have the integrity,
and have the commitment to public service to serve our judiciary.
I rise today to urge the Senate to confirm Judge George Levi Russell
III, of Maryland, to be U.S. District Judge for the District of
Maryland. Judge Russell was reported by voice vote out of the Judiciary
Committee on February 16. Judge Russell currently sits as a trial judge
in the Baltimore City Circuit Court.
Judge Russell is an excellent candidate. He received bipartisan
support from the Judiciary Committee and is ready to take office upon
confirmation of the Senate. Judge Russell brings a wealth of experience
to this position in both State and Federal courts. Earlier in his
career he served as a Federal prosecutor and as an attorney in private
law practice. He now sits as a State court trial judge in Maryland.
Judge Russell graduated from Moorehouse College with a B.A. in
political science and a J.D. from the Maryland Law School in 1991. He
passed the Maryland Bar and was admitted to practice in Maryland in
1991. He then clerked for Chief Judge Robert Bell on the Maryland Court
of Appeals, which is our highest State court. He worked as a litigation
associate for 2 years at Hazel & Thomas, and then briefly at Whiteford,
Taylor. He then served as an assistant U.S. attorney for the District
of Maryland from 1994 to 1999, handling civil cases. In that capacity
he represented various Federal Government agencies in discrimination,
accident, and medical malpractice cases. He then worked as an associate
at the Peter Angelos law firm for 2 years.
In 2002, he went back to the U.S. Attorney's Office, handling
criminal cases until 2007. He represented the United States in the
criminal prosecution of violent crimes and narcotic cases during the
investigatory stage, at trial, and on appeal. This included the
initiation of monitoring of wiretaps to infiltrate and break up violent
gangs in Baltimore City.
He also served as the Project Safe neighborhood coordinator for the
office from 2002 until 2005. He participated in community outreach
programs in coordination with the Baltimore City State's Attorney's
Office to reduce violent crime in Baltimore communities.
In 2007, Governor Ehrlich, a Republican, appointed him to serve as an
associate judge of the Baltimore City Circuit Court for a term of 15
years. As a trial judge, Judge Russell has presided over hundreds of
trials that have gone to verdict or judgment and he has experience in
handling jury trials, bench trials, civil cases, and criminal cases. He
has the professional experience which has been recognized by a
Republican Governor and a Democratic President.
Judge Russell has strong roots, legal experience, and community
involvement in the State of Maryland. He was born and raised in
Baltimore City and has extended family who live in Baltimore. He served
as a director and trustee of the board of the Enoch Pratt Free Library,
which serves the disadvantaged throughout the State of Maryland. He
served on the board of directors of the Community Law Center, which is
an organization designed to help neighborhood organizations improve the
quality of life for their residences.
He has also served as a board member on several organizations that
devote substantial resources to helping the disadvantaged, including
the Big Brothers and Big Sisters of Maryland. I know he has often
spoken to young people in school about the obligations, duty, and
mandate of a judge, and he tries to demystify the role of a judge in a
black robe.
Judge Russell is particularly concerned with addressing the drug,
violence, and mental health problems that plague Baltimore City. Judge
Russell comes from a very distinguished family in the legal profession
of Maryland. Judge Russell's father, George L. Russell, Jr., was also a
groundbreaking African-American lawyer in Maryland. He was the first
African-American judge on the Maryland Circuit Court in the 1960s and
was later Baltimore's first African-American Solicitor.
He was also the first African-American president of the Baltimore
City Bar Association. In later years, Judge Russell was named by the
Governor to chair the Maryland Museum of African-American History and
Cultural Commission and served as chairman of the board of the Maryland
African-American Museum Corporation.
He was also asked to chair Baltimore's Judicial Nominating
Commission. He has received numerous awards from the Maryland Bar
Foundation and NAACP.
His family is deep in public service, including his wife who serves
as a judge on the District Court of Maryland for Baltimore City. I am
absolutely convinced that Judge Russell possesses the qualifications,
temperament, and passion for justice that will make him an outstanding
Federal trial judge. He will serve the people of Maryland very well in
this position. I therefore urge my colleagues to vote for the
confirmation of Judge Russell to serve as a judge for the U.S. District
Court for the District of Maryland.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call
be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Unanimous Consent Agreement--H.R. 2072
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 11:15 a.m,
Tuesday, May 15, the motion to proceed to Calendar No. 396, H.R. 2072,
be adopted; that the only first-degree amendments in order to the bill
be Lee No. 2100, Paul No. 2101, Corker No. 2102, Vitter No. 2103, and
Toomey No. 2104; that there be no amendments in order to any of the
amendments prior to the votes; that there be no motions or points of
order in order other then budget points of order and the applicable
motions to waive; that there be up to 2 hours of debate to run
concurrently on the amendments and the bill equally divided between the
two leaders or their designees prior to votes in relation to the
amendments in the order listed; that upon disposition of the
amendments, the Senate proceed to vote on passage of the bill, as
amended, if amended; that there be 2 minutes equally divided prior to
each vote, and all after the first vote be 10-minute votes; that the
amendments and passage of the bill require 60 votes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, we have pending now a cloture vote. I have
spoken to the Republican leader very recently. We think it would be in
the best interests of the Senate to do away with the cloture vote.
Therefore, I ask unanimous consent that the cloture vote scheduled for
this evening be vitiated.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. REID. There should only be one rollcall vote tonight because the
Maryland judge we expect to be able to voice-vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time is expired.
Under the previous order, the question is, Will the Senate advise and
consent to the nomination of George Levi Russell III, of Maryland, to
be United States District Judge for the District of Maryland.
[[Page S3123]]
The nomination was confirmed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Will the Senate advise and
consent to the nomination of John J. Tharp, Jr., of Illinois, to be
United States District Judge for the Northern District of Illinois.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant bill clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Casey), the Senator from North Carolina (Mrs. Hagan), and the Senator
from Florida (Mr. Nelson) are necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator
from Missouri (Mr. Blunt), the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Burr),
the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cornyn), the Senator from South Carolina
(Mr. DeMint), the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Kirk), the Senator from
Kansas (Mr. Moran), the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski), the
Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Paul), the Senator from South Dakota (Mr.
Thune), and the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker).
Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cornyn)
would have voted ``yea'' and the Senator from South Carolina (Mr.
DeMint) would have voted ``nay.''
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Merkley). Are there any other Senators in
the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 86, nays 1, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 90 Ex.]
YEAS--86
Akaka
Alexander
Ayotte
Barrasso
Baucus
Begich
Bennet
Bingaman
Blumenthal
Boozman
Boxer
Brown (MA)
Brown (OH)
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Chambliss
Coats
Coburn
Cochran
Collins
Conrad
Coons
Corker
Crapo
Durbin
Enzi
Feinstein
Franken
Gillibrand
Graham
Grassley
Harkin
Hatch
Heller
Hoeven
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Isakson
Johanns
Johnson (SD)
Johnson (WI)
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lugar
Manchin
McCain
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Merkley
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (NE)
Portman
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Risch
Roberts
Rockefeller
Rubio
Sanders
Schumer
Sessions
Shaheen
Shelby
Snowe
Stabenow
Tester
Toomey
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Vitter
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wyden
NAYS--1
Lee
NOT VOTING--13
Blunt
Burr
Casey
Cornyn
DeMint
Hagan
Kirk
Moran
Murkowski
Nelson (FL)
Paul
Thune
Wicker
The nomination was confirmed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motions to
reconsider are considered made and laid upon the table and the
President will be immediately notified of the Senate's action.
____________________