[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 61 (Monday, April 28, 2014)]
[Senate]
[Page S2415]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EXECUTIVE SESSION
______
NOMINATION OF MICHELLE T. FRIEDLAND TO BE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT--Resumed
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will
proceed to executive session to consider the following nomination,
which the clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read the nomination of Michelle T.
Friedland, of California, to be United States Circuit Judge for the
Ninth Circuit.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, more than 2 weeks ago, the Senate voted to
end the filibuster on the nomination of Michelle Friedland of
California to fill a judicial emergency vacancy on the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. That vote was the fourth time this year
that the Senate had to overcome a Republican filibuster of a highly
qualified circuit court nominee. In stark contrast, the Senate
confirmed 18 of President Bush's circuit nominees within a week of
being reported by the Judiciary Committee.
The Ninth Circuit is the busiest circuit court in the country. It has
the highest number of appeals filed, the highest pending appeals per
panel and the highest pending appeals per active judge. It also takes
far longer than any other circuit court to resolve an appeal. The delay
in resolving these appeals hurts the American people. After the
confirmation last month of John Owens and what I expect will be today's
confirmation of Michelle Friedland, the Ninth Circuit will be operating
at full strength for the first time in more than 9 years. This is an
important milestone, but we should not stop there. There are five
additional circuit court nominees awaiting Senate confirmation. I hope
that Senators who care about Americans having access to the courts will
allow the Senate to confirm these nominees without further delay.
Michelle Friedland is an exceptionally talented attorney, who like
the other 19 judicial nominees confirmed earlier this year, could and
should have been confirmed last year. She was first nominated last
August and after her hearing was delayed due to the Republican shutdown
of our government, she finally came before the Judiciary Committee for
a hearing in early November.
In January, Ms. Friedland's nomination was voted out of the Judiciary
Committee with bipartisan support and she has the strong support of
both of her home state Senators--Senator Feinstein and Senator Boxer.
Nevertheless, we were once again forced to follow the costly ritual of
filing and voting on cloture and wasting valuable floor time. There is
no good reason we could not have voted to confirm Ms. Friedland last
year, and there is no good reason that we did not have a vote to
confirm her 2 weeks ago. Meanwhile, it is our Federal judiciary and the
American people who suffer from these delays.
If confirmed, Michelle Friedland would increase the gender diversity
on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. She would be the seventeenth
woman to ever sit on this appellate court. In comparison, 83 men have
been appointed to the Ninth Circuit over the course of its history. Her
confirmation will bring the percentage of active female judges sitting
on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to nearly 38 percent. Her
confirmation will also mark the first time since the 29th judgeship was
added in 2007, that it has had a full complement of active judges
serving on this busy appellate court.
I hope my fellow Senators will join me today to confirm Michele
Friedland to the Ninth Circuit so that she can get to work for the
American people.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I wish to express my opposition to
the nomination of Michelle Friedland to the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals.
Although Ms. Friedland has a fine resume, it is not her work
experience that concerns me but, rather, her views on many issues--
views that should give anyone reason to question her appointment as a
U.S. Circuit Court judge. Most troubling to me is Ms. Friedland's views
that the International Court of Justice preempts U.S. law, despite the
Supreme Court's repeated rejection of this notion. For those who don't
know, the International Court of Justice is the judicial arm of the
United Nations and Ms. Friedland believes decisions from this court
should be binding on state courts in the U.S. I am thankful that the
Supreme Court hasn't agreed with her and I'm fearful that her
appointment to the Ninth Circuit will give her the opportunity to
surrender U.S. sovereignty to foreign courts and international law.
Another reason we, as legislators, should oppose Ms. Friedland is
that she has expressed views that indicate judges are free to legislate
from the bench. As we all learn in grade school, the legislative branch
creates the laws, the executive branch enforces them, and the judicial
branch interprets them. Despite this, Ms. Friedland believes laws have
no force unless a judge says they do. So when legislators, elected by
the people, pass a law or a constitution is amended, the new law has no
power until a judge deems it enforceable and a constitution, state or
U.S., does not create any rights unless the judiciary says it does.
This is a dangerous notion that tells me that Ms. Friedland is likely
to only enforce laws and constitutional rights with which she agrees.
It is for these reasons that I am opposed to this nomination.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question occurs
on the nomination.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There appears to
be a sufficient second.
The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination
of Michelle T. Friedland, of California, to be United States Circuit
Judge for the Ninth Circuit?
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons),
the Senator from Alaska (Mr. Begich), the Senator from Iowa (Mr.
Harkin), the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu), and the Senator
from Arkansas (Mr. Pryor) are necessarily absent.
Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the
Senator from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman), the Senator from Kansas (Mr.
Moran), the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio). and the Senator from
Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe).
Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Arkansas (Mr.
Boozman) would have voted ``nay,'' and the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr.
Inhofe) would have voted ``nay.''
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Donnelly). Are there any other Senators in
the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 51, nays 40, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 108 Ex.]
YEAS--51
Baldwin
Bennet
Blumenthal
Booker
Boxer
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Collins
Donnelly
Durbin
Feinstein
Franken
Gillibrand
Hagan
Heinrich
Heitkamp
Hirono
Johnson (SD)
Kaine
King
Klobuchar
Leahy
Levin
Manchin
Markey
McCaskill
Menendez
Merkley
Mikulski
Murphy
Murray
Nelson
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Sanders
Schatz
Schumer
Shaheen
Stabenow
Tester
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Walsh
Warner
Warren
Whitehouse
Wyden
NAYS--40
Alexander
Ayotte
Barrasso
Blunt
Burr
Chambliss
Coats
Coburn
Cochran
Corker
Cornyn
Crapo
Cruz
Enzi
Fischer
Flake
Graham
Grassley
Hatch
Heller
Hoeven
Isakson
Johanns
Johnson (WI)
Kirk
Lee
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Paul
Portman
Risch
Roberts
Scott
Sessions
Shelby
Thune
Toomey
Vitter
Wicker
NOT VOTING--9
Begich
Boozman
Coons
Harkin
Inhofe
Landrieu
Moran
Pryor
Rubio
The nomination was confirmed.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the rest of the
votes tonight be 10 minutes in duration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________