[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 26, 2016)]
[Senate]
[Page S2451]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS

  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I am deeply disappointed that my 
Republican colleagues continue to play politics with our judicial 
system.
  There are currently 79 judicial vacancies in this country--28 of 
which are judicial emergency vacancies. In each of these districts 
across the country, Americans are waiting for their cases to be heard, 
but instead of justice, they are left hanging in the lurch.
  I have said it before, and I will say it again: Justice delayed is 
justice denied.
  Senate Republicans refuse to act to confirm Judge Merrick Garland--
who has more Federal judicial experience than any other Supreme Court 
candidate in history--to the Supreme Court, and they refuse to act on 
the 20 judicial nominees who were reported out of the Judiciary 
Committee by voice vote. It is outrageous that Senate Republicans 
stubbornly refuse to move these nominations forward, letting these 
accomplished and qualified nominees languish.
  One of those judges is Mark Young, an excellent nominee for the 
Central District Court of California, which is ranked 11th in the 
Nation in weighted case filings per judgeship.
  We need to fill this seat as soon as possible, and Judge Young is an 
extraordinary candidate. I was honored to introduce him at his 
nomination hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee last October 
and go over his impeccable resume.
  He has served as a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge since 2008 
and has 10 years of experience as a prosecutor in the U.S. attorney's 
office in Los Angeles.
  He holds degrees from the University of California, Los Angeles, and 
the University of Southern California Gould School of Law; and he has 
won numerous awards from organizations including the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation, Drug Enforcement Administration, and the Attorney 
General's Distinguished Service Award--one of the Department of 
Justice's highest honors.
  The people of the Central District of California need his leadership, 
and the overworked judges of the Central District need his help.
  We also have two additional candidates from California who are 
awaiting Judiciary Committee hearings.
  Judge Paul L. Abrams was nominated by President Obama in December 
2015 to serve as the U.S. District Court Judge for the Central 
District. Judge Abrams is currently a U.S. magistrate judge for the 
Central District, a post he has held since 2002.
  He began his career in private practice and then worked as a legal 
aid lawyer before serving in the Federal public defender's office, 
eventually becoming a supervising deputy Federal public defender. He 
holds degrees from the University of California, Berkeley, and Boalt 
Hall School of Law.
  Judge Lucy Koh, currently serving in the Northern District, was 
nominated by President Obama for the Ninth Circuit Court in February of 
this year. The daughter of Korean immigrants and a Harvard graduate, 
Judge Koh began her legal career as a Women's Law and Public Policy 
Fellow for the Senate Judiciary Committee.
  At the U.S. Department of Justice, she served as a special assistant 
to the Deputy Attorney General before spending 3 years as a Federal 
prosecutor in Los Angeles, where she was awarded the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation Director Louis J. Freeh Award for Demonstrated Excellence 
in Prosecuting a Major Criminal Case. She then spent 9 years in private 
practice. She served on the Superior Court for Santa Clara County until 
2010, when she was appointed to the Northern District, becoming the 
first Korean American woman to serve as a Federal district court judge.
  Each of these excellent candidates has flawless credentials, broad 
support, and they are ready to serve. So what are we waiting for? The 
American people cannot wait for justice--and they shouldn't have to.
  Let's move forward with giving each of these excellent judicial 
candidates the consideration and vote that they deserve.

                          ____________________