[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 45 (Wednesday, March 15, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1821-S1824]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Nomination of Neil Gorsuch
Mr. FLAKE. Mr. President, as I did 2 weeks ago and will continue to
do until he is confirmed, I rise to support the nomination of Neil
Gorsuch to serve on the Supreme Court. Judge Gorsuch is an
accomplished, mainstream jurist, and I look forward to helping to make
sure that he receives an up-or-down vote on the Senate floor.
Next week, my colleagues and I on the Judiciary Committee will hold
confirmation hearings on Judge Gorsuch. I look forward to hearing his
testimony. I am confident that he will impress the country with his
knowledge of and respect for the law, just as he has impressed me and
my colleagues.
But before the hearings get under way, I thought I would use this
opportunity today to highlight an additional aspect of his life and his
jurisprudence that make him an ideal nominee to serve on the High
Court. So far I have spoken on the floor about his fitness to fill
Justice Scalia's seat, as well as his defense of the separation of
powers and his support for religious liberty. Today I would like to
discuss a more personal aspect of Judge Gorsuch's background--the fact
that he is a westerner. As an Arizonan, I cannot overstate how
important it will be to have a fellow westerner serving on the Supreme
Court.
Where you are from influences your understanding of cultural and
regional sensitivities. When you look at the current makeup of the
Supreme Court, there is an unmistakable lack of geographic diversity.
Of the eight current Justices, five of them were born in New York or
New Jersey, and that number was six before Judge Scalia's passing.
Granted, Justice Kennedy is from Northern California, but to be frank,
much of Northern California is about as culturally western as Justice
Breyer's hometown of Boston.
The Supreme Court is in desperate need of a western perspective.
Judge Gorsuch fits that bill. When I had the opportunity to meet Judge
Gorsuch in my office last month, we discussed our respective western
backgrounds. I talked to him about my days growing up on a cattle ranch
in rural Arizona. He told me that his heart has always been in the
American West. You can learn a lot about a person by how they spend
their time with their friends and their family, and there is no
mistaking this aspect with Judge Gorsuch. He is a westerner through and
through.
He told me about his home outside of Boulder, where his daughters
raise and show chickens and goats. I was pleased to learn that each
year he takes his law clerks to the National Western Stock Show in
Denver, one of the Nation's largest rodeos. By now, I think we have all
seen the picture of him fly fishing with Judge Scalia. While all this
demonstrates how much he has embraced the western lifestyle, what makes
Judge Gorsuch a true westerner is more than just where he lives or
where his personal interests are. Judge Gorsuch's western values are
evident in his jurisprudence, which reflects a strong commitment to
public service. Arizona has had its share of distinguished public
servants. In fact, it was from this very desk that the late Barry
Goldwater, one of Arizona's favorite sons, steered the public policy
debate
[[Page S1822]]
for years after he chose to leave a successful career in the private
sector. Judge Gorsuch's career reflects the same ethos.
Early on, a young Neil Gorsuch rocketed to the top of the legal
profession, becoming a partner in one of Washington's most elite law
firms. But instead of enjoying the comforts of a lucrative private
sector career, he left it all behind for a high-responsibility, low-
profile job at the Department of Justice.
After his time at DOJ, Neil Gorsuch could have easily retired or
returned to a white-shoe legal practice. Instead, he returned to his
home State of Colorado to serve as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Tenth Circuit. Throughout his tenure on the Federal bench,
Judge Gorsuch's western disposition has shone through in his
jurisprudence.
I have already spoken of his skepticism toward the administrative
state, with its executive bureaucracies, which, he cautions, ``swallow
huge amounts of core judicial and legislative power and concentrate
Federal power in a way that seems more than a little difficult to
square with the Constitution of the framers' design.''
He shares a healthy skepticism over an overly intrusive and heavy-
handed bureaucracy with millions of his Federal westerners. Judge
Gorsuch recognizes how Federal regulations interfere with the ability
of Western States to govern themselves, whether it is a former
administration's Clean Power Plan, its ozone rules, or even management
of the Mexican gray wolf.
In numerous opinions, Judge Gorsuch has given voice to many of the
frustrations experienced by his western neighbors. From his criticism
of an overly assertive DC court that often feels compelled to intervene
from 2,000 miles away to his recognition of excessive litigation that
arises from the complexities of split-estate property rights out West,
he speaks our language.
These are perspectives any westerner is familiar with, but they may
not be obvious to others, including folks from New York and New Jersey.
If confirmed, Judge Gorsuch will already bring generational and
religious diversity to the Court. Perhaps more than anything, it will
be his western perspective that most enriches the debate in the years
to come.
As I have said before, Judge Gorsuch deserves fair consideration by
those who serve in this body, and he deserves an up-or-down vote on the
Senate floor. He should be confirmed overwhelmingly, and I am confident
that he will be.
Joining us on the floor today are several members of the Senate from
Western States. I see that the Senator from Wyoming has joined us. I
think he has some thoughts about Neil Gorsuch and his nomination to the
Court.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, joining my colleague here on the floor,
I agree with all of the comments the Senator from Arizona has made.
They are interesting because as to the history of the State of the
Senator from Arizona and his family history, Judge Gorsuch has a
similar history, to the point that his great-grandfather built a hotel
in Wyoming called the Wolf Hotel, in Saratoga, WY. I found a picture of
that hotel from 1878, which was 12 years before Wyoming became a State.
I got that picture from the American history museum at the University
of Wyoming and got a copy of the picture and gave it to Judge Gorsuch.
In front of the hotel in 1878, there was a stagecoach with six horses
lined up ahead of it. The Wolf Hotel was a halfway stop on the
stagecoach line between a couple of communities in Wyoming. They were
about 40 miles apart. So that is the heritage from which Judge Gorsuch
comes.
I think that western heritage is important. But I think that
additionally important is what the Senator referred to--his judicial
temperament, being such a mainstream member of the judiciary, and this
general belief inherent within him that the role of a judge is to apply
the law, not to legislate from the bench.
We have seen so much legislating from the bench. I think you just
don't get that if you take somebody from the Rocky Mountain West who
has this view of the Nation and an understanding of the rule of law and
the Constitution.
So I think we are going to see that when the Senate Judiciary
Committee begins its hearings next week on Judge Gorsuch's nomination
to the Supreme Court. I visited with him, reviewed his writings, and
then compared it to what I saw when I visited with Justice Scalia when
he came to Wyoming. The Senator from Arizona mentioned the picture of
the two working together, fishing together.
I just think he is the right person to continue that incredible
legacy of Justice Scalia.
Mr. FLAKE. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. BARRASSO. Yes.
Mr. FLAKE. You point out the sensitivities that you have when you
come from the West. A lot of it has to do with, if you are in a rural
area in particular, you are--as my family grew up--working on the land.
Much of that land is either owned by or controlled by the Federal
Government, the State government, or Tribal governments in Arizona's
case. In fact, 85 percent of the State of Arizona is publicly owned. So
when you live in the West and you work the land on a ranch or farm, you
are dealing specifically with Federal regulators and Federal property
managers. I think those who were raised in the West and have lived here
understand the impact of the Federal Government's decisions. The
administrative state has an outsized impact on those who live in the
West, and I think that is evident in the jurisprudence you see from
Judge Gorsuch.
How much of Wyoming is publicly owned?
Mr. BARRASSO. Well, it is about 50-50. But when you talk about the
heavy hand of a bureaucratic government and the impact on the lives of
the people who live there, it is dramatic. It can be very punishing, as
we have seen over the last 8 years with regulations that have come out
of agencies--sometimes, I believe, in defiance of the law, sometimes
reversed by the Supreme Court.
That is why I think it is critical to have Neil Gorsuch on the
Supreme Court, because he is someone who realizes that the Constitution
is a legal document--not a living document, not built for flexibility,
but really a rigid legal document. That is where I believe he stands.
That is what his writings indicate. It is the sort of thing we have
seen from him. I visited with him, and other Members have. These are
the things we read about.
With regard to his writings over the years, this is a judge who has
faithfully applied the law--applied the law, focusing on the
Constitution. He has not been afraid to rule against the government or
for unpopular parties when the law demands it because he is going to go
right back to the law. I believe his opinions show great reverence for
all of the Constitution--a key respect for the importance of the
separation of powers.
I support his nomination completely. It is interesting, because when
he was nominated for the position he currently holds, the Democratic
Senator from Colorado--and I am expecting Senator Cory Gardner to be
here in a little bit to talk about the quote from Ken Salazar, the
former Senator from Colorado, who talked about what a wonderful man
Judge Gorsuch was and how he should be put onto that bench. He was
unanimously confirmed here in the Senate.
I have full confidence in Judge Gorsuch as a son of the West, as the
only Justice from the Rocky Mountain West who would be on the Court.
Specifically, though, I would support him no matter where he was from
because of his belief that it is the role of a judge and a justice to
apply the law, not to legislate from the bench, which I think goes
above and beyond where someone is from, what their background may be.
But I will just tell you that his background, combined with his
philosophy and mainstream approach to the law, is exactly what we need
now in 2017 on the U.S. Supreme Court. I believe he deserves an up-or-
down vote. I believe he will be confirmed as people get a chance to see
him, get to know him better.
I see I am joined on the floor by another colleague, also from the
Rocky Mountain West, the Senator from Montana. You have heard from
Arizona, Wyoming, and now Montana. I would ask him about his thoughts
about this nomination by President Trump of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme
Court.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.
[[Page S1823]]
Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I want to thank my esteemed colleague from
Wyoming, Senator Barrasso, for his comments. He shared many of the same
views I have.
As I think about the job I do as a Senator--perhaps one of the most
important jobs we have as Senators is approving a Supreme Court
Justice. An Associate Justice of the Supreme Court can serve an average
of 27 years. We think about Justice Scalia; he served 30 years. Neil
Gorsuch is 49 years old. God willing, he probably will serve 30 years
or more, perhaps. Think about that. My wife and I have four children.
They are going through the college years and so forth. They are in
their early and midtwenties. They will likely be grandparents when
Judge Gorsuch wraps up his career on the Supreme Court, assuming he is
approved. That is why a decision like this about whom to vote for, whom
to stand behind, whom to stand with is so important. It is not just for
today, it is for our children and our grandchildren.
The people want a Supreme Court Justice who does not legislate from
the bench. The people want a Supreme Court Justice who upholds the rule
of law and follows the Constitution. The people want a Supreme Court
Justice with a record of constitutional jurisprudence and legal
restraint to match what we saw from Justice Antonin Scalia. The people
want a Supreme Court Justice with the academic credentials, who is well
prepared to serve the American people on our highest Court, to wrestle
with some of the most complicated issues that the High Court wrestles
with.
When President Trump announced that he was appointing Judge Neil
Gorsuch to the U.S. Supreme Court, the American people knew he was
truly a supreme pick. He has a brilliant legal mind. He understands the
role a judge plays in our judicial system--to interpret the law and not
to legislate from the bench. In fact, on the night he was announced,
when President Trump revealed his pick, I was at the White House, and I
heard Judge Gorsuch say: ``A judge who likes every outcome he reaches
is very likely a bad judge, stretching for results he prefers rather
than those the law demands.'' That is the humility of a great judge.
Judge Gorsuch has impeccable legal qualifications that demonstrate he
will be the type of Justice every American deserves to have on the
highest Court. He graduated from Harvard Law School. He was a Harry
Truman Scholar, graduated with honors in 1991. He earned his law degree
and then attended Oxford University as a Marshall Scholar and received
his doctorate degree in 2004 from Oxford.
As we say out West, and as a Montanan, I have to say I am thrilled to
see somebody from Colorado be nominated for the Supreme Court. We say
out West: Go get a good education and then get over it. And he brings
that kind of humility to the bench. He understands that he is beneath
the law, he is subject to the law. He is there to interpret the law,
not to make the law.
He clerked for Justice Byron White. He clerked for Justice Kennedy of
the Supreme Court of the United States. In fact, in 2006, Judge Gorsuch
was nominated by then-President Bush to the Tenth Circuit in Denver,
CO. He was confirmed without any opposition, including the support of
11 current Democratic Senators. In fact, some of those Democrats
included Harvard Law classmate Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden,
and the current minority leader, Chuck Schumer. During his time as a
judge on the Tenth Circuit, he has built a solid reputation as a
respected jurist with a very distinguished record.
One thing about serving on the Tenth Circuit Court for 10 years: You
can run, but you can't hide. He has left a track record. It is an
impressive track record. It is a consistent record of defending the
Constitution, including respecting the separation of powers and
respecting federalism and the Bill of Rights to protect every American
from government overreach and government abuse.
When I had the opportunity to sit down with Judge Gorsuch, it was
back in early February. We spoke about the role of government and
federalism. We spoke about the Second Amendment. We spoke about
protecting life and upholding our civil liberties. We spoke about our
shared western values, mine as a native Montanan, his as a native
Coloradan, both of us westerners. I know he understands our way of
life. He understands Montana values. In fact, his face lit up as we
talked about the love of the outdoors and his passion for hiking and
fishing.
As chairman of the Western Caucus, it is important to me to have
someone who understands western values, someone who understands the
impact the law and his decisions will have on the West.
As westerners, we fight to protect our Fourth Amendment rights. We
champion federalism so that power not expressly given to the Federal
Government in the Constitution is returned back to the States and to
the people. We will tirelessly fight to protect the Second Amendment.
These are western values.
By the way, the Second Amendment is not primarily about hunting. Our
Founding Fathers were not thinking about deer hunting or elk hunting
when they were discussing the Second Amendment. It was about liberty.
It was about freedom. These are western values. Judge Gorsuch's
background and record strongly suggest that he recognizes and adheres
to these values. He will uphold the law. He will rightfully check the
administration and Congress when their actions are not done under the
law, like President Obama's EPA power plan or the WOTUS rule. These are
actions that cripple western economies, and they are politically
charged.
I would also like to mention that Senator Cory Gardner of Colorado
and I were just at the White House meeting, just an hour ago. We were
at the White House meeting with over a dozen Tribes who represent
hundreds of other Tribes. We were there to discuss our support for Neil
Gorsuch to be a Supreme Court Justice. I can tell you, it was great to
be there with one of my hometown Tribes from Montana, the CSKT. They
have endorsed Neil Gorsuch. They understand that we need a mainstream,
commonsense westerner on the Supreme Court.
By the way, when you look at Neil Gorsuch's record on Indian Country
issues, as a member of the Tenth Circuit Court for 10 years, he has a
track record of ruling on some very complicated issues that face Indian
Country. He understands sovereignty. That is very important. That is
why you are seeing Tribes endorsing Judge Gorsuch.
More importantly, the American people deserve nine members on the
Supreme Court. Neil Gorsuch is the mainstream judge the American people
want and deserve to fill out the Court.
I am looking forward to what will happen next week in those hearings.
You are going to see a very, very bright, a very, very thoughtful, a
very, very kind, and a very, very humble jurist who understands and
upholds the rule of law. I am excited for our country that we have such
a phenomenal nominee. I look forward to casting my vote to confirm him
to the highest Court in our great country.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, what is the parliamentary situation right
now?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate is considering the Coats
nomination.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I understand that we will be voting in
about 10 minutes; is that correct?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct, sir.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I have had the great honor and privilege
of knowing the nominee to be our Director of National Intelligence for
many years. In fact, I came to the House of Representatives in the
election of 1984, and I had the honor of knowing Dan Coats beginning at
that time.
As is well known, Dan Coats left the Senate and became our Ambassador
to Germany, where he did an outstanding job. He came back to the U.S.
Senate and served in this body with distinction and honor. Now he goes
on to serve as the Director of National Intelligence.
I could argue that a dedicated, experienced, knowledgeable, and
courageous Director of National Intelligence
[[Page S1824]]
is now needed more than at any time that I can remember in the last
many years.
With divisions within the intelligence community, there are
challenges to the credibility of the intelligence community along the
lines that I have never seen. There are questions about the activities
of the intelligence community. For example, the President of the United
States alleges that Trump Tower was ``wiretapped,'' in his words, by
the previous administration, and we see the former Director of National
Intelligence both before the Congress and on national television
stating that those allegations are not true.
There are probably more questions and more controversy surrounding
our intelligence services than at any time since anyone can remember,
since Watergate. So this is a perfect time, in my view, for Dan Coats
to assume the highest responsibilities of our Director of National
Intelligence. He has the respect and indeed affection of Members on
both sides of the aisle because of his successful efforts at working in
a bipartisan fashion. He served on the Intelligence Committee. He
served on that committee in a very dedicated and knowledgeable fashion.
I hope my colleagues will unanimously vote in favor of our former
colleague. Both sides of the aisle know him, and we know him well. I
wish I had some of his qualities of congeniality and pleasantry. He has
always been respectful of other views. Even in the fiercest debates
that we might have, he has always been respectful of those who
disagree. So he comes to the job with the much needed credibility that
will make him immediately effective.
Let's be frank. The intelligence communities are probably under
greater attack in a whole variety of ways, both on whether the American
people trust them to do the job that they are doing or whether they
have become a partisan organization. I think that with the respect and
appreciation and affection that those of us who had the privilege of
knowing him--on both sides of the aisle--and knowing what an honorable
and decent person he is, he will not only serve as an effective
Director of National Intelligence, but he will serve to restore
credibility.
God knows we need credibility at this time, as we see the Russians
trying to affect the outcome of our election, as we see today the
Russians trying to affect the French election and possibly the German
election, as we see unprecedented cyber attacks--more than at any time
in the past. With the challenge of cyber alone, where our adversaries
or our potential adversaries are equal to or even, in some cases, more
capable of exercising their abilities and capabilities in the cyber
realm, then we are in a very difficult and challenging struggle.
That is why I think that many times in history, not only does the man
make the job but the job makes the man. I am confident, in the case of
Senator Dan Coats, that will be the case.
I thank the Democratic leader for allowing this vote to take place so
Dan Coats can get to work immediately.
I urge my colleagues to offer their support with their vote for this
nomination of a great and good and gentle man who has again volunteered
to serve his Nation, for which all of us should be appreciative, and I
am sure we are.
Mr. President, 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. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the Coats
nomination?
Mr. BARRASSO. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant bill clerk called the roll.
Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the
Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Alexander), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr.
Corker), and the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Isakson).
Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Tennessee (Mr.
Alexander) would have voted ``yea'' and the Senator from Tennessee (Mr.
Corker) would have voted ``yea.''
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cotton). Are there any other Senators in
the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 85, nays 12, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 89 Ex.]
YEAS--85
Barrasso
Bennet
Blumenthal
Blunt
Boozman
Brown
Burr
Cantwell
Capito
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Cassidy
Cochran
Collins
Coons
Cornyn
Cortez Masto
Cotton
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Donnelly
Durbin
Enzi
Ernst
Feinstein
Fischer
Flake
Franken
Gardner
Graham
Grassley
Hassan
Hatch
Heinrich
Heitkamp
Heller
Hirono
Hoeven
Inhofe
Johnson
Kaine
Kennedy
King
Klobuchar
Lankford
Leahy
Lee
Manchin
McCain
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Moran
Murkowski
Murphy
Murray
Nelson
Perdue
Peters
Portman
Reed
Risch
Roberts
Rounds
Rubio
Sasse
Schatz
Schumer
Scott
Shaheen
Shelby
Stabenow
Strange
Sullivan
Tester
Thune
Tillis
Toomey
Van Hollen
Warner
Whitehouse
Wicker
Young
NAYS--12
Baldwin
Booker
Duckworth
Gillibrand
Harris
Markey
Merkley
Paul
Sanders
Udall
Warren
Wyden
NOT VOTING--3
Alexander
Corker
Isakson
The nomination was confirmed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I move
to table the motion to reconsider.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to address the
Senate for 1 minute.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.