[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 58 (Tuesday, April 4, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Page S2389]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Motion to Postpone
Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, in order to allow President Trump,
Republicans, and Democrats time to come together and discuss a way
forward on a Supreme Court nominee who can meet the 60-vote threshold,
I move to postpone the nomination to 3 p.m. on Monday, April 24, and I
ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the motion.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
The result was announced--yeas 48, nays 52, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 107 Ex.]
YEAS--48
Baldwin
Bennet
Blumenthal
Booker
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Coons
Cortez Masto
Donnelly
Duckworth
Durbin
Feinstein
Franken
Gillibrand
Harris
Hassan
Heinrich
Heitkamp
Hirono
Kaine
King
Klobuchar
Leahy
Manchin
Markey
McCaskill
Menendez
Merkley
Murphy
Murray
Nelson
Peters
Reed
Sanders
Schatz
Schumer
Shaheen
Stabenow
Tester
Udall
Van Hollen
Warner
Warren
Whitehouse
Wyden
NAYS--52
Alexander
Barrasso
Blunt
Boozman
Burr
Capito
Cassidy
Cochran
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Cotton
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Enzi
Ernst
Fischer
Flake
Gardner
Graham
Grassley
Hatch
Heller
Hoeven
Inhofe
Isakson
Johnson
Kennedy
Lankford
Lee
McCain
McConnell
Moran
Murkowski
Paul
Perdue
Portman
Risch
Roberts
Rounds
Rubio
Sasse
Scott
Shelby
Strange
Sullivan
Thune
Tillis
Toomey
Wicker
Young
The motion was rejected.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, our Democratic colleagues have done
something today that is unprecedented in the history of the Senate.
Unfortunately, it has brought us to this point. We need to restore the
norms and traditions of the Senate and get past this unprecedented
partisan filibuster.
Therefore, I raise a point of order that the vote on cloture, under
the precedent set on November 21, 2013, is a majority vote for all
nominations.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The precedent of November 21, 2013, did not
apply to nominations to the Supreme Court. Those nominations are
considered under plain language of rule XXII.
The point of order is not sustained.