[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 74 (Tuesday, May 8, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2555-S2556]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     NOMINATION OF MICHAEL BRENNAN

  Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, tomorrow the Senate will vote to move 
forward with the President's nominee to join the Seventh Circuit Court 
of Appeals. It is a new low that sets a dangerous standard for judges 
who have the power to make critical decisions that impact the everyday 
lives of the people we serve.
  Take a look at Judge Michael Brennan's record. At his hearing, he 
refused to acknowledge the ways our criminal justice system is biased 
against Americans of color. He made statements condoning judicial 
activisim. He argued that judges are justified in not following 
precedent if they feel it was incorrectly decided. Think about that for 
a minute.
  I am not a lawyer, but I understand this about our courts: A judge 
who feels no obligation to follow precedent laid out by higher courts 
is not a judge; that is someone who has ceased to be bound by any 
standards guiding a judge. Precedent is the backbone of our legal 
system. Saying that judges can disregard it if they feel it is 
incorrect would be a radical departure. Think about how this could 
work. In a Brennan court, it could be OK for a judge not to follow a 
Supreme Court decision like Brown v. Board of Education, which 
desegregated schools, as long as that judge--in this case, I guess, 
Judge Brennan--believes the case was incorrect. If you disregard 
precedent, decades of legal progress could be rolled back. The well-
established rights of so many Americans would be at risk.
  During his hearing, Brennan claimed he was only talking about 
precedent from the same circuit, but the article where he originally 
made these arguments made no such distinction then, and Brennan even 
admitted that at the hearing.
  We cannot entrust the people we serve to a judge who can't be trusted 
to follow settled law.
  Brennan would also be the first judge in more than 35 years to be 
confirmed over the objection of a Senator from his home State. Think 
about that. That doesn't even account for the backstory that I am going 
to mention. He would be the first judge in 35 years to be confirmed 
over the objections of a Senator from his home State. Senator Baldwin 
from Wisconsin has not returned her blue slip on Brennan. In departure 
from Senate tradition, Republicans had a hearing and are now allowing a 
vote on Brennan's nomination despite not having a blue slip from 
Senator Baldwin.
  The seat Brennan is nominated for has been vacant since 2010. Why? 
Because Senator Johnson, now the senior Senator from Wisconsin, did not 
return a blue slip on President Obama's first nominee to fill this 
seat. This body honored Senator Johnson's blue slip and was not going 
to confirm that nominee because the blue slip had not been returned. 
That was following the

[[Page S2556]]

precedent of this Senate--decades of precedent. The nominee therefore 
did not receive a hearing, let alone a vote. Now Republicans are 
refusing to show Senator Baldwin the same level of courtesy and 
respect.
  We have a blue-slip procedure in place not out of courtesy to 
Senators personally but to the Americans we serve. Senator Baldwin 
represents the people who will be most affected by Judge Brennan's 
decisions. She opposes his nomination. Her blue slip should be 
respected.
  The people served by the Seventh Circuit and Americans all over the 
country need judges who will follow the law. To be sure, Judge Brennan 
is not that judge. We can do better. We should do better. I ask my 
colleagues to oppose his nomination.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________