[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 78 (Monday, May 14, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2635-S2636]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                       Nomination of Amy St. Eve

  Amy St. Eve is a native of Belleville, IL. She was valedictorian of 
her class at Belleville West High School. She received degrees from 
Cornell University and Cornell Law School, where she served on the Law 
Review.
  After law school, she worked for stints in private practice, as an 
in-house counsel, at the Office of Independent Counsel, and as an 
assistant U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Illinois.
  In 2002, she was nominated for the Federal district court in Chicago 
with my support and the support of Republican Illinois Senator Peter 
Fitzgerald. She was confirmed by a voice vote.
  During her 16 years on the Federal bench, Amy St. Eve has handled 
thousands of cases and has personally presided over 120 trials. Judge 
St. Eve has an outstanding reputation as a judge. She shows up early. 
She works hard. She knows the law. She runs her courtroom efficiently. 
She is respected by the litigants and her fellow judges as one of the 
best trial judges in Illinois, if not in the Nation. For years, I have 
heard praise for her from across the political spectrum.
  Whenever someone comes before me who has practiced in the Federal 
courts of Chicago, I make it a practice to ask them: Who do you think 
are the best judges on the Federal bench? Without exception, I can tell 
you that Amy St. Eve's name is always mentioned--always. That is no 
exaggeration.
  It is a little bittersweet to see her leave the district court bench, 
but she has the qualifications and judgment to step up and be an 
outstanding member of the Seventh Circuit. I am honored to support her 
nomination.
  I congratulate her and her family--her husband, Howard, and her 
children, Lauren, Emily, and Brett--on this important day in the 
Senate.
  Michael Scudder was born next door to Illinois, in Indiana. He 
received his undergraduate degree from St. Joseph's College. After 
working for several years as an accountant, he attended Northwestern 
Law School, where he earned his J.D. After law school, he clerked for 
Judge Paul Niemeyer of the Fourth Circuit and then for Supreme Court 
Justice Anthony Kennedy. Mr. Scudder then worked for several years in 
private practice and as an assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern 
District of New York. In 2006, he began working as a counselor in the 
Office of the Deputy Attorney General, and in 2007, he moved to the 
White House, where he became general counsel of the National Security 
Council. In 2009, he returned to private practice at the law firm 
Skadden, Arps, where he has worked until this day.
  Mr. Scudder has made a name for himself in the Chicago legal 
community for his commitment to pro bono work and for his efforts to 
encourage other lawyers to make public service and pro bono a 
significant part of their legal career. He has won several awards for 
his pro bono efforts, including from Northwestern Law School and from 
the District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
  Mr. Scudder is well respected across the political spectrum, and he 
has the experience, the integrity, and the judgment to be an 
outstanding Federal judge. I congratulate him, his wife, Sarah, and 
their children, Erin, Michael, Margaret, and Nicholas, on this 
occasion.
  It is an honor to speak on behalf of these two Illinois nominees who 
have been rated unanimously well qualified by the American Bar 
Association.
  Let me comment for a moment on the process that led us to this 
moment. If anyone follows the judicial nominations before the Senate, 
they may find it unusual that Democratic Senators like myself and, I 
might add, Senator Duckworth, who joins me in praising these two 
nominees, are standing here before the Senate, before a vote, and 
saying that we worked with the Trump White House and the blue-slip 
process--and did it successfully--to come up with two outstanding 
nominees. I want to comment briefly on how we did it.
  Both nominees received blue slips--approval slips--from the 
individual Senators in their State, from both Senator Duckworth and me. 
The White House engaged in good-faith negotiations over these 
vacancies. They respected the tradition that we had established in 
Illinois of having an expert screening committee review all candidates. 
The process resulted in the selection of these two excellent nominees, 
whom all sides agreed upon. We made it clear to the White House--both 
Senator Duckworth and I--that we were not going to drag out this 
process; we would have a timely review of each nominee, our committee 
would give its recommendation, and we would be back in touch with the 
White House in a timely fashion. That is how the process has worked in 
the past, and that is how it should work with this President when it 
comes to these two circuit court nominees.
  When blue slips and home-State judicial screening commissions are 
respected, we end up with consensus, highly qualified nominees. Yet 
there are many in Republican circles here in Washington who have 
decided that they want to jettison blue slips, ignore that tradition, 
and basically ignore home-State screening commissions. That is the 
wrong step as far as Senator Duckworth and I are concerned. We showed 
good faith--and so did the White House--in coming up with these two 
fine nominees.
  Recently, Senator Baldwin of Wisconsin and her bipartisan screening 
commission were dealt out of the process that led to the confirmation 
vote last week of Seventh Circuit Wisconsin nominee Michael Brennan. 
And now Republicans are pushing forward with an Oregon Ninth Circuit 
nominee, Ryan Bounds, over the objections of both Oregon Senators after 
Mr. Bounds failed to disclose controversial writings to the screening 
committee in Oregon.
  I hope my Republican colleagues in the Senate--who are now in the 
majority, with a President of their own party, and are now feeling 
their oats and deciding they want to push aside the traditions of the 
Senate--will stop and reflect for a moment. Isn't it better that we 
show mutual respect for one another when it comes to the blue-slip 
process?
  There have been times in the past when Senators from various States 
did not give approval for nominees, and sometimes those vacancies went 
on for years. Nevertheless, Democrats in the same position respected 
the blue-slip process. I think the Republicans should do the same.
  As Senators, we have a fundamental responsibility to the people we 
represent when it comes to the selection of Federal judges. Long after 
many of us are gone, these judges will still be serving in the Federal 
judiciary. We must exercise a vigorous advice-and-consent role for 
these members of the Federal judiciary who will sit in courthouses in 
our states.
  It should concern all of us if any Senator is dealt out of the 
judicial selection process in their State. None of us want that to 
happen to us as individuals or to the constituents we represent.
  By confirming Michael Brennan and pushing the nomination of Ryan 
Bounds, some in this Chamber are sending a clear signal that home-State 
Senators and, more importantly, the people they represent aren't going 
to matter anymore in the judicial selection process. That is a terrible 
path for the Senate to pursue.
  We are at a critical moment in the Senate history when it comes to 
judicial nominations. Senate traditions like blue slips and home-State 
screening commissions have worked well for decades to build consensus 
and produce high-quality nominees, no matter which party is in power. 
Abandoning these traditions for the heady moment we might have 
politically will diminish the advice-and-consent role of the Senate and 
provide more power to the executive branch over our own U.S. Senate.
  I hope there are at least a few Republicans on the Senate side who 
will stop their party from going down this road of abandoning blue 
slips and home-State screening commissions. We

[[Page S2636]]

should have mutual respect for one another professionally, even when we 
disagree politically. All it would take is for a handful of Republican 
Senators to stand up and say: We are going to defend these traditions. 
We believe the traditions are worth defending.
  In closing, I will say that Amy St. Eve and Michael Scudder are 
outstanding nominees who were selected through a process of good-faith 
negotiations and timely decisions, and one that respected the Senate's 
traditions and home-State interests. If that process becomes an 
exception rather than the norm, all of our home States, the quality of 
our Federal judiciary, and the institution of the U.S. Senate will 
suffer.
  Let me close by saying that these two nominees are two of the best. I 
knew one of them from her 16 years of service on the bench and the 
other from recommendations given to us by many who practiced with him 
over the years. I have confidence that they will do a fine job on this 
circuit court bench. I may not agree with all their decisions, but I 
will respect them as a man and a woman who have come to this 
professional responsibility with an understanding of their 
constitutional responsibilities to the United States, to the State of 
Illinois, and to this circuit.
  Madam President, I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. PORTMAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.