[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 116 (Wednesday, July 11, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4906-S4907]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                      Nominaion of Brett Kavanaugh

  Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, there was a time when Blacks and Whites 
couldn't get married or go to the same school. The Supreme Court 
changed that. There was a time when gay people could be arrested for 
loving one another and when it was illegal for them to get married. The 
Supreme Court changed that. There was a time when thousands of women 
died from having illegal, unsafe abortions. The Supreme Court changed 
that.
  The Justices on the Supreme Court matter to each and every one of our 
lives. That is why there is so much concern over President Trump's 
nominee to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court--Judge Brett 
Kavanaugh.
  Rightwing groups, like the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist 
Society, have been working for decades to set the stage to pack our 
Federal courts with ideologically driven conservatives. They have 
invested millions of dollars and decades of time in this effort. These 
two organizations have played the primary role in vetting and selecting 
Donald Trump's nominees to the Supreme Court. By including Judge 
Kavanaugh on their list of potential nominees, these two organizations 
certainly expect that he will reflect their own ideological 
perspectives, which include overturning Roe v. Wade and repealing the 
Affordable Care Act, the ACA. They certainly expected Neil Gorsuch--
another name on their list--to do the same when he got on the Supreme 
Court. In the short time he has been on the Court, Justice Gorsuch has 
not disappointed them.
  Is it any wonder that millions of people across the country are 
raising concerns over the nomination of yet another nominee on the 
Federalist Society and Heritage Foundation's wish list? Isn't it 
reasonable to conclude that Judge Kavanaugh will also reflect the 
ideological agendas of these organizations?
  This is why Judge Kavanaugh does not deserve the benefit of the 
doubt. He has the exceptionally high burden of proof to assure the 
American people he can be fair and objective. The Senate has a 
constitutional obligation that is equal to the President's to vet a 
President's nominee to the Supreme Court and fulfill its advice and 
consent obligation responsibilities. I take this responsibility 
seriously because a fight for the future of the Supreme Court will have 
ramifications for so many issues that we care about.

  Our Federal courts have been at the center of the Republican Party's 
strategy to dismantle, gut, and weaken the Affordable Care Act, the 
ACA, since it was passed over 8 years ago. The Supreme Court narrowly 
upheld the constitutionality of the ACA's core provisions in 2012. The 
ACA provides affordable, accessible health insurance to millions of 
people in our country who would otherwise not have such insurance. But 
the Republican Party's effort to sabotage this critically important law 
through the courts continues unabated.
  Right now, Texas and 19 other States have a lawsuit pending in 
Federal court that claims, among other things, that the Affordable Care 
Act's protections for Americans living with preexisting conditions--
illnesses such as diabetes, asthma, and cancer--are invalid. The Trump 
administration filed a brief supporting Texas in its attack on the 
ACA's protections for millions of people in our country with 
preexisting conditions. This case will likely end up before the Supreme 
Court. If Texas wins its lawsuit, the healthcare of millions of 
Americans will be at stake--meaning one in four Americans could either 
lose their health coverage or pay exponentially more for healthcare.
  The outcome of this case is personal to millions of Americans and 
their families, and it is certainly personal to me. A little over 1 
year ago, I was diagnosed with kidney cancer. I was fortunate. I have 
health insurance that allows me to focus on fighting my illness rather 
than worrying about how I will pay for my treatment. I now join the 
millions of Americans living with a preexisting condition--illnesses 
that don't discriminate on the basis of age, gender, or political 
ideology.
  As this case makes its way to the Supreme Court, the American people 
should not forget that Donald Trump and this administration have been 
openly hostile to the ACA, a law that has helped millions of people. In 
fact, the President has openly bragged about all the things he has done 
to gut the ACA. Does the President expect his nominee, Judge Kavanaugh, 
to protect the ACA? I don't think so--quite the opposite.
  The next Supreme Court Justice will also play a determining role in 
the future of a woman's right to make her own reproductive health 
decisions. I remember vividly the stories of women dying in America, 
unable to access safe, legal abortions. The fight for reproductive 
freedom, prompted by these stories, was one of the reasons I got 
involved in politics.
  When I was in college, the first letter I ever wrote to Hawaii's 
congressional delegation was about abortion at a time when our State 
legislature was debating whether to legalize abortion. Hawaii became 
the first State in the country to do so. Those of us who lived in a 
time before Roe v. Wade, when a woman was forced to have a child 
against her will, are deeply concerned about the future of a woman's 
right to have an abortion, to have that freedom of choice.
  Throughout his campaign for the Presidency, Donald Trump repeatedly 
promised to appoint Justices to the Supreme Court who would favor 
overturning the core holding in Roe v. Wade. The Heritage Foundation 
and Federalist Society share this goal, and it is not a stretch to 
assume that the names they included on their Supreme Court wish list 
hold the same views.
  Judge Kavanaugh's record on this issue is deeply troubling and of 
significant concern. Last year, Judge Kavanaugh issued a dissent in a 
case that granted a 17-year-old immigrant in the custody of the 
Department of Health and Human Services, HHS, the right to get an 
abortion. Kavanaugh argued in his dissent that holding the

[[Page S4907]]

young woman in custody, refusing to release her for a medical 
appointment for a procedure until HHS was able to find her a sponsor 
who would serve as a foster parent, was not an undue burden under the 
Supreme Court's legal test.
  He did not consider holding someone in government custody to be an 
undue burden. This is the view of someone who will not follow the law 
as it is currently set forth by the Supreme Court if confronted with 
challenges to Roe. Let us remember, it is the Supreme Court that sets 
precedent, and that can happen if Judge Kavanaugh is on the Court. 
Really, his dissent in this case is a view of someone chosen for a 
reason, ready to fulfill Donald Trump's campaign promise to see Roe v. 
Wade overturned.
  This fight matters. Who sits on our courts matters. How we exercise 
our constitutional duty to examine a nominee for the highest Court in 
our land matters. Just as well-financed conservative interests have 
spent decades setting the stage for the court packing going on today, 
those of us who oppose this agenda need to mobilize, resist, and stay 
engaged for the long haul in the fight for a fair and independent 
judiciary.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.