[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 146 (Tuesday, September 4, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Page S6013]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     NOMINATION OF BRETT KAVANAUGH

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, the Judiciary Committee has begun the 
hearing to consider Judge Brett Kavanaugh for confirmation as Associate 
Justice of the Supreme Court. One of the distinguished professionals 
asked to introduce Judge Kavanaugh is Lisa Blatt, a prominent and 
accomplished Supreme Court litigator. She also happens to be a self-
described ``liberal Democrat and feminist.''
  Nevertheless, in a recent op-ed, Ms. Blatt laid out the case for why 
Democrats should support Judge Kavanaugh's nomination. Just last week, 
she spearheaded a letter that 41 veteran appellate advocates wrote to 
the committee. They said: ``Based on our experience with Judge 
Kavanaugh and his work over 12 years of distinguished judicial service, 
we are confident that he possesses the character, temperament and 
intellect that will make him an asset for our Nation's highest Court.''
  Our colleagues on the committee also received a letter from Bob 
Bennett. Like Ms. Blatt, he is also a Democrat and, in fact, he served 
as a personal lawyer to one of America's most prominent Democrats, 
President Bill Clinton, during a particularly acrimonious time in 
recent history. Yet Mr. Bennett concluded, in a letter to our 
colleagues, that Judge Kavanaugh is ``the most qualified person any 
Republican President could possibly have nominated.''
  He went on to say: ``Were the Senate to fail to confirm Brett, it 
would not only mean passing up the opportunity to confirm a great 
jurist, but it would also undermine civility in politics.''
  Those familiar with Judge Kavanaugh's judicial record and temperament 
come away impressed. So has the American Bar Association, an 
organization our Democratic friends have called ``the gold standard'' 
in evaluating judicial nominees. They deemed Judge Brett Kavanaugh to 
be unanimously ``well qualified.'' That is the highest possible rating 
they can give, unanimously ``well qualified.''
  Many of our Democratic colleagues have been determined to oppose 
Judge Kavanaugh's nomination, no matter what, since the day he was 
nominated. Some of our Democratic colleagues opposed him and anyone 
else before he was nominated, but they are running out of options. They 
can't find any substantive reasons why he doesn't deserve confirmation.
  That explains the hyperventilation and orchestrated antics at this 
morning's hearing, where they talked about almost anything besides his 
distinguished record. Our colleagues keep falling back on the same 
process complaints that have failed to persuade anyone for weeks and 
weeks.
  So let's review the facts.
  The Judiciary Committee has received half a million pages of 
materials with respect to this nomination. This is by far--by far--the 
most materials provided in support of a Supreme Court nomination in our 
Nation's entire history. In fact, it is more material than was produced 
for the last five Supreme Court nominations combined.
  Of course, this record-shattering tower of executive branch documents 
is all in addition to Judge Kavanaugh's 12-plus-year record on the DC 
Court of Appeals--obviously, the most relevant part of his record. 
Again, that judicial record was something our Democratic friends said 
was the best way to evaluate a judge, back when it was a Supreme Court 
nominee of a Democratic President whom the Senate was considering.
  Judge Kavanaugh has issued over 300 opinions from what the legal 
community widely considers the second highest bench in the country. By 
any objective standard, by any fair metric, any Senator who is willing 
to give Judge Kavanaugh full and fair consideration is more than amply 
prepared to do so, but, of course, many of our Democratic colleagues 
haven't been interested in doing that.
  As I said, many Senate Democrats made up their minds instantly upon 
Judge Kavanaugh's nomination that they would oppose him no matter 
what--no matter what his qualifications, no matter how many opinions 
are in the public record or how many pages of documents are provided. 
Many Senate Democrats were never going to give this nominee a fair 
hearing. There could be 1 million pages of documents or 5 million or 10 
million, for that matter. Nothing will change the fact that one 
Democrat who serves on the committee declared she would oppose any 
nominee--any nominee--before Judge Kavanaugh was even announced. 
Nothing will change the fact that the very same night he was announced, 
two more Democrats on the Judiciary Committee publicly announced they 
finished their consideration and will vote against him. Nothing will 
change the fact that the very next morning, the Democratic leader stood 
up and said: ``I will oppose him with everything I've got,'' and more 
and more Democrats have followed suit.
  Our colleagues will have the opportunity to thoroughly examine this 
nominee during this week's hearings, and afterward he will receive a 
vote on the floor. No amount of partisan opposition or political 
theater will stop the Senate from doing its job.

                          ____________________