[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 194 (Thursday, December 5, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6875-S6876]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                          Judicial Nominations

  Mr. COONS. Mr. President, I serve on the Senate Judiciary Committee, 
as a member of the Bar Association of Delaware, and a Member of the 
U.S. Senate. I am concerned about the transformation of our Federal 
judiciary under this current administration. I am particularly 
concerned about rising issues around qualification and competency. Let 
me speak to that, if I might, for a few minutes.
  This Senate is doing precious little in terms of legislating, but we 
are moving at a breakneck pace to confirm President Trump's judicial 
nominees--roughly, 150 so far. During the entire 8 years of the 
previous administration, 55 circuit court judges were confirmed. Nearly 
that same number have been confirmed in just 3 years of the Trump 
administration--48. Nearly one in seven of all U.S. district court 
judges currently serving have been appointed by President Trump.
  I am deeply concerned about the quality of some of these nominations. 
Some have never taken a deposition, argued a motion, let alone tried a 
case in court. The American Bar Association, the professional 
association of lawyers, has ranked nine of President Trump's nominees 
as ``not qualified,'' which is an exceptionally unusual and striking 
step for them to take.
  This isn't about whether the President's nominees are conservative or 
not. I understand that elections have consequences and that a 
Republican President will more often than not nominate conservative 
judges. I have, in some cases, joined my Democratic colleagues in 
supporting qualified nominees put forward by the administration who 
have won support from their home State Senators and advanced through a 
bipartisan judicial nomination and confirmation process in our 
committee, but let's be clear. I will not stand by while this 
administration rams through nominees who are not just Republican and 
not just conservative but demonstrably unqualified.
  I can't support nominees with deeply concerning records about their 
commitment to justice and to advancing a commonsense juris prudence. I 
am not going to set a standard any lower than what has been required in 
previous administrations to serve on the Federal bench for many, many 
years.
  We have heard in this Chamber and around this country that the 
quality of the Federal bench and the capabilities and the experience 
and the values and the judgment of those who serve on Federal benches 
across this country is an absolutely essential piece of our 
Constitution and our ordered liberty.

[[Page S6876]]

The cases that come before Federal courts are too important to tolerate 
incompetence, inexperience, or bias in the Federal judiciary.
  Why does this matter both in terms of the process and the substance? 
The President has put forward nominees who, in my view, would take us 
backward on civil rights and voting rights, on women's access to 
healthcare, on laws that protect consumers and workers, and on the 
environment. Their decisions impact every American. Equally concerning 
is that Trump's nominees don't reflect the diversity of our Nation. We 
want litigants to go into a court and be able to have their day in 
court and be confident that the judge before them represents the 
breadth and range of America.
  So far, of the 55 circuit court nominees confirmed, only 11 have been 
women, and they have been even less racially diverse. Of all of 
President Trump's nominees, 87 percent are White and 78 percent are 
men. I think the judiciary should reflect the diversity of the American 
people and have strong records and a wealth of experience. Sadly, that 
is not the case for several we have considered, and let me briefly 
speak to two.
  President Trump's nominee to serve on the Ninth Circuit Court of 
Appeals, who was recently confirmed, Lawrence VanDyke, raised serious 
concerns about his work ethic and his temperament. He was rated ``not 
qualified'' by the ABA based on concerns about his lack of knowledge of 
basic procedural rules and his commitment to being truthful. Six 
retired justices of the Montana Supreme Court questioned his fitness 
when he ran for the Supreme Court in Montana and expressed concerns 
about his partisanship and the possibility of corporate influence. He 
is opposed to basic civil rights and civil liberties for the LGBTQ 
community and made a range of statements that I think would be 
disqualifying under any circumstance.
  Sarah Pitlyk, who this Senate just confirmed this week to a lifetime 
seat on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, 
has never tried a case, either criminal or civil, has never taken a 
deposition, has never examined a witness, and has never argued a motion 
in Federal or State court. The ABA unanimously rated her as 
``unqualified'' for a lifetime seat in the Federal judiciary.
  We can and we should do better than this. Of the entire bar of the 
State of Missouri, I am certain there are qualified, capable, and 
seasoned conservatives who could have been nominated for that seat in 
the entire Ninth Circuit. In particular, the State for which Mr. 
VanDyke was nominated, there are certainly abundant opportunities to 
choose qualified nominees. We can and we should do better than this.
  In my State of Delaware, my senior Senator, Tom Carper, and I worked 
together to help form a bipartisan judicial nominating committee to 
fill two vacancies on our district court. We felt strongly we had to 
reach out to the White House and work with them to identify consensus 
nominees who would be the best candidates we could best support and 
whom the President could nominate. Ultimately, we had a very productive 
process, and the President nominated Maryellen Noreika and Colm 
Connolly, whom we both returned positive blue slips for. They 
ultimately have been confirmed by this Senate, seated, and now serve in 
our district court. This is how the process should work.
  We should be able to consult back and forth between the executive and 
legislative until we find competent, capable, and qualified judges of 
whom we can all be proud of. The Senate should not be a rubberstamp for 
this administration, regardless of the quality of nominees that get 
sent forward.
  I will continue to oppose President Trump's nominees who are 
undeserving of a seat on the Federal bench and unqualified to serve. It 
is, in my view, our responsibility to guard against the politicization 
of the Federal judiciary, and we should work together, not to tear down 
and destroy the traditions and rules of this Senate but to find ways to 
strengthen and sustain them. That is how we will move qualified and 
consensus nominees forward and protect the independent judiciary on 
which our very democracy rests.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.