[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 115 (Tuesday, June 23, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3133-S3138]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                        Justice in Policing Act

  Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, the past few months have been amongst 
the most wrenching and tumultuous in recent memory. The deaths of 
George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery, as well as from the COVID-
19 pandemic, have forced our country to reckon with not only the 
decades of long failure to reform our police departments and prevent 
unwarranted brutality against Black Americans but also the centuries-
long struggle against racial injustice.
  Here in Congress, the Democrats have sought to turn the anger and 
frustration in our country--and, yes, sometimes despair--into real and 
meaningful action. The Democrats wish to seize the moment. Three weeks 
ago, the Democrats announced a bill that would finally bring strong, 
comprehensive, and lasting change to police departments across 
America--the Justice in Policing Act, led by Senators Booker and 
Harris. The House of Representatives will pass that bill this week, but 
here in the Senate, we have a much different story.
  Senate Republicans have responded to our comprehensive legislation by 
proposing a bill that is so much weaker on nearly every single count 
and, worse still, is completely silent on so many issues that scream 
out for action. Should police officers be held to greater account if 
they violate Americans' constitutional rights? The Republican bill is 
silent. Should police departments continue to have easy access to 
military-grade equipment? The Republican bill is silent. Should police 
departments be forced to change their behavior when it comes to racial 
profiling? Should they develop a better use of force standard? Should 
the Justice Department be empowered and encouraged to investigate 
police departments that have bad patterns and practices? Silent. 
Silent. Silent.
  In the place of real change and accountability for police officers 
and departments, the Republican bill proposes a slew of studies and 
commissions. We don't need to study the problem of police misconduct 
and violence--we need to solve it. No doubt, these issues are complex, 
multifaceted, and difficult, but the Republican legislation pretends as 
if the cancer of police brutality is, in reality, little more than a 
runny nose.
  The national conversation about policing reform, which has been 
ongoing for several years, was renewed by the terrible killing of 
George Floyd--his windpipe crushed by an officer who kept his knee on 
Floyd's neck for nearly 9 minutes. The bill my Republican friends have 
drafted would not even completely ban the type of brutal tactics that 
led to George Floyd's death. The Republican bill does not even fully 
prevent the kind of tactics that sparked this whole debate in the first 
place.
  Breonna Taylor, a first responder, was asleep in her bed in 
Louisville, KY, when she was killed by police who were executing a no-
knock warrant. The Republican bill does not ban no-knock warrants. It 
does not limit no-knock warrants or require police departments to 
provide more information before obtaining them from a court. It calls 
for more data on the use of no-knock warrants. After the tragic loss of 
Breonna Taylor, how could the Republican bill not even attempt to 
prevent the kind of events that led to her death?
  Imagine if President Johnson, after the bus boycotts and the march in 
Selma and the righteous movement for civil rights in America, had 
proposed a bill that had called for more data on the effectiveness of 
poll taxes and other voter intimidation techniques. Imagine if 
President Johnson, instead of the Voting Rights Act, had proposed a 
voting rights commission to have studied the issue a little bit more.
  There is no escaping the fact that the Senate Republicans have 
drafted a policing bill that is deeply, fundamentally, and irrevocably 
flawed, and the Democrats are not the only ones to say so.
  In this morning's Washington Post, the Floyd family lawyer, Reverend 
Sharpton, and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund urged 
Senators to oppose the GOP reform bill. They called it a nonstarter. 
That is what we believe as well.
  Last night, the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund said that it 
``cannot support legislation that does not embody a strong 
accountability framework for police officers and other law enforcement 
who engage in misconduct.''
  The lawyer for the families of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, Ben 
Crump--one of the Nation's most renowned civil rights attorneys--wrote 
that the Republican legislation is ``in direct contrast to the demands 
of the people'' who have been protesting, and ``the Black community is 
tired of the lip service, and shocked that the [Republican proposal] 
can be thought of as legislation.'' That is from the lawyer for the 
families of Breonna Taylor and George Floyd.
  Let me repeat: The attorney representing the families who are seeking 
justice believe the Republican bill is completely inadequate, lip 
service, and can hardly be thought of as legislation. How does Leader 
McConnell respond to that charge? How does he respond when the 
families' lawyer says his bill is a nonstarter?
  Civil rights groups--the noble guardians of these issues for 
generations that want nothing more than to see meaningful legislation--
are urging the Senate to reject the Republican proposal. They see this 
bill for the futile and, maybe, cynical ploy that it is. Their 
opposition speaks louder than almost any other.
  Who does America believe when it comes to dealing with these issues--
Leader McConnell, who seems to be new to these issues, or the civil 
rights groups, which have been fighting for change for decades? Who 
does America believe?
  We Democrats are certain the McConnell plan will not--indeed, 
cannot--result in any passing of legislation. It is clear the 
Republican bill, as is, will not get 60 votes. There is overwhelming 
opposition to the bill in our caucus, and because the bill needs such 
large-scale and fundamental change, there is no conceivable way that a 
series of amendments strong enough to cure the defects in the bill 
could garner 60 votes either. So no bill will pass as a result of this 
ploy by Senator McConnell. The Republican majority has given the Senate 
a bad bill and proposed no credible way to sufficiently improve it.
  Simply put, Leader McConnell has created a cul-de-sac from which no 
legislation can emerge. Leader McConnell's plan appears to be designed 
to get the burden of dealing with policing reform off the Republicans' 
shoulders by setting up a process which is guaranteed not to result in 
successful legislation.
  Again, Leader McConnell is leading the Senate into a cul-de-sac--a 
process designed to fail. Yet there is a way out of this cul-de-sac. 
Yes, there is a way out. It is the same process that has led to success 
in the Senate time and again. It is a simple word--``bipartisanship.''
  This morning, Senators Booker, Harris, and I are sending a letter to 
Leader McConnell, stressing the need for bipartisan talks to get a 
constructive starting point on policing reform. If our two parties 
could get together to draft a bipartisan proposal--and even if we don't 
agree on everything, we can agree to invoke a real amendment process--
then we might produce a bill that has a real shot of passing. If the 
Republican leader would acknowledge the obvious need for these talks, 
there is a real chance we could produce legislation that has a shot of 
passing.
  So we are pleading with Leader McConnell: Instead of pressing forward 
with this partisan bill that is designed to make sure no bill passes, 
Leader McConnell, pursue a path that is designed to produce real, 
meaningful policing reform.
  In the Senate, where 60 votes are required to achieve almost 
anything, a bipartisan process is the only way to move forward.
  My friends, this could be a moment for the Senate to rise to the 
occasion. There is certainly something happening out there in America. 
Hundreds

[[Page S3134]]

of thousands of protesters of every faith and color and age have taken 
to the streets to demand change.
  If Americans out in the country can together join in a righteous 
chorus calling for change, we in the Senate can at least try to come to 
deliver it, but it is going to take more than typical games here in the 
Senate that Leader McConnell seems to be now playing.
  We are going to have to rise above the take-it-or-leave-it 
legislating that has trapped us in the status quo on so many issues.
  We were able to negotiate a $3 trillion emergency aid package before 
bringing it to the floor of the Senate. We have done it on budgets and 
criminal justice reform, on the Great American Outdoors Act. A 
bipartisan group put together an immigration bill that passed the 
Senate with more than two-thirds votes on a very contentious issue 
because it was bipartisan.
  So on even thorny issues like police reform, we can--we can and we 
must--work with each other, and we need to, in order to achieve a bill 
that can actually pass the Senate.
  So let me repeat my request to Leader McConnell: Let us not retreat 
to partisan corners on such a vital issue. Let us appeal to the higher 
instincts of this Chamber and try to find a bill together.
  I yield to the Senator from New Jersey.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.
  Mr. BOOKER. Madam President, I thank you for the recognition, and I 
thank the Democratic leader for his words.
  The Democratic leader talked about what is happening in our country. 
I have never seen something like this before in all my years, where 
hundreds of thousands of Americans have been out in protest--and not 
just certain sectors. In all 50 States, in large cities and small 
towns, Americans from every background, race, religion, and political 
party have joined together following the gruesome capture of the 
torture and murder of a fellow American.
  This is a profound moment. It is a moral moment. We know this is not 
a partisan moment because the good will of all Americans is evident, 
from national polling that shows that real reform is widely supported 
by people of both parties to just the voices of people who are saying 
that we are a nation formed around a fundamental idea of life, liberty, 
and the pursuit of happiness, to have it so fundamentally violated. The 
call is for us to act, to come together as good men and women and do 
something to protect human lives.
  We have done that before on the Federal level in a bipartisan way, 
coming together to protect people against indiscriminate violence--from 
the Violence Against Women Act to even the historic, bipartisan work 
that went on to get 99 Members of this body behind an anti-lynching 
bill.
  I am grateful for that aspect of our history, that this is a body 
that has acted multiple times to try and protect human life.
  Well, no one need watch a video of 8 minutes and 46 seconds again to 
understand that this body now holds a true moral choice of how will we 
act. What will we do in this moral moment in our country? Will we come 
together and protect life and liberty or will we do nothing and allow 
the violence to happen, the cycle in our Nation, the name after name 
after name after name that we know and the thousands of other names 
that we do not know--Black lives being abused, civil rights being 
violated, lives being lost because we have failed the moment in our 
Nation?
  A little over 2 weeks ago, Leader Schumer, Senator Harris, and I, 
along with colleagues in the House, introduced an act that was narrowly 
focused on accountability. It zeroed in on what we could do to create 
accountability, to ensure oversight, to implement transparency, and to 
ban actions that people in this country, in both parties, widely 
believe should and must be banned.
  The bill that is being put forth by Leader McConnell is wholly 
unacceptable to bring accountability, transparency, and consequences 
when our common values as a country are violated. This is not about 
partisanship--a Republican bill and a Democratic bill. It is about 
taking meaningful action that will create change.
  The bill Leader McConnell wants to put on the floor is called the 
JUSTICE Act. It belies its name because it does not--in any way--even 
serve as a starting point or even a baseline for negotiations.
  The American people are not in the streets chanting ``We want more 
data; we want more data.'' The American people are not in the streets 
chanting ``Give us a commission; give us a commission.''
  We know the data, and we have had commissions--from the Kerner Report 
all the way to the Task Force on 21st Century Policing. What we are 
hearing a demand for, from voices all over our country--including from 
leaders in police departments to mayors, to local leaders, to 
activists--is real accountability; that if you do something wrong in 
America, there will be consequences; that no one is above the law; that 
we, in this country, will make sure that those who represent law and 
enforcement do so in a way that accords with our common values and our 
common ideals.
  In fact, we want to go further in this country. We have a greater 
moral imagination that does not have us trapped in the quicksand of the 
present but calls to us to rise to a higher ground; that we could be a 
nation that imagines ourselves having a larger definition of law 
enforcement, a larger definition of public safety. We cannot get mired 
in this moment. This must be the start of climbing to that higher 
ground.

  The problem with the bill that Leader McConnell wants to put on the 
floor, it is not bold. It is not courageous. There is no great 
imagination about what we can be. It doesn't challenge us to come 
together. What it does is guarantee that the cycle of violence in our 
country, the cycle of the abuse of civil rights, the cycle of death 
that has so moved so many Americans will continue.
  If we don't implement real measures of accountability for police 
officers in this country--as the Republican bill fails to do--it is not 
if but when we will be back here again after another police officer 
kills another unarmed Black person and faces no fear of Federal 
accountability in the courts.
  If we don't establish real transparency measures with a national 
registry of police misconduct--which Leader McConnell's bill fails to 
do--it is not if but when we will be back here again, after another 
officer who has a record of inappropriate use of force will get fired 
from one town and hired in the next and end up hurting another citizen, 
violating their civil rights or--worse--killing them.
  If we do not end those harmful practices that Americans from all 
backgrounds know are wrong, like racial and religious profiling, no-
knock warrants in drug cases, and the use of choke holds--which this 
McConnell bill fails to do--it is not if but when we will be back here 
again after another Breonna Taylor is murdered in her own home after a 
no-knock warrant, after another Eric Garner is suffocated to death on a 
sidewalk with an inhumane choke hold.
  If we do not create a national use-of-force standard in America--
which this Republican bill, again, fails to do--we will be back here 
again the next time another officer uses deadly force when they could 
have used deescalation because that deadly force was ``reasonable,'' 
though not necessary.
  I hear the voices. We all hear the voices, the anguish, the agony, 
the pain, the trauma, the hurt. It has triggered a nation to rise up 
like has never happened in the last 50 years.
  We are in a moment of profound possibility, but what do we face? We 
face it being shut down here in the Senate over an impotent bill that 
fails to meet this moment.
  The American people are demanding accountability, not commissions; 
they are demanding accountability, not study; they are demanding 
accountability, not data collection alone. We have to ask ourselves: 
Will we stand for a bill with zero accountability or will we rise?
  I am so frustrated because I have been here now for 6 years, and I 
have seen, from inside this body as a Member to even before I came 
here, how the leader has done bipartisan efforts. I saw it on 
immigration reform. A Gang of 8 was formed, discussions were had, and 
they came to a bill. They put it on the floor, and they voted for it.

[[Page S3135]]

  I have seen it in this COVID crisis. People met and worked on 
solutions.
  I have seen, time and again, when there is a sincere desire to come 
to a bipartisan consensus, how it works. But this is not how Leader 
McConnell is acting now.
  Where is the good faith? Where is the yearning for justice? Where is 
the desire to get something real done?
  There have been no hearings. He has called for no discussions. He has 
called for no meaningful engagement--in the way we have done in the 
past--from stakeholders and groups that have been working on this 
issue. He has not sent it to the appropriate committee of jurisdiction.
  This is not what the American people want. This is not what this 
moment calls for. This is shameful. This is a desire to turn a page, to 
point a finger of blame, and to leave the calls for justice in this 
country falling upon the mute ears, the deaf ears, of a body that 
should be hearing, listening, and responding.
  There is no easy fix for the problems we face, but they do demand 
work. They don't demand simple monologues; they demand real dialogue. 
This is not a time to retreat into our corners. It is a time to engage 
each other.
  I cannot, in any way, give any justice or sanction to what is going 
on in this body now. We will be back here again. We will see more video 
capturing the dark corners of our country that must be brought into the 
light and solved with the spirit of this Nation.
  I join Chuck Schumer and Kamala Harris in urging Majority Leader 
McConnell not to proceed in this way. It is not progress. It is an 
attempt to turn a page on history that we will have to revisit. Every 
minute, every hour, every day we do not act, Black lives are in danger; 
our fellow citizens are in danger; we as a Nation, our principles and 
ideals are in danger.
  It is time that we come together and provide hope from this body that 
serves, truly serves, to honor what the public is calling for, which is 
action--not retreat but for us to try, in this body, to rise together.
  I yield to my colleague from California.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
  Ms. HARRIS. Madam President, the murders of George Floyd, Breonna 
Taylor, and Rayshard Brooks are the latest in a long history of 
violence against Black people in America, but thanks to the advocacy, 
thanks to the courage of their mothers and fathers and relatives and 
all of the civil rights leaders, the lawyers, those who are marching in 
the streets--and smartphones--everyone can finally bear witness to the 
violence that has been happening in our country at the hands of police.
  Now, let's be clear. This behavior is not new. Mothers have been 
crying over their dead children's bodies for generations, yet no one 
would listen. No one would listen.
  Emmett Till's mother had the courage, as a leader, to say: The world 
will listen when they look at my baby's body in that casket. Yet here 
we are, these many decades and generations later, and still we have not 
seen meaningful change in America on this subject.
  It is time we act. It is time we act. And let us be clear: Sometimes 
some of the most courageous and important work that has happened in 
this U.S. Congress has happened not because there was leadership in the 
body but because the people demanded it and they would not relent until 
their government and elected leaders and representatives listened to 
and answered their call for steps toward what we call a more perfect 
Union.
  It has been many a time the case that it is because of the people 
marching in the streets that we had the Voting Rights Act and Civil 
Rights Act and the Fair Housing Act--because the people would allow 
nothing less than that we, as a government, be true to our stated 
ideals.
  Yes, over the last 3\1/2\ years in our country, many of us have 
wondered whether the leaders of this country actually pay homage to and 
have any desire to institute and to get closer to those ideals.
  This is a moment for the U.S. Senate to say we, as a body, will do 
that; that what is clear right now in this moment and in this movement 
is that there is still work that can be done--not just should be done 
but can be done--to come closer to those words inscribed across the 
street in the U.S. Supreme Court, to effectuate ``Equal Justice Under 
Law.'' It is within our grasp to do this. It is not just an imperative; 
it is within our grasp. In America today, people from every State, all 
50 States, and in every walk of life are demanding that we take the 
problem of police brutality seriously. We have this opportunity, and we 
should see it as such. Where before there may have been reluctance to 
go against the strength of the status quo, which is always reluctant, 
if not hostile, to change, the people in the streets of every race, 
every gender, every age, from every State, are not only giving us 
permission but demanding that their leaders finally make good on the 
American promise of ``Equal Justice Under Law.'' They are demanding 
this change; they are not just asking for it.

  So we can't answer the people's demand for accountability with 
watered-down politics and watered-down policies and obstructionist 
tactics to distract us from what we clearly know is necessary to meet 
the calls and the cries of this moment and this movement. I will say 
that we cannot answer their demands with this Republican attempt to 
obstruct real progress and real justice in our country.
  And for all of the pundits out there who want to entertain a 
conversation about whether Democrats actually want police reform, are 
you kidding me? Are you kidding me? We are responding to the cries in 
the street; we are taking them seriously; and we have proposed a 
prescription that actually responds to not just their demands but the 
specific cases and the bodies which have just most recently been 
buried, much less the generations of Black bodies which have been 
buried because of this issue. So don't anyone dare suggest we are 
standing in the way of progress.
  Let us all be clear about what is happening in the politics of this 
moment. The Republican bill has been thrown out to give lip service to 
an issue with nothing substantial in it that would actually save or 
would have saved any of those lives. Let's not be distracted from the 
task at hand. I intend to vote against a motion to proceed tomorrow. I 
also intend to vote for a motion to proceed with real reform. I am not 
against a motion to proceed. We should proceed. Let's proceed with 
action--not gestures--with action.
  Let's talk about the Republican bill. I am a former prosecutor. I 
have personally prosecuted everything from low-level offenses to 
homicides. I worked almost my entire career with police officers. What 
I can tell you is this--and I am certain of it--police officers will 
tell you how difficult their job becomes when their colleagues and 
other police officers break the rules and break the law. They will tell 
you that. They will tell you that it affects the culture of their 
working environment. It affects the morale of where they work every 
day. It affects the integrity of their work. What they know is bad cops 
are bad for good cops.
  What we all know is that it is in the best interest of community 
safety and harmony when the people trust their government, and it is a 
reciprocal relationship.
  In addition to what our bill proposes, the Justice in Policing Act is 
about accountability and consequence. It is also brought forward with a 
spirit of what we know is in the best interest of growing trust and the 
American people's trust in their government.
  As a former prosecutor, I will also say that in the criminal justice 
system, we also talk about and use this phrase ``accountability and 
consequence.'' We use it all the time, accountability and consequence. 
There must be accountability and consequence. Almost every time that 
phrase is invoked, it is directed at the person who was arrested and 
hardly ever is that phrase directed at the very system itself and the 
actors in that system.
  Where is the accountability and consequence when a system fails the 
people it is designed to protect? Where is the accountability and 
consequence when people who have been invested by the people with a gun 
and a badge--it is the power we give them--where is the accountability 
and consequence when they abuse that power, one must ask. Our bill is 
designed to address just

[[Page S3136]]

that. I will tell you, there is not one component of the Republican 
bill that does the same.
  Let's talk about the history of where we are today--just recent 
history, meaning in the U.S. Senate on this subject. On Monday June 9, 
in response to protests in all 50 States of these United States, 
Senator Cory Booker and I, along with our CBC and House Judiciary 
colleagues and a majority of our Senate caucus, announced the Justice 
in Policing Act. Over 1 week later, the people are marching in the 
streets. Let's just remember this. People are marching in the streets 
every night, every day. Well, 1 week later, somebody got the memo, and 
then what did they do? They came up with what they call the JUSTICE Act 
as a way to essentially show that they have something but to basically 
obstruct what already had been put in place. They did it because they 
knew that the people were demanding something. What they put up, 
instead of meeting those demands, was a tactic to obstruct the progress 
of the Justice in Policing Act.
  Then they are playing a political game around here saying: ``Look, 
the Democrats won't vote for policing reform.'' No. We are actually 
fully prepared to vote for policing reform, which is why a week earlier 
than you figured it out, we figured it out and put it on paper and 
presented it to the Nation.
  Let's not play political games today and tomorrow. Let us understand 
that Senator McConnell, the majority leader, made it clear--you know, I 
say to the Senator from New Jersey, Mr. Booker, I wasn't here for those 
days when he saw a lot of that bipartisan work. I did see it with other 
COVID bills, and I am thankful that did happen, but what I see most 
recently on this issue is that Senator McConnell made it clear that he 
had no intention of passing bipartisan comprehensive legislation on 
policing reform. What we have seen is that instead of an ability for 
all of us in this Chamber to pass the Justice in Policing Act--which 
has already gained 227 cosponsors, enough to pass the House--instead, 
the Senate leader has scheduled this vote tomorrow, not to solve the 
problem of police brutality in America but to solve his political 
problem, to which he has taken no stand and that caucus has taken no 
meaningful stand on an issue that has people in our streets marching 
for the last 3 weeks, and those marching folks will go on.
  The proposal was carefully crafted that is being offered tomorrow for 
a vote. The Republican proposal was carefully crafted to deflect from 
real change by merely, as my colleague Senator Booker outlined and 
Senator Schumer outlined--by merely offering to study the problem 
without doing anything to solve it
  Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, would the Senator yield for a question?
  Ms. HARRIS. When I am finished, I will.
  The Republican bill does not even provide a baseline for a discussion 
or amendment on police reform in that there are no mechanisms to hold 
law enforcement officers accountable in court for their misconduct. 
There is no transparency into police misconduct, which is necessary, of 
course, to enable communities to hold officers accountable. There is no 
requirement of data collection on all use-of-force incidents or on 
racial or religious profiling. There is no ban on harmful policing 
policies and practices, such as racial and religious profiling and no-
knock warrants in drug cases. We are not banning all no-knock warrants 
in drug cases because Breonna Taylor would be alive today had that been 
the case. There is no reform to the issues of choke holds or carotid 
holds in the Republican bill that is being offered. There is no 
national standard for use of force.
  I am happy to entertain the question from the Senator from Texas. 
Then I will conclude my comments.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Loeffler). The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I wonder if the Senator would tell me, 
the JUSTICE Act that it sounds like the Democratic conference intends 
to block tomorrow includes the anti-lynching legislation that you and 
Senator Booker have championed; are you aware of that?
  Ms. HARRIS. The same one Rand Paul obstructed a couple of weeks ago? 
Yes, I am aware of that.
  Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, so the Senators are going to block their 
own anti-lynching bill by their vote tomorrow.
  Ms. HARRIS. Absolutely not. I think it is important we not distract 
the American people from the task at hand.
  We cannot pull out a specific component of this bill and leave 
everything else in the garbage bin. That is the logical and actual and 
practical conclusion of where you are going with the suggestion that we 
would sacrifice issues like no-knock warrants, issues like a national 
standard for use of force, issues like the need for independent 
investigations of police misconduct, issues like pattern and practice 
investigations with subpoena power for the Department of Justice for 
the sake of one. It is like asking a mother to save one of her children 
and leave the others.
  Mr. CORNYN. Would the Senator yield for another question?
  Ms. HARRIS. Absolutely.
  Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, the Senator certainly is familiar with 
the rules of the Senate, which allow Senators to offer amendments to 
improve legislation once we get on it, but if the Democratic conference 
is going to prevent the Senate from actually getting on the bill, there 
is no opportunity for any Senator, you or any one of us, to offer 
amendments to improve it.
  I would further ask the Senator, aren't you aware of the fact that 
there are 60-vote thresholds on the back end so that if we get on the 
bill and you don't like the way it turns out, you can block it on the 
back end; is the Senator aware of those options you have?
  Ms. HARRIS. Senator Cornyn, we are honored to serve on the Senate 
Judiciary Committee, as does Senator Booker and Senator Durbin. We all 
serve on the Judiciary Committee. The two Senate officers serve with 
you on the Senate Judiciary Committee. As you know, because we have 
been present during our most recent hearings, we have asked that there 
would be a meaningful discussion of the Justice in Policing Act in that 
committee. None has occurred.
  If we are going to talk about process, let us look at all the tools 
that are available to well-intentioned, well-meaning legislators, if 
the goal is actually to solve and address the issue at hand. I have 
seen no evidence of that. I have seen no evidence. In fact, what I have 
seen in reading some of the newspapers--sometimes they get things 
wrong, but if they got it right, the Senate leader says that he has no 
interest in engaging in that kind of discussion or debate before 
putting the bill on the floor for a vote tomorrow.
  Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, may I ask one last question?
  Will the Senator yield?
  What I am trying to fathom is why the Senator would rather have these 
negotiations occur behind closed doors as opposed to here on the floor 
of the Senate with the American people to see broadcast on television? 
Don't you think that sort of interaction and debate and negotiation out 
in front of all 330 million Americans would be beneficial to healing 
our country and coming to some consensus about what the appropriate 
reforms should be?
  Ms. HARRIS. Indeed. That is the beauty of the Judiciary Committee; 
our meetings are public meetings.
  I will conclude my remarks by saying that I do believe now is the 
time for Congress to pass legislation that will bring real change and 
real improvement. It is time that we meet this moment and meet the 
movement that we are seeing outside of these doors. We are seeing 
people of every race, gender, age, and religion marching together in 
unison as Americans. We are seeing people putting their bodies on the 
line in the face of more excessive force and tear gas to stand for 
equality for all people.
  The bill that is being offered for a vote tomorrow does not, in any 
way, meet the needs of this moment and the longstanding needs America 
has had for reform.
  I will, therefore, join Senators Schumer and Booker in not only 
sending a letter to Senator McConnell this morning demanding the Senate 
vote on the Justice in Policing Act, but I will say I fully intend to 
vote against a motion to proceed until and unless we are, as a body, 
prepared to offer meaningful reforms upon which we can debate.

[[Page S3137]]

  I will say also that one of the other problems with what is being 
offered by our colleagues across the aisle is it is not meeting the 
moment in terms of need for reform. It is simply, basically, they 
constructed a confessional, where there can be a confession of misdeeds 
after the fact, and that in no way meets the moment in terms of reforms 
that are necessary.
  In the immortal words of my great Uncle Sherman, God rest his soul, 
``That dog don't hunt.''
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.
  Mr. DURBIN. First, I want to thank my colleagues, Senators Booker and 
Harris. Thanks for your leadership and courage and the fact that have 
dedicated yourself to this moment.
  Some would say we are fortunate; others would say we are blessed to 
be at this moment in this place in the roles that we currently have. 
Can you imagine across the United States of America how many people 
would like to be standing where we are standing today? Despite the 
frustration, we have a voice. We have an opportunity. We, as U.S. 
Senators, have the power, if we use it, to do something about what 
threatens America.
  Imagine how 8 minutes 46 seconds could have such profound impact on 
this Nation of over 300 million people and the world, but then to 
realize that 8 minutes 46 seconds merely reminded us of all of the 
other issues, all of the other cases, all of the other George Floyds 
who came before.
  I have just been stunned in my own home State of Illinois--which I 
dearly love and know fairly well--by what I have seen in the streets of 
towns large and small. In the city of Chicago, just this last 
Juneteenth weekend, there was an amazing display of unity on Black 
Lives Matter. The African-American ministers led it, but all the rest 
of us were happy to be part of it because it meant so much.
  Then you go downstate Illinois to towns like our capital city, 
Springfield, or Jerseyville, IL, and attend Black Lives Matter rallies 
there that were organized by two young women, African-American high 
school juniors. They organized 1,500 people in Springfield for a Black 
Lives Matter rally.
  Nykeyla Henderson and her twin sister Nykia Henderson said: Let's 
call together students and friends about Black Lives Matter. Fifteen 
hundred people showed up. No windows were broken, no looting, no 
screaming, no shouting, no cursing. It was a textbook display of 
constitutional authority that each of us as a citizen has, and they 
used it so well. I salute them even to this day.
  Then, to go down to Jerseyville, a small rural community that I have 
represented over the years--which may or may not have a minority 
population at all--and to have, from 20 miles away, a high school 
junior, a young African-American woman whose name is Lay'lahny Davis, 
who did exactly the same thing: She called together hundreds of 
people--in this case, some 350 on the courthouse lawn in Jerseyville--
to celebrate Black Lives Matter.
  I have never seen anything like this. I have never seen it reach this 
level of commitment. Trust me, these young women were doing this, 
knowing that some of the people standing on the perimeter were not 
their friends, but they had the courage to be there because they 
believed in what they were doing.
  Do we have the courage at this moment to speak up for real change? 
How many times in the history of this country can Senators come to the 
floor and say that it is within our grasp? We can make America better, 
and we can perfect this great Nation to even be greater with courage.
  What I hear from my colleagues--Senators Harris and Booker--I could 
not agree with more. I am going to vote against this motion to proceed 
tomorrow. I believe, as they do, that we as a Senate can do better. We 
can do better in the Senate Judiciary Committee, which throughout 
generations has been the place to go, the forum to visit, the last 
stop, if you will, on the most important issues of our day--the Senate 
Judiciary Committee--time and again.
  I have been blessed to serve there for over two decades, and I look 
back on the history of that body before I arrived, and I think to 
myself: Durbin, you are a lucky man to be on the Senate Judiciary 
Committee of the U.S. Senate, particularly at this moment. This is not 
only our issue; this is our moment in the Senate Judiciary Committee 
and on the floor of the U.S. Senate. That is why Senator McConnell's 
tactic is so empty and so obvious.
  We understand how the Senate works. If you have been here 5 minutes, 
you know. He is the majority leader. He calls the shots. He decides 
what is coming to the floor, which amendments will be offered, which 
will not be offered, which bills will move forward, and which bills 
will stop. It is his power to do it. It is a very powerful position.
  Instead of saying to us: Start in the Senate Judiciary Committee, 
find a bipartisan measure to bring to the floor, and then let's work 
together to have meaningful amendments but to have it, in fact, 
enacted--instead of that, he said: Take our bill or leave it. If you 
don't want to vote for the Republican bill on this subject, go home and 
defend your vote. I am prepared to and I think my colleagues are too.
  Listen to what the National Association for the Advancement of 
Colored People Legal Defense Fund said about this bill today. This 
organization is an incredible organization, and if you don't know much 
about it, read ``Devil in the Grove,'' a story of Thurgood Marshall in 
the late 1940s and 1950s, risking his life defending African Americans 
who were facing criminal charges across the United States.
  The NAACP Legal Defense Fund said: ``In this moment, we cannot 
support legislation that does not embody a strong accountability 
framework for police officers and other law enforcement who engage in 
misconduct as well as needed reforms to policing practices.''
  The group wrote in a letter, a copy of which was sent to Members of 
the Senate, and they went on to say: ``We urge you to vote no on the 
motion to proceed with consideration of the JUSTICE Act''--which is the 
Republican bill--``and instead advance reforms that will hold law 
enforcement accountable and offer more transparency of policing 
practices such as those embodied in S. 3912, the Justice in Policing 
Act of 2020''--a bill which I am honored to cosponsor with my friends, 
Senators Booker and Harris.
  This morning I sat down and decided to read in detail the analysis of 
these two bills. It is night and day in terms of the direction they 
take. Something as fundamental as choke holds--does America know what a 
choke hold is? We saw it and will never forget it. We saw that knee on 
George Floyd's neck, and we watched the minutes pass by and his life 
ebb away. Can we be anything less than resolute on the issue of choke 
holds? Our bill is. It bans them. It bans them. The restriction of 
blood or oxygen or the carotid artery--we are specific; we are 
specific. Sadly, the Republican bill is not.
  We also defined ``deadly force'' and what is less than ``lethal 
force.'' We specifically defined it. What does the Republican bill do? 
It calls on the Attorney General of the United States to develop a 
policy--to develop a policy--Attorney General William Barr.
  On no-knock--I thank Senator Harris for raising that--we have direct 
legal limits on the use of no-knock, which was, in fact, the procedure 
followed that led to the death of Breonna Taylor in Louisville, KY. 
What does the Republican bill have? A reporting requirement--a 
reporting requirement.
  Body cameras? We require them. We put penalties in the law for those 
who don't use them. We also require that they be on vehicles, law 
enforcement vehicles. The Republican bill does not require them. It 
offers grants to police departments that want to buy them and then asks 
from those departments ``assurances'' that they are using them.
  On the misconduct registry, we establish public access to the 
misconduct registry when it comes to police misconduct. But there is no 
public access in the Republican bill.
  Yes, it is true, as was noted earlier by the Senator from Texas, 
there is commonality on issues like anti-lynching--thank goodness--a 
mere century after we started debating it in the U.S. Senate. We have 
reached that point, and I am glad we have.
  When it comes to training, data, and demographics, there are many 
areas of commonality, but there are specific areas that this bill--the 
one we have

[[Page S3138]]

introduced--includes that are not included in the Republican bill: 
Criminal liability under the Civil Rights Act--we changed the standard 
to make it truly an attainable standard on the Democratic bill; 
qualified immunity; civil rights investigations; the power of subpoena, 
which we give to the Department of Justice; the use-of-force 
investigation; grants for independent investigation; and--this is a 
measure I have worked on for a while and am so glad it is included 
here--banning racial profiling once and for all.
  I want to salute a former colleague from Wisconsin, Russ Feingold. He 
was one of the earliest on this whole issue of profiling, a courageous 
position on his part at that moment in history. Finally, we include it 
in our bill.
  It is not included in the Republican bill. Instead, what they offer 
are commissions, data collection, and a couple of other criminal 
offenses, each of which is worthy of consideration but should not be 
enough to divert us from our goal.
  I am going to conclude by saying this. I feel blessed to be here in 
the U.S. Senate at this moment in history. I feel fortunate to have a 
chance, with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, to change the 
history of this country in the right direction. My goodness, it is so 
long overdue. After all of the 400 years of slavery, when it first came 
to our shore, and the greed and racism that fed it as that insidious 
original sin of our country, now is our chance to do something in our 
generation to make a difference for those future generations that march 
in the street and look to us for real change.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Hawaii is recognized
  Ms. HIRONO. Madam President, I share the strong words and position 
and perspective of my wonderful colleagues, colleagues who spoke before 
me just now--Senators Harris, Booker, and Durbin--calling for real 
policing reform, not the bill that is coming before the floor tomorrow.