[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 163 (Monday, September 21, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5724-S5725]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                Remembering Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

  Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, on Friday evening, the Nation learned 
the sad news that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had passed away.
  From her time as one of the few women in the Ivy League, to being 
only the second woman ever appointed to the Supreme Court of the United 
States, Justice Ginsburg was and is an inspiration to generations of 
Americans.
  Throughout her remarkable life, Justice Ginsburg fought to secure 
equal rights and opportunities for all. She was a champion of women's 
rights in particular and broke down gender barriers throughout both her 
personal life and professional career.
  During this difficult and often divisive time, I think there is a lot 
we can learn from the way Justice Ginsburg interacted with those with 
whom she disagreed, especially her good friend the late Justice Scalia. 
If you looked at a diagram outlining the ideologies of these two 
Justices, these two would be at opposite poles. They shared very little 
in common in terms of the way they approached the job of being a 
Supreme Court Justice.
  She was once asked about their close relationship, which stood in 
contrast to their vastly different views, and she said: ``You can 
disagree without being disagreeable.'' Well, we have all heard that 
before, and it is absolutely true--unfortunately, not practiced enough. 
But I think that sort of approach should be a reminder to all of us 
about the importance of treating each other with civility and respect, 
even when the person standing in front of you or on the opposite side 
of a computer screen has a vastly different world view from our own.
  Our Nation is grateful for Justice Ginsburg's 27 years on the High 
Court and her incredible contributions to our history. Sandy and I send 
our condolences to the entire Ginsburg family, as well as the countless 
colleagues and friends she earned throughout her lifetime.
  As Leader McConnell said this morning, the Senate is preparing to 
fulfill our constitutional duty of advice and consent. Throughout 
history, there has been a Supreme Court vacancy 29 times during a 
Presidential election year, and each time, the President has fulfilled 
his duty to put forth a nomination. Of those 29 election-year 
instances, 19 occurred when the President and the Senate majority were 
of the same political party. All but two of those nominees were 
confirmed.
  Our friends on the other side of the aisle have tried to compare this 
to the vacancy in 2016, but the facts were different. At that point, we 
had a President of one party in his final year in office and a Senate 
majority of another party. You would literally have to go back to 1880 
to find an example of the Senate confirming an opposite party 
President's Supreme Court nominee during an election year.
  The other difference is that President Obama was not on the ballot in 
2016, so it made sense for the American people to weigh in. Do you 
think we would still be hearing the same arguments from our friends 
across the aisle if Hillary Clinton had become President and been able 
to nominate a successor to Justice Scalia? I think not.
  Voters cast their ballots and not only elected President Trump but 
also a Senate Republican majority. In 2018, they expanded that majority 
following the confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh. If the American people 
had elected a Democratic President and a Democratic Senate majority, I 
have no doubt that Senator Schumer would act on that nomination as 
well.
  Just as the Senate has always done, we will thoroughly review the 
qualifications and experience of whomever the President nominates. We 
should not rush that process. It should be conducted carefully and 
consistently with how the Senate has previously handled Supreme Court 
nominations. When that process is complete, the Senate will vote on 
that nominee sometime this year.
  In some cases, the confirmation process has moved quickly. In the 
case of Justice Ginsburg, she was confirmed in only 42 days. In others, 
the process has taken longer and been significantly more contentious.
  I hope our colleagues on the other side of the aisle will try to 
restrain themselves from repeating the smear campaign that took place 
during Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation hearing, including the Judiciary 
Committee hearing. I hope they will refrain from making threats, like 
threats of packing the

[[Page S5725]]

Court in the future, which Justice Ginsburg herself opposed and warned 
would make the Court partisan, because if Democrats decide to add 
additional members to the U.S. Supreme Court when they are in power, 
then the pressure will be irresistible for Republicans to add other 
Justices to the Court, and it would look--and it would be clearly a 
partisan institution rather than an impartial judge of the law and the 
facts.
  The President has every right to put forth a nomination, and we have 
an obligation to give him or her due consideration under our advice and 
consent responsibilities. As always, we will be thorough, and I hope, 
unlike last time, we can be civil and treat all with respect.
  I am prepared to fulfill my responsibilities as a Member of this body 
and of the Judiciary Committee, and I hope our colleagues on both sides 
are prepared to do the same thing.