[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 165 (Wednesday, September 23, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5805-S5806]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                       Supreme Court Nominations

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today in honor of Justice Ruth 
Bader Ginsburg. Justice Ginsburg was a role model for many and a 
champion for all, and I was one of those.
  I would like to speak about what is at stake for the American public 
with this vacancy on the Court and why whoever is elected President in 
November should be the one who decides to fill this seat.
  Justice Ginsburg was, simply put, a phenomenal lawyer and jurist. She 
was small, and she was mighty. As a civil rights lawyer, she won key 
cases that established a woman's constitutional right to equal 
treatment and confirmed the principle of equal rights for all. As a 
jurist, she further cemented these key principles into law. She brought 
them up, and she made them exist forever.
  As a person, she brought smiles to our faces, and now she really does 
bring tears.
  Although small in stature, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a formidable 
advocate, strategist, and champion. I believe she will continue to 
serve as a major role model for generations of women, both young and 
old, for whom she paved the way, and I am one of those. We are in her 
debt today, and generations to come will be in her debt as well.
  Justice Ginsburg is also important to me personally. Her confirmation 
hearing was the first I participated in as a newly elected Senator and 
as the first woman to sit on the Judiciary Committee in 1993. It was a 
long time ago.
  As I said before the committee in 1993, it was not until I began 
preparing for Justice Ginsburg's confirmation that I learned how she 
built the foundation for women's rights. Simply put, it was this: 
Before becoming a judge on the DC Circuit, Justice Ginsburg was the 
director of the ACLU's Women's Rights Project, where she won five cases 
before the Supreme Court. Amazing--five cases before people believed 
women had these rights. In one of these cases, Craig v. Boren, the 
Supreme Court held for the first time that the equal protection clause 
of the 14th Amendment applied to women. Can you believe it--actually 
applied to women. This is a very big addition because this really 
canceled out inequality.
  In other words, it is because of Justice Ginsburg's advocacy as a 
lawyer that the government cannot discriminate against women on the 
basis of sex. For the female side of this room, this was really a major 
person whose works enabled us to run for this esteemed body and be part 
of it.
  It is no surprise, then, that Justice Ginsburg remained a fierce 
defender of women from the bench.
  She consistently reaffirmed a woman's right to choose and upheld Roe 
v. Wade against dozens of attacks.
  She invalidated the men's-only policy at the Virginia Military 
Institute. Explaining that decision at a visit to VMI, Justice Ginsburg 
told cadets that she knew it ``would make V.M.I. a better place.''
  In 2007, she vehemently dissented in a case where the Court's 
majority held that a woman--namely, one Lilly Ledbetter, with whom we 
have become familiar--was time-barred from suing

[[Page S5806]]

her employer for discrimination when she finally learned that her male 
colleagues had been paid more than her for several years. Justice 
Ginsburg's dissent in this case became the basis for the Lilly 
Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which we passed in 2009, making it possible to 
bring lawsuits when gender-based pay discrimination is actually 
uncovered.
  As a testament to the legal giant she was, Justice Ginsburg's 
accomplishments on behalf of women are just one part of her legacy, and 
that legacy I strongly believe is going to be honored more and more in 
the years to come. She died last Friday, just 46 days before the 2020 
Presidential election.
  Importantly, under a Republican standard adopted in 2016, the Senate 
should not consider a Supreme Court nomination until after the 
inauguration of the next President, whoever that may be. Until 
recently, Republicans have been intent on their own standard, which 
they used to block consideration of Merrick Garland, President Obama's 
nominee, to fill Justice Scalia's seat on the Court. Now, can we have 
one set of rules for Democratic Presidents and another for Republican 
ones? I think not. To allow otherwise undermines not only our faith in 
Congress but also the faith of people that we are going to stick by 
what we do and be impartial in the judicial system. Now, just 41 days 
before the election, Senate Republicans must abide by their own 
standard.
  What is at stake? There is a great deal of attention this week as to 
whom the President might select. The simple truth, however, is this: No 
matter whom President Trump nominates, fundamental rights and 
protections must be considered because they become at risk if the 
nominee doesn't respond positively and effectively to these.
  For example, in November, the Court will hear a renewed legal 
challenge--brought by the Trump administration--to the Affordable Care 
Act. Given President Trump's promise to appoint a Justice who would 
strike down the Affordable Care Act, healthcare access and protections 
for the nearly 130 million nonelderly Americans with preexisting 
conditions are really in certain peril, and we have every reason for 
serious consideration and opposition if this protection is not 
continued.
  It is unbelievable that during a pandemic that has already killed 
more than 200,000 Americans, this President and his allies are rushing 
a nomination that could leave up to 30 million Americans without 
healthcare. I hope that doesn't happen.
  The next Justice will also decide cases concerning women's 
reproductive rights, voting rights, access to justice, environmental 
protections, the rights of LGBT Americans, and the rights of American 
workers. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a champion for all these 
rights and protections. She is very hard to replace, and it is 
important to think of those rights that need continued protection when 
the replacement is made by the President.

  We cannot allow the Senate and the President to jam through a nominee 
who will undo this legacy, which is so important to every American 
because every American has that legacy today, firm, and uses it 
virtually every day of their life.
  We are ready to fight, and we will do everything in our power to 
safeguard these hard-won rights and protections. It is really 
important. Of all the nominations I have sat as a fairly long-term 
member--since 1993--of the Judiciary Committee, these protections and 
rights are really all important and must be protected. They will be 
what we are looking at when the nominee comes to the Senate.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.