[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 166 (Thursday, September 24, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5845-S5846]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                       Supreme Court Nominations

  Madam President, in 2016, Leader McConnell and Senate Republicans 
held a Supreme Court vacancy open for nearly a year on the supposed 
principle that ``the American people should have a voice in [selecting] 
their next Supreme Court Justice.''
  Now, 41 days before a national election in which we might have a new 
President, Leader McConnell cannot even mention his supposed principle. 
In another speech on the floor today, he never mentioned it--never 
mentioned it. All the sophistry and diversionary arguments that are 
getting more and more like Trump don't undo the fact he totally 
reversed himself, and the American people know it, and the overwhelming 
majority of Americans want us to wait until a new President is elected 
before we choose a Supreme Court Justice.
  Yesterday, the Presiding Officer confirmed that the Senate has 
never--never--confirmed a Supreme Court nominee this close to the 
election. Again, all the history, all the obfuscation, all the relevant 
facts don't deny it. Yesterday, the Presiding Officer of the Senate--a 
neutral figure who happened to be a Republican--confirmed that the 
Senate has never confirmed a Supreme Court nominee this close to the 
election. We hear a lot of talking points from the other side, some 
twisted readings of precedent. But facing a simple question--Has there 
been a Senate precedent confirming a Justice this close to an election 
between July and election day?--the Presiding Officer confirmed that 
``no such precedent exists.''
  Leader McConnell and the Republican majority are not following their 
supposed principle, and they are not following precedent. This is 
nothing more than an exercise in brute force.
  It may very well destroy the already waning sense of comity and 
collegiality in the Senate, once hallmarks of this great Chamber. It 
may have done an end to it, unfortunately and sadly. And for what? Why 
do we go to such great lengths to ram through a Justice mere weeks 
before an election, making a complete mockery of their previous 
position? Because this is the only way for Republicans to achieve their 
radical rightwing agenda, which the public will abhor. Unable to get 
their legislative agenda passed through Congress, they have to rely on 
the courts to erode, bit by bit, the rights the American people now 
enjoy.
  Republicans would say: That is not true. They are hysterical. They 
are just speculating, trying to scare voters.
  But this is what the President has said. He wants to nominate a 
Justice who will ``terminate'' the Affordable Care Act. His 
administration is suing in court, right now, to invalidate the law--a 
case that will be heard 1 week after the election, a case that could 
rip away healthcare from tens of millions of Americans in the middle of 
a pandemic, and Leader McConnell says this is ``hysterical.'' Go tell a 
mother or father whose son or daughter has

[[Page S5846]]

cancer and they can't get insurance because they no longer have the 
protection that it is hysterical. Shame.
  This is real stuff, and this is not speculation. There is a suit 
before the Supreme Court right now on this issue.
  Speculation? Was it not President Trump who said that women should be 
punished for having an abortion? Was it not the Republican majority who 
confirmed the majority of judges to the Federal bench with disturbing 
views on a woman's right to choose? Was it not the Republican leader 
who has admitted that he hopes to ``pick away'' at women's rights 
through the courts?
  What about workers' rights? What about voting rights? The Supreme 
Court, even with Justice Ginsburg, slowly eroded workers' rights in the 
Janus case and voter rights in the Shelby County case, opening the door 
for a flood of voter suppression efforts.
  Imagine--just imagine, America--what another rightwing Justice, a 
solid 6-to-3 majority would mean for a Court that has already eroded 
your rights
  This is not speculation. Oh, no. This is about every right and 
freedom that Americans hold dear. It is no wonder that President Trump 
and Senate Republicans are afraid to test this in an election and are 
so eager to rush this nomination through.