[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 178 (Monday, October 19, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6305-S6306]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                    Nomination of Amy Coney Barrett

  Mr. President, on SCOTUS, yesterday, on a 4-to-4 split ruling, the 
Supreme Court declined to hear a case that could have prevented the 
State of Pennsylvania from counting all the votes in the November 
election. It was an important decision for democracy but also a 
reminder of what is truly at stake in a Supreme Court vacancy left by 
Justice Ginsburg. One more vote provided by a hard-right, Trump-
nominated Justice could be the difference between voting rights and 
voting suppression.
  Over the past several years, closely divided decisions of the Supreme 
Court have meant the difference between having the ability to marry the 
person you love or not; the ability to have your right to vote 
protected or not; the ability to make personal choices about your own 
healthcare or not.
  The American people should know exactly what is at stake in the 
nomination of Judge Barrett to the Supreme Court--nothing less than 
their fundamental rights as Americans. So, frankly, it was an insult to 
the intelligence of the American people for Judge Barrett to spend the 
entire Judiciary Committee hearing dodging every single question of 
substance, including questions as to whether voter intimidation is 
illegal or whether the President could unilaterally delay the 
election--to not be able to answer whether the President could 
unilaterally delay the election? Whoa.
  Just think about what it means for a sitting judge to refuse to 
answer a question about voter intimidation--voting, the wellspring of 
our democracy--because she thinks it is too controversial. Think about 
what it means for a sitting judge to refuse to answer a question about 
the peaceful transfer of power--the bedrock of our democracy--because 
it might upset her patron, President Trump. It is absurd. No one is 
buying it.
  Every election season, Republicans promise to nominate judges who 
will tear down our healthcare and roll back the clock on women's 
rights. The far right promises to deliver judges who will dismantle the 
environmental regulations that keep our air and water clean and protect 
our planet from runaway global warming. President Trump has made the 
same promises out loud many times. But as soon as someone is nominated 
to be a Justice, all of a sudden that person becomes a legal vacuum, a 
cipher, totally devoid of ideas, views, or opinions, even on the 
questions of basic legal, uncontroversial fact.
  The truth is, Judge Barrett does have, unfortunately, hard-right 
views and opinions on these issues. Her views are so far away from the 
American people that none of them could pass in this Senate--even 
though it is controlled by Republicans--and certainly not in the House.
  She has harshly criticized decisions to uphold the Affordable Care 
Act. She has been closely affiliated with organizations that advocate 
for the elimination of a woman's right to choose. She has drafted 
judicial opinions on the issue of gun safety that put her far to the 
right of even Justice Scalia.
  That is why, in the hearings last week, the president for the 
Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law said: ``Judge Barrett's 
views are far outside the mainstream.'' That is why yesterday the 
plaintiffs in the decisions that resulted in marriage equality--
Obergefell and Hodges--said they oppose Judge Barrett for the Supreme 
Court because she will endanger those hard-won rights.
  So the idea that Judge Barrett is some sort of neutral arbiter who 
will only interpret the law as it is written is just not believable. 
She will make hugely impactful decisions that will alter the fabric of 
American society, starting with what will be one of her very first 
cases--a lawsuit pushed by President Trump and Republicans to

[[Page S6306]]

rip away healthcare from millions of Americans.
  God save us.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic whip.