[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 184 (Sunday, October 25, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Page S6502]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MORNING BUSINESS
______
NOMINATION OF AMY CONEY BARRETT
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, when the Senate considers nominees to the
U.S. Supreme Court, it is particularly important that we act fairly and
consistently, using the same set of rules, no matter which political
party is in power.
When President Obama nominated Judge Garland 8 months before the 2016
Presidential election, I met with him and maintained that he was
entitled to a hearing. Others argued that the winner of that year's
Presidential election should be allowed to choose the nominee, and that
is what happened. My views did not prevail, and the standard was
established that a nominee to the Court would not be voted on prior to
the election in a Presidential election year. This year, a vacancy has
also occurred, notably much closer to the election.
Prior to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death, I stated that, should a
vacancy on the Supreme Court arise, the Senate should follow the
precedent set 4 years ago and not vote on a nominee prior to the
Presidential election. Since her passing, I have reiterated that in
fairness to the American people--who will either be reelecting the
President or selecting a new one--the decision on the nominee to fill
the Supreme Court vacancy should be made by whoever is elected on
November 3.
Because this vote is occurring prior to the election, I will vote
against the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett. To be clear, my vote
does not reflect any conclusion that I have reached about Judge
Barrett's qualifications to serve on the Supreme Court. What I have
concentrated on is being fair and consistent, and I do not think it is
fair nor consistent to have a Senate confirmation vote prior to the
election.
____________________