[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 65 (Thursday, April 15, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1966-S1967]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Motion to Discharge
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, my friend and colleague from Utah is not
the first to come to the floor on the Republican side and raise
questions about committee procedure that led to Vanita Gupta being
considered today before the U.S. Senate.
They say it is unheard of, unthinkable, unimaginable, unfathomable
that the Senate committee rules were not carefully followed and that
their attempt at a filibuster was in some way diverted.
I would ask unanimous consent to have printed into the Record a memo
entitled ``Senate Judiciary Committee Rule Violations by [Senate
Judiciary Committee] Chairs Graham, Grassley, and Hatch.'
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
Senate Judiciary Committee Rule Violations by Chairs Graham, Grassley,
and Hatch
Chairman Graham Rule Violations
Graham (116th Cong.)
[[Page S1967]]
a. Violation: Rule III
i. Date: July 25, 2019
ii. Summary: Chairman Graham's Secure and Protect Act was
on the agenda. Then-Ranking Member Feinstein was the only
Democrat in attendance. Graham stated that he would deem the
bill held over at the following week's markup. This
constituted ``conducting business'' under the Committee's
rules, despite the lack of a quorum.
iii. Source: https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/07/
25/2019/executive-business-meeting
2. Graham (116th Cong.)
a. Violation: Rule I; Rule IV; Rule V
i. Date: August 1, 2019
ii. Summary: At an August 1, 2019, markup, Chairman Graham
forced a vote on his Secure and Protect Act despite a request
to hold over the bill. Graham ignored Democratic requests to
hold the bill over; called a vote--setting a time certain for
final passage of the bill--without first allowing any
Democratic members to speak; and did not allow any amendments
to be offered.
iii. Source: https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/08/
01/2019/executive-business-meeting
3. Graham (116th Cong.)
a. Violation: Rule III; Rule IV
i. Date: October 15, 2020
ii. Summary: Chairman Graham held a markup during which
Committee Republicans held over Amy Coney Barrett's
nomination to the Supreme Court. Chairman Graham also called
a vote to vote on Barrett's nomination at a time certain the
following week. However, Barrett's hearing had not yet
concluded by this point--the witness panels were held in the
afternoon on October 15, 2020, after the markup vote.
Committee Democrats objected to holding this markup before
the hearing concluded, and Senator Durbin--the only Democrat
in attendance--moved to adjourn the markup. Graham overrode
Durbin's motion on a roll call vote in violation of the
Committee's quorum rule.
iii. Source: https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/
nomination-of-the-honorable-amy-coney-barrett-to-be-an-
associate-justice-of-the-supreme-court-of-the-united-states-
day-4
Durbin Comments: https://twitter.com/SenatorDurbin/status/
1316751184468865025?ref_src=t wsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp
%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E131675118446 8865025% 7Ctwgr%5E%
7Ctwcon%5Es 1_&ref_url=https%3A %2F%2Fw
ww.commondreams.org%2Fnews%2F2020%2F 10%2F 15%2Funpreceden
ted-lindsey-graham-openly-violates-committee-rules-schedule-
vote-barrett
4. Graham (116th Cong.)
a. Violation: Rule III
i. Date: October 22, 2020
ii. Summary: Chairman Graham broke the Committee's business
quorum rule, which states that nine Members of the Committee,
including at least two Members of the minority, must be
present to transact business. No Committee Democrats attended
this markup, at which Amy Coney Barrett's nomination was
voted out of Committee. Chairman Graham ignored this rule,
and Committee Republicans voted 12-0 to advance Barrett along
with the other nominees on the agenda that day.
iii. Source: https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/1 0/
22/2020/executive-business-meeting
Chairman Grassley Rule Violations
1. Grassley (115th Cong.)
a. Violation: Rule IV
i. Date: September 13, 2018
ii. Summary: Then-Chairman Grassley violated Rule IV by
passing a motion to cut off debate on Brett Kavanaugh's
nomination without an affirmative vote from one member of the
minority. At this markup, the Judiciary Committee held over
Brett Kavanaugh's nomination. Numerous other items were on
the agenda that day, most notably a motion from thenChairman
Grassley to set a precise time at which the committee would
vote on Kavanaugh's nomination the following week. Senators
Leahy and Durbin argued that Grassley's motion violated Rule
IV by cutting off debate without the consent of any member of
the minority. Senator Durbin read Rule IV aloud and then
summarized: ``The point is, you need 11 votes and one member
of the minority to stop debate on any matter, let alone a
nomination to the Supreme Court.'' Grassley responded, ``The
answer to your question is no we don't, and we've checked
with the Senate Parliamentarian.'' Grassley asserted that
Chairman Hatch had done the same thing in 2003, setting a
precedent that he was following.
Other items on the agenda that day included: six motions to
subpoena various documents related to Kavanaugh' s record; 21
lower court judicial nominees; a nominee to be a U.S.
Attorney; a nominee to be a U.S. Marshal; a nominee to be
Director of National Drug Control Policy; and five
legislative bills.
iii. Source: Video of the markup, from approximately minute
marker 00:44:48 to 00:48:15: https://
www.judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/09/13/2018/executive-
business-meeting
Chairman Hatch Rule Violations
1. Hatch (108th Cong.)
a. Violation: Rule IV
i. Date: February 27, 2003
ii. Summary: At a markup, Chairman Hatch ignored Rule IV by
cutting short Committee debate on the nominations of John
Roberts (D.C. Cir.) and Deborah Cook (6th Cir.). Pursuant to
Rule IV, then-Ranking Member Leahy asked for a vote before
Hatch ended debate, but Hatch refused, directing the clerk to
call the roll and noting that ``[t]he Chairman's prerogative
is to determine that we can go ahead to a vote'' and that
Rule IV ``does not apply to executive nominations.''
iii. February 27, 2003 Executive Business Meeting Record,
on file with the Senate Judiciary Committee Library
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota is recognized.