[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 25 (Tuesday, February 8, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S551-S553]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                           U.S. Supreme Court

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I am sure that you, more than most Members 
of the Senate, remember our debate a few weeks ago on the Voting Rights 
Act. I remember your statement on the floor. It was powerful and really 
spoke to the truth of why we were meeting and debating this issue.
  We realize that, sadly, since the Civil War, when African Americans 
were finally given the right to vote, this has been a battle every year 
since. And yesterday, the Supreme Court decision tells us that we still 
have a battle to fight when it comes to voting rights in America.
  By a 5-to-4 vote yesterday, the Supreme Court's conservative majority 
allowed Alabama lawmakers to move forward with a congressional 
districting map that diminishes the power of Black voters in a State 
where Black Americans account for more than 25 percent of the 
population.
  You see, this case had been considered by a three-judge district 
court panel in Alabama, and they ruled in a unanimous decision that the 
map likely violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and they ruled that 
we should block that map because it would violate the right to vote of 
African Americans.

  I might say, for the record, this three-judge panel, two of the three 
judges were appointed by former President Trump, and yet they came to 
that conclusion. So the Supreme Court had a decision of whether to go 
along with this three-judge panel and stop the implementation of this 
map until they

[[Page S552]]

could have a full hearing on the subject or allow them to go forward. 
And, sadly, by a 5-to-4-vote, the Supreme Court's conservative majority 
stayed a lower court's decision, where they ruled unanimously that the 
district map was discriminatory.
  The Supreme Court did not issue a well-reasoned decision; they issued 
basically no reason. They did so on what is known as the shadow docket. 
We are seeing it more and more by this Court--no explanation, no full 
briefing, no signed opinion for the majority. What we have was a scant 
reaction by the Court.
  But I do want to note that Justice Kagan wrote that that decision by 
the Supreme Court in favor of allowing this Alabama map to go forward 
``does a disservice to the District Court, which meticulously applied 
this Court's longstanding voting-rights precedent.'' She went on to 
note that ``most of all, it does a disservice to the Black people of 
Alabama who under that precedent have had their electoral power 
diminished in violation of the law this Court once knew to buttress all 
of American democracy.''
  Yesterday's decision is the latest example of the Supreme Court 
hacking away the protections of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, one of 
the most important civil rights laws in our history--a law singularly 
responsible for decades of progress in minority representation in 
public office.
  As a result of these decisions, legal protections for voters of color 
throughout the country are being systematically dismantled by the 
Republican Party through State legislatures and, sadly, by our Federal 
courts.
  So now what do we do? Well, Congress must act. We must restore the 
Voting Rights Act to its full power and potential, and we can do that 
by enacting the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.
  This legislation would strengthen and modernize the Voting Rights 
Act's protections, including by requiring Supreme Court Justices to 
actually explain their reasoning behind their decisions when they 
overturn a lower court's decision on a voting rights case. Is that too 
much to ask, that the Supreme Court explain to the American people why 
they are overruling a lower court's decision which says Americans are 
being discriminated against when it comes to their right to vote? I 
don't think the Supreme Court is that busy that it can't tell the 
American people its logic behind these decisions.
  Every day, we are seeing the consequences of this Senate's failure 
just a few weeks ago to protect the right to vote. Mr. President, you 
and I agree; we cannot wait any longer.


                               January 6

  Mr. President, let me address a related topic: 2022 is an election 
year. We know that well. And over the next 8 months, both parties will 
have a chance to make our case to the American people for the November 
election, to engage in spirited, public debate about the issues that 
matter: the pandemic, the economy, and the challenges facing our 
country.
  But what happened last week in Salt Lake City, UT, is incredible. The 
Republican Party made its opening move in this year's election. Instead 
of offering a vision for the future of America, the Republican Party 
leaders meeting in Utah chose to attack democracy itself.
  On Friday, the Republican National Committee declared that the 
January 6, 2021, insurrection was a form of ``legitimate political 
discourse.'' This outrageous declaration, printed under the official 
letterhead of the Republican National Committee, is the saddest 
commentary on what Donald Trump and his acolytes have done to a great 
political party, the party of Abraham Lincoln.
  The violence that we personally witnessed in this Chamber on January 
6, 2021, was deadly, seditious, and un-American--far from legitimate. 
Is that what we call the worst assault on the Capitol since the War of 
1812? Was it legitimate political discourse when the violent mob beat 
police officers with metal poles and assaulted them with bear 
spray? Was it political discourse that contributed to the death of five 
police officers who confronted that mob? Was it just merely political 
discourse when a defeated, embittered former President incited that mob 
to attack this Capitol Building and do its best to overturn the results 
of a free election, which he lost? No. It was an incitement to violence 
and an attack on our democracy.

  Let's be clear: The Republican Party's whitewashing of the 
insurrection isn't just a pathetic capitulation to Donald Trump and his 
Big Lie; it is a dangerous revelation of the mindset of the leadership 
of America's Republican Party. By legitimizing the insurrection, 
Republican Party leaders are exploring the use of violence and saying 
it is perfectly acceptable, it is legitimate when it comes to the 
political goals.
  This is how democracies die.
  Last year, the intelligence community warned that ``narratives of 
fraud in the recent general election . . . will almost certainly spur 
some [domestic violent extremists] to try to engage in violence.'' That 
came from our intelligence community. This is not a hypothetical.
  Over the past year, we have seen how the Big Lie, promulgated by the 
former, defeated President of the United States, has inspired his 
supporters to commit and threaten violent acts.
  On Friday--the same day that the Republican Party declared that the 
insurrectionist mob was legitimate political discourse--a Texas man 
appeared for his first day in court. That man is facing Federal charges 
for threatening to kill public officials in the home State of the 
Presiding Officer, the State of Georgia.
  What is exactly alleged to have happened? Well, the day before the 
January 6 insurrection, this man posted a message on the website 
Craigslist calling for the murder of three election officials in 
Georgia. He wrote: ``It's our duty as American Patriots to put an end 
to the lives of these traitors and to take back our country by force. 
We can no longer wait on the corrupt law enforcement and the corrupt 
courts. If we want our country back we have to exterminate these 
people.''
  The case against this man is the first case that has been brought 
forward by the Justice Department's Election Threats Task Force, which 
the Department established last June in response to the burgeoning 
threats of violence against election officials. But it is going to be 
far from the last case, unfortunately. Right now, the Department of 
Justice is investigating dozens of similar cases.
  And less than 1 week after charging this Texas defendant, the 
Department also charged a man in Nevada who told an election worker 
that she was going to ``die'' because she played a part in ``stealing'' 
the 2020 election from Donald Trump. Thankfully, that election worker 
was not physically harmed, but she was shaken and disturbed by that 
declaration.
  She is not alone. Last April, the Brennan Center published a report 
finding that nearly one in five election officials in America had 
received threats because of their roles in the 2020 election. One in 
three of these election officials says they worry for their safety 
because of the rising tide of political violence. Political violence. 
And the Republican National Committee describes it as ``legitimate 
political discourse.''
  Is this the cost of participating in a democracy in Mr. Trump's 
vision of America? Since the 2020 election, the former President and 
his supporters have latched on to the Big Lie to discredit American 
democracy and the decision of American voters and to go after those who 
work in it, like election workers.
  But this is not the first time a malicious lie has been used to 
foment distrust, disdain, and even hatred for America's public 
servants. It was 72 years ago this week that Wisconsin Senator Joseph 
McCarthy delivered his infamous ``Enemies from Within'' speech in 
Wheeling, WV. In that speech, Senator McCarthy pulled a sheet of paper 
out of his pocket, held it up to the crowd, and claimed he had a list 
of more than 50 names of Communist agents who had infiltrated our 
government. These scurrilous accusations by Senator McCarthy made 
headlines and provoked nationwide hysteria. Rumors abounded about card-
carrying Communists working within our government.
  And over the next 4 years, Senator McCarthy led a personal witch hunt

[[Page S553]]

against public servants, journalists, members of the military, and 
average citizens. He destroyed lives in the process. But he never 
revealed his list of 57 names or any other credible evidence for his 
claims. Nonetheless, Senator Joe McCarthy discredited and defamed 
anyone standing in his way. He would accuse his opponents of being 
Communists or Communist sympathizers if they publicly disagreed with 
him.
  With rare and notable exceptions--and one of them Senator Margaret 
Chase Smith, Republican Senator of Maine, and a few others--no one had 
the courage to question Joe McCarthy or challenge his wild allegations. 
Politicians were too afraid that he would turn on them next, so they 
remained quiet.

  And in the absence of opposition, he assumed even greater power--
until 1954, when some courageous members of Senator McCarthy's own 
political party, the Republican Party, joined together with the 
Democrats in the Senate. They voted to condemn Senator McCarthy and the 
lies that had fueled his witch hunt. They stood in a bipartisan 
majority to do it. With that vote, Senator Joseph McCarthy's reign of 
terror was brought to an end. The press began to ignore him, and the 
public had had their fill.
  What will it take for our Republican colleagues today to say that 
they are done with the Big Lie of Trumpism? What will it take for them 
to reject it and renounce the normalization of political violence? What 
will it take for Republicans to admit that January 6 was a deadly 
insurrection, not a ``legitimate political discourse''?
  Americans of conscience of both political parties and Independents as 
well need to unite in support of the truth. That doesn't mean we are 
going to agree on every issue. On the contrary, real debate is the 
lifeblood of our democracy. But we have to work from a shared set of 
facts and reality--like the fact that President Biden actually won the 
2020 election and there was no evidence of widespread voter fraud.
  I want to commend my Republican colleagues who have been willing to 
speak the truth in the last few days. I know it can't be easy.
  Over the weekend, Senator Mitt Romney, Senator Bill Cassidy, and 
Senator Lisa Murkowski spoke out against the Republican National 
Committee's decision to censure Congresswoman Liz Cheney and 
Congressman Adam Kinzinger of Illinois for committing the unforgivable 
sin of investigating the violent assault against American democracy. 
Unfortunately, they are a small but courageous minority. The vast 
majority of my Republican colleagues remain silent while their party 
leaders declare January 6 legitimate.
  And on Friday, former Vice President Pence publicly stated: 
``President Trump is wrong . . . Under the Constitution, I had no right 
to change the outcome of our election.''
  That simple, declarative statement of truth--that the Vice President 
cannot singlehandedly overrule the will of the American people--is 
welcomed, but the fact that it drew outrage from former President Trump 
and his supporters is a sad reflection on the reality of today's 
Republican Party.
  If the events leading up to January 6 taught us anything, it is that 
aspiring authoritarians like Donald Trump will toss aside longstanding 
laws and values to cling to power. That is why for the past several 
months, a bipartisan group of Senators have been discussing a proposal 
to modernize the Electoral Count Act, an obscure law that was at the 
heart of former President Trump's efforts to overturn the election. I 
have been working on this effort on our side with Senators King and 
Klobuchar, and there is a bipartisan effort, on the same matter, taking 
place as well.
  By updating the Electoral Count Act, we can make clear that the Vice 
President does not have the power to reject a State's lawfully 
appointed electors and overturn the results of an election. That is 
important, and I believe it is a promising sign that Democrats and 
Republicans are going to join together in discussion of finally 
rewriting this ancient law.
  But I also want to be honest about the scope of threats facing our 
American democracy. At a moment when too many Republican Party leaders 
are legitimizing the January 6 insurrection and Republican State 
legislators are erecting new barriers to the ballot box, particularly 
for African Americans, we must have the courage to restore the Voting 
Rights Act. And we need to come together across party lines to defend 
our democracy, condemn violence, and to live by the rule of law, not 
the rule of the mob.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Padilla). The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.