[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 7, 2023)]
[Senate]
[Page S666]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Federal Judiciary
Mr. President, on another but somewhat related matter, over the last
several years, Washington Democrats have waged war on our independent
Federal judiciary.
Three years ago, the majority leader of the Senate, the Senator from
New York, joined an abortion rally outside the Supreme Court, where he
made deeply disturbing comments about two sitting Associate Justices on
the Supreme Court of the United States. He said:
I want to tell you, Gorsuch; I want to tell you, Kavanaugh:
You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price.
You won't know what hit you if you go forward with these
awful decisions.
That is a quote.
Well, the majority leader certainly did not mince words. The top
Democrat in the U.S. Senate threatened two sitting Supreme Court
Justices by name based on a case they were considering.
In the year since, the radical left has picked up the sword and
carried on the fight. Last summer, as the Supreme Court considered a
case on abortion rights, a radical organization released the home
addresses of several Supreme Court Justices, and they encouraged
protesters to show up at the Justices' private homes to harass and
intimidate. It was a disgusting invasion of privacy and a massive
security risk, which sadly was met with nothing more than a shrug by
many of our Democratic colleagues.
Attorney General Garland himself had an opportunity to address this
abhorrent conduct in the Judiciary Committee last week, and he
confirmed that, to date, no prosecutions have been brought under a
Federal statute making what these protesters did a crime--seeking to
intimidate sitting Justices and cause them to change their opinion on
legal matters that they were charged with. No prosecutions.
With no real repercussions for such gross behavior, the far left has
now expanded its attack to include other Federal judges.
Last month, the liberal news site Vox published a story railing
against what it described as ``Trump's worst judges,'' all of whom
serve on the Federal courts in my State of Texas. The author of that
piece tweeted the article that featured a photo of one of those judges,
Matthew Kacsmaryk. The author added that Judge Kacsmaryk is ``the
single worst villain in the United States of America that most people
have never heard of, and I am determined to make him a household
name.''
This blatant attack on this sitting Federal judge and on the
independent judiciary wasn't just limited to a liberal news site;
larger mainstream news sources joined in too. The Washington Post
recently published an opinion piece that argued that the only way to
``rein in Republican judges'' is to shame them. These are Federal
judges who were given life tenure following Senate confirmation for the
very purpose of making them insulated from politics so that they can
remain laser-focused on judging the law and interpreting the
Constitution and applying it to the case before them.
The Washington Post opinion piece I am referring to says:
Democratic politicians, left-leaning activist groups,
newspaper editorial boards, and other influential people and
institutions need to start relentlessly blasting Republican-
appointed judges.
A former aide to Senator Schumer, majority leader of the U.S. Senate,
who now serves as the executive director of a dark money group called
Demand Justice, shared that article on Twitter and endorsed the idea of
referring to judges by ``their party affiliation.'' Again, these are
Senate-confirmed judges who serve for life who have basically forsworn
politics. But this former aide to the Senate majority leader says: No,
you need to refer to them by their party affiliation--presumably the
party affiliation of the President who nominated them to the office.
As our country struggles to deal with hate speak online and threats
of violence against our leaders and politicians, it is hard to imagine
anything getting more dangerous than the rhetoric targeting Federal
judges and the independent Federal judiciary.
Last summer, U.S. marshals arrested a man outside of Justice
Kavanaugh's home who had traveled all the way from California with the
intention of assassinating Justice Kavanaugh. When the man was
arrested, he had in his possession a Glock 17 pistol, along with
ammunition, a knife, a hammer, a crowbar, and zip ties. He told
authorities that it was his plan to break into the house and kill
Justice Kavanaugh and then take his own life. Thank God he was caught
before anyone was harmed. But we may not be so lucky next time when
this reprehensible, irresponsible rhetoric strikes unstable individuals
and prompts them to do things that none of us, I hope, would want or
endorse.
Blatant attacks against judges and our independent judiciary must
come to an end.
Sadly, one of our Senate colleagues has joined the ranks of the angry
mob. Last month, the senior Senator from Oregon delivered an incredibly
dangerous speech here on the Senate floor advocating for the Biden
administration to ignore a potential court order from Judge Kacsmaryk's
court. To be clear, this is a U.S. Senator who said that the executive
branch should disregard the lawful order of a Federal district judge.
He wants the Constitution to be effectively ripped into shreds and
thrown out the window if the judge happens to decide a case in a way
that he doesn't approve of.
The left's attack on our independent judiciary keeps getting more and
more dangerous. It doesn't matter what case is in a Federal court or
what ruling is ultimately handed down--Senators must respect the
Constitution itself, and with that comes three coequal branches of
government.
Judicial independence is the thing that distinguishes our democracy
and our Constitution from all other countries on the planet--judicial
independence: judges who aren't afraid to call balls and strikes and
interpret the Constitution, hopefully, as written and apply the laws
that Congress passes. That judicial independence should never be
threatened. If a U.S. Senator doesn't realize that, then we have some
really, really big problems.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.
(The remarks of Mr. Cotton pertaining to the introduction of S. 691
are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills
and Joint Resolutions.'')
Mr. COTTON. I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.