[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 101 (Thursday, June 12, 2025)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3361-S3364]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                               Judiciary

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, the first few months of this 
administration, we witnessed unprecedented, unacceptable attacks on the 
Federal judiciary by President Trump and his allies.
  In one particularly egregious example, President Trump demanded the 
impeachment of a Federal judge who ruled against the administration, 
and President Trump said this man was ``a Radical Left Lunatic, a 
troublemaker and agitator.'' That is a direct, specific quote from the 
President of the United States about a sitting Federal judge.
  On Memorial Day, President Trump referred to members of the bench as 
``USA HATING JUDGES'' and ``MONSTERS WHO WANT OUR COUNTRY TO GO TO 
HELL.'' That is a direct quote from the President of the United States 
about sitting Federal judges.
  This kind of reckless, inflammatory language is part of the 
President's ongoing attempt to intimidate the Federal judiciary. We are 
supposed to take this as acceptable conduct? It should be condemned by 
all political leaders, regardless of your political party. But my 
Republican colleagues have said nothing in response to these attacks on 
Federal judges. It is the ``silence of the lambs.''
  In April, one of my Republican colleagues had the courage to say out 
loud why Republicans are not speaking up. As she put it, ``We are all 
afraid.''
  Their fear is simply emboldening this President. Last month, 
President Trump was asked if he needs to uphold the Constitution. In 
response, he said:

       I don't know.

  It was shocking to hear that response from the President--even this 
President--and it demonstrates just how little regard he has for our 
fundamental rights and our Constitution. Yet my Republican colleagues 
are silent.

[[Page S3362]]

  Their unwillingness to speak truth to power calls to mind a line from 
``A Man for All Seasons":

       When statesmen foresake their own private conscience for 
     the sake of their public duties, they lead their country by a 
     short route to chaos.

  The American people have already seen and suffered through the chaos 
that has come from the silence of our elected officials. So long as 
they fail to speak up, the chaos and lawlessness will continue.
  It is not only President Trump who is intimidating judges and 
attacking judicial independence; House Republicans are acting as 
accomplices, filing Articles of Impeachment against six Federal judges 
simply because they ruled against President Trump.
  House Republicans have continued their attack on the judiciary with 
their reconciliation bill they passed last month. Buried in this 1,000-
page bill is a provision that would strip Federal courts of their 
ability to enforce a contempt citation when a party fails to comply 
with certain types of injunctions. The contempt power is integral to 
the authority of the Federal courts. Without the contempt power, 
parties could simply disregard court orders.
  Currently, Trump administration officials know that if they violate 
court orders, they can be held in contempt and subject to fines or even 
jail time. But President Trump doesn't want the courts or anyone else 
to stand in his way, and that led House Republicans to advance a 
provision prohibiting courts from enforcing some contempt citations. 
This would let President Trump pursue his agenda without any concern of 
being held accountable in the courts, and it would prevent courts from 
enforcing contempt citations in all manner of cases, whether the 
injunction issues today, tomorrow, or even 10 years ago.
  Maybe House Republicans thought no one would notice this provision. 
Maybe they thought nobody would have the nerve to oppose the President. 
But I can tell you, the Senate Democrats read the provision. We noticed 
it. We spoke out against it all week, and we will do everything in our 
power to ensure it does not become law.
  The attacks on the judiciary not only threaten our Constitution, they 
threaten the judges and their families themselves. Recent reporting has 
revealed a dramatic spike in threats against judges. Between the 
beginning of March and the end of May, 197 Federal judges were 
threatened. Judges and their families have received threats in the form 
of anonymous pizza deliveries to their homes. These deliveries are 
meant to show that the perpetrator knows exactly where the judges and 
their families live. So far, more than 100 pizzas have been delivered 
to more than a dozen judges and their relatives.
  It is not a laughing matter. At least 20 of these deliveries were 
made using the name of Judge Esther Salas's son Daniel Anderl, who was 
murdered--murdered--at his family's home by a former litigant. Even 
Justice Amy Coney Barrett's family has been reportedly receiving 
unsolicited pizza deliveries.
  Whether I agree with these judges when it comes to their philosophy 
is beside the point. This is frightening. Judge Salas herself has 
characterized the deliveries as ``psychological warfare'' that sends 
the message: ``Do you want to end up like Judge Salas? ``Do you want to 
end up like Daniel?''
  These instances are sickening. They threaten not only judges and 
their families but judicial independence and the rule of law. They must 
be investigated, and they must be stopped.
  Over a month ago, as ranking member of the Senate Judiciary 
Committee, I sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI 
Director Kash Patel. I asked them to investigate the deliveries and 
other threats against Federal judges and provide information on steps 
they have taken to protect these judges and their families. I have yet 
to receive a response.
  On Tuesday, I sent another letter urging them once again to 
investigate these threats against judges and highlighting the need for 
action. The Federal judiciary and our government can wait no longer.
  Last week, I met with three Federal judges to discuss judicial 
security. Judge Salas was among them. Her experience is a reminder how 
important judicial security is and how much is at stake. Our meeting 
also served as a reminder of how our judges have shown tremendous 
courage in the face of these ongoing threats.
  We should all be grateful for their public service and their 
willingness to don black robes and act without fear or favor. We should 
also be grateful for law enforcement officials protecting our judges. 
But it is not enough to merely acknowledge and appreciate the courage 
and dedication of our judges and law enforcement.
  The Justice Department and the FBI must investigate and must act now. 
The President and his allies must stop these attempts to intimidate a 
coequal branch of government, and congressional Republicans need to 
step up publicly and stand behind these judges.
  In the meantime, I will continue to stand up for the judiciary and 
highlight the need to protect our judges, and I will continue to stand 
against those who threaten our judges and the rule of law, whether from 
the right or the left. I hope my Republican colleagues will find their 
voices and join me.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


 Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act

  Mr. MERKLEY. Colleagues, we are at an extraordinary time when there 
is a ``Government For Sale'' sign on the White House lawn. We have 
never seen this in the history of the United States of America.
  President Trump is engaged in an extraordinary level of corruption. 
Let me just provide two examples.
  As President, he said to the world: Come and buy my meme coin, my 
Trump coin, and you will be invited to a very special dinner to have 
access to me. And the 220 people who buy the most coins over a 
multimonth period, hold onto them. You will be invited.
  This dinner was held 2 weeks ago, and 220 people spent an estimated 
$150 million in order to attend that dinner.
  A meme coin is basically a nothingburger. What is it? It is not 
something you can do international transactions on. It is nothing you 
can print out and put on your wall. It is, simply, kind of a hobby 
coin.
  People didn't pay $150 million for a digital hobby coin. They paid it 
because the President said: This will give you access to me and my 
team. And he provided that access. And he said: The top 25 buyers of 
this coin will get something extra special, some extra special tour. 
Initially, it was said it would be of the White House. Later, it was 
not clear if it would be at the White House. In fact, there is no 
transparency.
  We do not have a list of who these 220 people are or what they paid. 
But we do know one of these individuals; that is the individual Javier 
Selgas. He is the CEO of Freight Technologies. He said: We bought $2 
million of the Trump meme coin, and we are planning to buy $20 million 
of the Trump coin in order to influence the policy of how freight is 
treated between Mexico and the United States of America.
  He was very clear about it: We are buying access, and we are buying 
influence.
  What happens with that money? It simply goes into Trump's pocket. Is 
he producing an item of any value that he is selling? No. He is selling 
access and influence. So that is one example.
  Then, he has another crypto enterprise in which he is inviting folks 
to use a digital coin, a different type of digital coin called a 
stablecoin; use it in international transactions: Give me your dollars. 
I will invest your dollars. I get to keep all the proceeds from those 
investments, and you can use my digital coin called USD1 for 
international business transactions.
  Why would you use this coin instead of just using the dollars 
themselves? To make special affection on behalf of the President of the 
United States of America.
  There is a company, MGX. MGX is tied to the Government of the United 
Arab Emirates. MGX said: ``We will buy $2 billion of your coins.''
  That makes the $2 million from Freight Technologies or the $20 
million

[[Page S3363]]

they were planning pretty small chump change because now you have a 
company saying we will buy $2 billion of your coins.
  And what did they say they wanted? They said they wanted advanced AI 
chips, artificial intelligence chips. They wanted a world-leading AI 
center to be built in the United Arab Emirates.
  Now, technically, it would be done through MGX. But who is the chair 
of MGX? The national security advisor for the Government of UAE.
  So what transpired is UAE says: We want this AI center.
  MGX, associated with the government, says: We will buy $2 billion of 
your digital coins.
  And the President goes to the Middle East and says: Do you know what, 
I support establishing an advanced AI center, and we will partner with 
it in Abu Dhabi.
  Abu Dhabi is one of the Emirates of UAE.
  So here we have Freight Technologies on one type of coin saying we 
are buying these coins to get influence. Now you have MGX and UAE 
buying $2 billion of coins in order to get influence. This is the U.S. 
Government for sale in a way we have never seen. This is the Mount 
Everest of corruption.
  And right at this moment, the Senate is debating a cryptocurrency 
bill. Isn't this the moment we should debate whether or not Federal 
elected officials--ourselves, the Vice President, the President, 
members of the Cabinet--should be offering for sale our personal coins 
in order for people to give us money? Because, really, it is just like 
somebody handing us a sack of money. That is what this is like.
  Forbes magazine has now estimated that within the first few months of 
the Trump administration, the Trump family has built value in their 
crypto industry of $1 billion. If he had not been elected, it would be 
worth nothing. But because he is pumping it as President, both the meme 
coin and USD1 the stablecoin, the world is saying: If we want 
influence, we have to buy these coins. Just like in his first 
administration, folks said: If we want influence, we have to stay at 
his properties. We have to book his hotel rooms. We have to hold our 
events at his special locations, be it his golf courses or his hotel 
conference centers.
  But those hotel rooms or booking conference centers in his first term 
are nothing on the order of magnitude of selling these cryptocurrency 
coins.
  That $2 billion that Trump holds, his family holds, even if 4 percent 
is invested, that is $80 million a year. And with the passage of this 
bill, if we do not put an anti-corruption measure into this bill, the 
world will be saying: Just as we rented his hotel rooms when we do an 
international business transaction, we have to use USD1.
  That is why we should be debating amendments on this bill. We have a 
responsibility to address the concerns of the people of the United 
States of America.
  And from our very beginning--from the very beginning--on through the 
last now 250 years, we have been concerned about corruption and having 
our government end up for sale. If we turn the clock back to our 
Founders, Hamilton said we put an emoluments clause in our Constitution 
so our elected leaders could not be bribed:
  [M]any mortifying examples of the prevalence of foreign corruption in 
republican governments.
  It was to counter that foreign corruption that he had already 
witnessed in republican governments. So in establishing our Republic, 
with our separation of powers, with our checks and balances, with our 
vision of government by and for the people, you can't allow the elected 
leaders to take bribes or to take, if you will, tribute money to 
influence.
  People say: Well, it is not a bribe if it is not tied to a specific 
act. Obviously, the CEO of Freight Technologies had a specific act in 
mind. He wanted to change a rule regarding freight transactions between 
Mexico and the United States of America. Clearly, the UAE had a 
specific desire in mind. They wanted AI chips, and they got them.
  Maybe in a court you could not establish a direct this-for-that--quid 
pro quo, if you will--but certainly these companies knew what they were 
doing. They were buying access and influence. So in that sense it is at 
least a payment of money to the President of the United States to gain 
access and gain influence, and that is exactly the type of corruption 
that Hamilton said he had witnessed ``mortifying examples,'' and so we 
put a clause into the Constitution to say this could not be done.
  All right. So we have a responsibility. We took an oath to the 
Constitution. Every single colleague, all 53 across the aisle, took the 
same oath to the Constitution. So now is the time to actually debate 
this issue and defend the Constitution. If you are not willing to 
debate an amendment to defend the Constitution, then essentially you 
are ignoring your oath to the Constitution; you are violating your oath 
to the Constitution of the United States of America.
  When this bill came to the floor, the majority leader said we will 
have an open amendment process, and that was a factor considered by 
many colleagues when they voted for moving this bill to the floor, that 
there would be an opportunity for amendments. But now that the bill is 
here, suddenly, the Republican leadership that controls the floor says: 
No. We are closing off amendments. We are not going to allow any 
examination of the corruption that is present through this industry. We 
are not going to allow any examination of the loopholes in the 
regulatory framework that is in this bill. We are not going to allow 
any examination of the scams being enacted on ordinary citizens using 
these digital currency--these cryptocurrency ATMs.
  I had never even heard of these ATMs. It turns out that there are 
over 300 of them in my State of Oregon. I have asked my colleagues on 
both sides of the aisle: Have you heard of these? They said no.
  But one of our colleagues was very familiar with this form of scam on 
seniors--Senator Durbin. He has an amendment that should be considered.
  So because it is so important that we take this moment and we honor 
our responsibility to examine these issues, I will be coming back to 
the floor in order to offer a point of order that this bill violates 
the Senate pay-go provisions and, therefore, we shouldn't be doing this 
bill until that is remedied. I will also be coming back to table the 
blocking amendment that the majority leader put in place to prevent 
anyone from offering amendments. So both those votes will occur about 
half an hour from now.
  Let's get our heads together about our responsibilities as Senators 
representing the people of the United States. Let's get our heads 
together about our responsibility to the Constitution. Let's get our 
heads together about taking on this open sale of the government being 
conducted out of the Oval Office, just down Pennsylvania Avenue.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Hagerty). The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss S. 1582, the so-
called GENIUS Act.
  Several weeks ago, when the majority leader said we would have votes 
on amendments, I took him seriously, and I was one of the first to 
file. And we could have been voting on amendments--my amendments, those 
of my colleagues--at any time in the last few weeks, but that hasn't 
happened.
  That is regrettable because the GENIUS Act, as it is currently 
drafted, is, I believe, fundamentally flawed. The GENIUS Act exposes 
taxpayers, consumers, and the financial system to unacceptable risk and 
creates venues for criminals, terrorists, and rogue governments to 
finance their illicit activities.
  Among other things, this bill places the U.S. Government stamp of 
approval on Tether, the world's largest stablecoin, which is based in 
El Salvador and favored by North Korea, Russian arms dealers, 
ransomware attackers, the Iranian military, the drug cartels, and so 
many other criminal organizations.
  The GENIUS Act takes already weak State laws and makes them weaker 
and applies them nationwide, making it possible for stablecoin 
companies to operate with near-zero capital and unable to withstand a 
financial crisis. It is possible for stablecoin companies to avoid 
getting an audit. It is impossible for the government to revoke a 
stablecoin company's charter, even if it turns out to be a Ponzi scheme 
or if an executive dips into customer funds.

[[Page S3364]]

  The GENIUS Act buys into the belief that the billionaires running the 
industry know what they are doing and that the marriage of complex 
financial products and complex technology simply can't fail. The one 
thing the billionaires do know how to do is protect their interests.
  But, not surprisingly, this bill leaves open the door to bailouts, 
which we have seen time and time again for other lightly regulated 
nonbanks that got into trouble, like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG, and 
Bear Stearns.
  When there is a run on a stablecoin--and there very likely will be a 
run one day--the industry will turn to the American taxpayer for a 
bailout, and the GENIUS Act paves the way for that to happen with no 
limits on the Federal Reserve's authority to prop up the industry.
  Finally, this bill perpetuates Donald Trump's naked corruption. It 
actually green-lights the name of Trump's stablecoin, USD1, and it 
allows Trump's handpicked regulators to write the rules of the road 
governing his most recent business venture.
  We need to provide real guardrails that will protect consumers, real 
tools for our national security Agencies to address this new 
technology, and real authority for regulators to intervene in a 
crisis--real guardrails and real tools, not words on a page that give 
only the aura of regulation and protection with no teeth.
  My amendments and those offered by colleagues on both sides of the 
aisle would provide these tools and authorities. However, it appears 
that we won't have the opportunity to consider a single one of them and 
improve this legislation. Because of that, I would urge my colleagues 
to oppose this bill.
  With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LANKFORD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.