[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 93 (Tuesday, June 2, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2483-S2487]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
C-SPAN2
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I am here to say happy 40th birthday to
C-SPAN2, broadcasting democracy in the Senate to the American people.
I have to confess to you that, 40 years ago today, I voted no on the
Senate being televised. I thought it would hurt the decorum of the U.S.
Senate.
Whether it has hurt the decorum of the U.S. Senate or not, I am not
going to make a judgment on that today. But I do tell you that, on
reflection, I am glad that the Senate is televised to make government
more real to the American people.
So I guess I would have to confess that I cast the wrong vote 40
years ago.
So now, for four decades, C-SPAN2 has served as an essential conduit
between the U.S. Senate and the American people. Since its launch on
June 2, 1986, C-SPAN2 has offered uninterrupted, unfiltered access to
the debates, the votes, and the deliberations of the U.S. Senate so
people in this country that watch the Senate on C-SPAN2 get the news
unfiltered, directly to you, the American people.
The American people don't have to rely on biased journalists to get
their news when it might really be distorted. And when I say
``distorted,'' too often at my town meetings in Iowa--and I had 12 of
them last week--I hear people say: How come you can't get along? In
other words, Republicans and Democrats don't seem to be talking to each
other.
I always try to explain that there is more partisanship than there
should be, but I also say there is not as much as you, as an Iowan,
actually see because you see on television Members of the Senate always
disagreeing. When there is agreement, you never see much about it.
So this is your opportunity to listen in the U.S. Senate, to get it
unbiased, in a way that you would not from journalists.
Also, C-SPAN2 operates without any public funding or any government
oversight. The continued success of C-SPAN2 is due to the funding that
is provided by platform operators such as cable, satellite, and now
even streaming services. These platforms should continue to make
delivery of C-SPAN2 a priority, and I am sure they will because
Americans then can watch Congress in action in realtime.
So I say once again: Happy birthday, C-SPAN2. Your coverage of the
Senate helps democracy work and provides a true public service.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant executive 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.
Recognition of the Majority Leader
The majority leader is recognized.
C-SPAN2
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, as we begin our proceedings this morning, I
want to take a moment to recognize a milestone here in the Senate.
On this day 40 years ago, C-SPAN broadcast the U.S. Senate for the
very first time. On June 2, 1986, the American people were able to turn
on their
[[Page S2484]]
televisions and see the Senate come to order and their Senators engage
in debate until the gavel dropped later that day. Gavel-to-gavel
coverage. That is the C-SPAN way.
And over the last 40 years, C-SPAN hasn't missed a beat. It has
captured 43,830 hours of Senate proceedings, broadcast 169,000 speeches
by hundreds of U.S. Senators who have served in these Halls, and
captured the moments--large and small, historic and human--that make up
the U.S. Senate.
On that first day 40 years ago, the Senate was considering an
education bill, and what a fitting topic of discussion for C-SPAN's
first day covering this Chamber. Education is C-SPAN's entire mission.
C-SPAN urges its viewers to ``make up your own mind.'' And for 40
years, C-SPAN has enabled the American people to make up their own
minds about what we do here in the Senate.
It has helped countless American students see the legislative process
in action, and it has ensured that what happens here is lost neither to
the day's news cycle nor to history.
And I trust that C-SPAN will continue to offer the American people a
front row seat to the Senate for many decades to come.
South Dakota
Mr. President, C-SPAN captures a lot of our work here in Washington,
but just as important is the work that Senators do back in our States.
Last week, the cameras were off here in the Chamber, and Senators
were back at home hearing from the people that we all represent.
I spent last week back home in South Dakota traveling around my State
and hearing directly from South Dakotans. I had a chance to catch up
with mayors of Webster and Lennox.
Mayor Danny Fergen of Lennox took me around the city. He showed me
new housing developments in Lennox. I saw that city's infrastructure
needs, and we went down Main Street to a few businesses--including El
Mariachi restaurant.
I also spent some time up in northeastern South Dakota. As I
mentioned, I met with the mayor of Webster Mike Grosek, and I dropped
by a few local businesses that are benefiting from the permanent tax
relief Republicans delivered in the Working Families Tax Cut.
I went to the Three22 Kitchen & Cocktails in Aberdeen and saw the
Main Street expansion that the owners had undertaken, including the
first rooftop lounge in the city.
I visited ``Quite Possibly the Coolest Store Ever!''--the Hitch'n
Post--a family-owned business that has been an icon in Aberdeen for
over 50 years and was recently named one of America's best western
retailers.
And then over at the Meathouse in Andover, I had a conversation about
the local agricultural economy with the ranchers who run that business
and who take pride in their home-raised beef.
I have always valued the opportunity I have had lately to spend some
time hearing from South Dakota's young people. This past month, I have
been in classrooms in Winner and Rapid City and Sioux Falls, and we
have had a number of school groups visiting Washington, DC, as well.
I attended the Dakota Relays at the beginning of May and then the
State track meet this past Friday.
And last week, I had the privilege of speaking at Boys State at
Northern State University and then at Girls State at the University of
South Dakota in Vermillion.
It is always a pleasure to get to talk with young people and to hear
what is on their minds and what their dreams are for their futures. And
I suppose that is because, on any given day here in the Senate, that is
what our focus as Republicans boils down to: cultivating a brighter
future for young people and for all Americans, a future that is secure
with greater prosperity and more opportunities to get ahead.
That is our focus here in the Senate, and it is what we continue to
work toward every day.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant executive clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Recognition of the Minority Leader
The Democratic leader is recognized.
Nomination of William Pulte
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, well, first, on the announcement of an
attempted appointment of Bill Pulte: Trump's appointment of Bill Pulte
to serve as Acting Director of National Intelligence is another Trump
low. A guy who can file such baseless, political, and outrageous
charges against political officeholders he doesn't like can't be
entrusted to protect our national security. Pulte has already proven
himself willing to act as a Trump puppet, and now Donald Trump wants to
put him in charge of the Nation's intelligence, a place where integrity
is demanded? A man who doesn't have an ounce of integrity is being put
in that position, which demands total integrity, by Donald Trump.
The Director of National Intelligence is supposed to speak truth to
power, but Donald Trump appears to have chosen Pulte because he speaks
power's truth instead. Americans need an intelligence chief loyal to
the facts, the intelligence, the security of the Nation, not the
political interests of one man.
At a time of growing threats around the world, this nomination raises
a fundamental question: Is the President looking for independent
intelligence or political validation? His fiascos in foreign policy,
most recently in Iran, show he doesn't listen to facts or intelligence.
He is going to get in even more trouble with Bill Pulte in this very
sensitive job.
The intelligence community exists to protect the American people, not
to serve as another instrument of Presidential retribution.
Anti-Weaponization Fund
Mr. President, now, on the slush fund, the only way to ensure Trump's
$2 billion, taxpayer-funded giveaway to Trump's MAGA allies never sees
the light of day is to abolish it by law. The only way to make sure
that Trump's slush fund never sees the light of day is to abolish it by
law, not to trust the word of a corrupt President who stands to benefit
the most from it.
The same goes for the license Trump gave himself and his family to
commit tax fraud with impunity. Any promise from Trump is worthless,
and when it comes to ending his blatantly corrupt slush fund or his
blank check to commit tax fraud, Trump barely promised anything in the
first place. That is why the first amendment I will offer on the
Republican reconciliation bill will be to ban Trump's slush fund
permanently and to revoke his family's free rein to commit tax fraud
forever. Trump doesn't get to make off with at least $100 billion his
family owes on taxes, and he doesn't get to use your tax dollars to pay
off the MAGA right--not on our watch.
Again, the only way to ensure his $2 billion, taxpayer-funded
giveaway never sees the light of day is to abolish it by law, not to
trust the word of the corrupt President who stands to benefit the most
from it.
We need to set the record straight about what exactly the Trump
administration did and did not commit to yesterday. Trump's Department
of Justice put out a statement saying that it would abide by the recent
court order that temporarily blocked Trump from using Americans' tax
dollars to pay off his MAGA loyalists and billionaire friends and
violent insurrectionists who maimed our Capitol Police on January 6.
Let's be clear. The Trump administration hasn't made any commitment
to kill the slush fund permanently, nor has it pledged to revoke the
broad immunity from tax audits that Trump granted himself and his
family.
Can you believe it, America? Trump and his family still get to cheat
their way out of paying their taxes and then use your tax dollars to
line their pockets and give handouts to his billionaire cronies,
criminals, and cop-killing insurrectionists?
Trump's slush fund is corruption at its absolute worst. America has
seen a lot of corruption from this administration, but this
corruption--I don't think we have seen anything like it in our entire
history. Trump shook hands with himself, suing his own government, and
then settling the case so he could steal your tax dollars, America--all
at a time when families are struggling to make ends meet amid
skyrocketing costs.
[[Page S2485]]
What do Republicans have to say? What do they have to say about this?
What are our Republican colleagues saying about this god-awful slush
fund? Well, after the DOJ's meek statement yesterday, one of my
colleagues across the aisle said Trump's slush fund is ``a moot
point.'' A moot point? Trump's far-right radical rewards program is
anything but moot. Trump and the GOP didn't suddenly find their
conscience. They simply hit a temporary roadblock. If Senate
Republicans are truly concerned about Trump's corruption, then prove
it. Ban the slush fund by law permanently.
If Republicans revisit their reconciliation bill this week, as I
said, the very first amendment I will offer will be to ban Trump's
slush fund permanently and revoke his family's free rein to commit tax
fraud.
The corruption is so grievous that toothless Republican guardrails
won't cut it. Democrats won't settle for half measures. We are going to
kill this slush fund permanently, and we are going to bury it and bury
it deep.
Senate Testimony
Mr. President, on Rubio coming to the Hill, Secretary Rubio has a lot
to answer for when he testifies before the Senate today--on China, on
giving kickbacks to Russia, on Ukraine, on withholding arms to Taiwan,
on this administration's ridiculous rhetoric on NATO, on the disastrous
gutting of foreign aid that is leaving Americans vulnerable to one
infectious disease after another, on Iran, on foreign corruption. The
list goes on and on and on.
And today, with all these questions, all these bungles, all these
terrible--terrible--missteps that hurt America--today will be the first
time Marco Rubio, the National Security Advisor and Secretary of State,
testifies before the American people since the start of Trump's
disastrous war with Iran--first time. The war has been going on over 60
days. He is finally coming to the Hill to talk about it.
Yesterday, Trump said he finds the peace negotiations with Iran
``very boring.'' And that he ``couldn't care less'' if they are over.
I want to tell you, Donald Trump, who cares: our troops who are in
harm's way; their families; Americans across the country who are sick
of paying the immense costs of this disastrous war, including paying
$4.50 a gallon at the pump. Secretary Rubio needs to answer whether he
cares about ending this war.
I urge my colleagues as well to ask Rubio to address recent reports
that the Trump administration left a loophole open for the past year
and a half that allowed China to acquire, potentially, hundreds of
thousands of cutting-edge American AI chips. These chips are essential
to America's national security and to our economic competitiveness, but
Chinese companies linked to the Chinese military have funneled them
through foreign firms with seeming impunity.
By failing to protect this vital technology, the Trump administration
has threatened our lead in the AI race and weakened our national
security. Either the Trump administration failed to identify the
loophole, suggesting gross incompetence, or kept it open willfully,
which is very, very dangerous.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Waiving Quorum Call
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to waive the
mandatory quorum call with respect to the Kuhlman nomination.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Memorial Day
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, last Monday was Memorial Day. It is a
day that all around the country we honor those who gave their lives so
that we can be free.
Some say Memorial Day is the saddest day of the year.
Our colleague Senator Tom Cotton from Arkansas is a combat veteran,
and he served as part of the Old Guard at Arlington National Cemetery.
He has written a book. It is a bestselling book on the New York Times
Best Sellers list. It is called ``Sacred Duty.'' In that book, he
points out that Memorial Day is not the saddest; it is the most noble
day of the year. They are powerful words, and they were on my mind last
Monday in different cemeteries around the State of Wyoming.
I started in Douglas, WY, as I always do, at 7 a.m. They do a flag-
raising ceremony. They take it all the way up to the top and then bring
it down to hold its final position at half-staff. Then I went to
Lander, WY, to the Mount Hope Cemetery, and then joined the ceremonies
in Ten Sleep, WY. These are sacred places, and each year--Memorial
Day--as I travel the State, I try to talk about something I have seen
happen since the last year, because in each of these cemeteries, people
gather in respect and in reverence.
We do this all around the country. You know, in Wyoming, I try to add
a special touch to what has happened in the last year because we have
tens of thousands of servicemembers and veterans and military families
who serve our country, and they know what it means to serve and
sacrifice on behalf of the American people.
This year, I talked about SSG Tyler Pickett from Saratoga, WY. I
spoke about him earlier this year on the floor. In the year 2000, 26
years ago, he enlisted in the U.S. Army after graduating from Saratoga
High School. It was something he had looked forward to doing all of his
life. He became part of the legendary 10th Mountain Division.
He was deployed to Iraq. On June 8, 2008, he was killed by a suicide
bomber in Kirkuk, Iraq, and the bomb, of course, was supplied by Iran.
Sergeant Pickett was 28 years old.
I spoke at his services in Saratoga in 2008. He was a brave and
beloved son of Wyoming. It is almost 18 years to the day since Sergeant
Pickett gave his life for our Nation.
Earlier this year, I spoke with his mother Sheri Peterson. She is a
Gold Star mother. She told me that after 18 years, she finally feels
some relief in the loss of her son and the weight that her son's death
has put upon the family. She said it was because now the Ayatollah
Khamenei is dead, the person who is responsible for supplying the
weapon that killed her son. She said: When you speak with President
Trump, please tell him ``thank you'' from our family.
This is a Gold Star mother speaking. She knows that we have a
President who remembers our fallen members not only with words but by
actions on behalf of our Nation.
Stories like Sergeant Pickett's remind us of the cost of freedom and
the debt we owe to these fallen heroes.
This year is the 250th anniversary of the founding of our Nation. We
are about to celebrate that 250th birthday. Exactly 1 month from today,
July 2, is the anniversary of when the Continental Congress
officially voted to declare our independence. The Declaration of
Independence was adopted 2 days later. That is why we celebrate the
Fourth of July. That is the day our Nation was born.
America's central idea, the Declaration of Independence, is the root
of every American idea. This is the document. This is instantly
recognizable all around the world. You put it up, and people are like:
Oh, there it is.
In many ways, it is a work of art, it is a masterpiece, and it
beautifully expresses what we as America stand for. It has set us as a
nation on a course of freedom, liberty, and greatness.
We don't read it enough. We really should. The central sentence is
that we are ``endowed by [our] Creator with certain unalienable Rights;
that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.''
``Unalienable.'' That single world sums up the heart of this great
American experiment. It means that we the people are the source of the
power, and the power is on loan from us, the people, to the government,
not the other way around.
Our Founding Fathers also deeply believed in a Creator. God is
mentioned four separate times in this Declaration of Independence. You
can't explain the majesty of this great country without the Supreme
Being.
The Declaration of Independence is an inspiration to every generation
of American. It belongs to us--to all of us.
[[Page S2486]]
You know, when we think about the Declaration of Independence, we
think about freedom, and we think about liberty. A lot of people use
those words interchangeably. They say: Oh, it is the same thing.
But it is not. Freedom and liberty are not interchangeable. Their
meanings are different. Freedom is the ability to think and to speak
and do what we want. Liberty refers to the rights and the privileges
granted and protected by our laws. Thus, the difference.
I would say today, let us be worthy of our history and of our heroes
and of our heritage. Let us live out the spirit of 1776. Let us carry
on that spirit for the next generation. As we prepare to celebrate the
250th birthday of our Nation, I remain optimistic that our Nation's
best days are ahead.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mueller Investigation
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, on March 15, 2026, I made public an FBI
agent's interview statement. That agent was involved in a conspiracy
called Crosswind, which was a code-named investigation into former
Trump adviser Walid Phares. That statement, made under penalty of
perjury, exposes widespread abuses within then-Special Counsel
Mueller's operation.
That operation is kind of history, but it leads us up to something
more current. For example, the statement noted that multiple personnel
were removed from then-Special Counsel Mueller's team because they
``saw concerning things and voiced their concern''--that word
``concerning'' meaning they knew something wasn't right going on in
Special Counsel Mueller's team investigating the whole thing about
Russia's involvement in the first election of Trump.
That statement--remember, that statement was made just this year--
noted that former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe referred to
President Trump in a derogatory manner. In other words, were they
unbiased in their investigations? And I think I will show you where
they weren't very unbiased in that investigation.
A Justice Department attorney wanted to remove and water down
McCabe's negative tone about Trump from McCabe's interview summary, so
it looks to me like another coverup attempt.
The statement--and again, this is an FBI agent who served on
Mueller's team and was under oath when he gave this statement--noted
that Mueller's right-hand man Aaron Zelinsky exhibited clear bias
against President Trump. And that political infection at the top
trickled down to everyone else, because this FBI agent said the Mueller
team created throughout the office space characters and cartoons that
were very anti-Trump.
To wrap it all up in a bow, the FBI agent's statement discusses
violations of security protocol, mishandling of classified information,
and more potential FISA abuses.
For example, one Justice Department prosecutor is alleged to have
brought a classified notebook to a meeting without the proper carrying
bag. This prosecutor also was alleged to have traveled from her house,
which means she had stored classified information outside of a
classified facility.
This is the same Justice Department that prosecuted Trump for
allegedly mishandling classified information. Remember, the FBI raided
Mar-a-Lago, all in an attempt to ruin Trump politically, financially,
and, of course, with the end goal that they were hoping to put him in
prison.
Of course, the partisan media has neither reported these jaw-dropping
findings nor the blatant and potential criminal FISA abuses. The FBI
agent said the FISA on Crosswind shouldn't have been renewed, and other
FBI personnel held that very same view. The agent's statement said:
``As the investigation progressed, the facts that we originally thought
meant one thing were learned to mean something else. Per reporting from
another agency and what we learned from the investigation up to the
point of the third renewal''--
Meaning the FISA renewal--
``there were no corroborating facts that tied Crosswind to certain
facts that we thought were originally true.''
This FBI agent--again, I want to remind you that he was under oath
when he gave this statement. The agent then ``pointed out these
specific corrections to the application''--meaning the FISA
application--``in numerous instances throughout the FISA-certified copy
process. This was circa 2018. I sent these edits to Kevin Clinesmith,
who said, `We can't send this to DOJ.'''
That is the same Clinesmith who admitted to criminally altering an
email connection with a FISA application during Crossfire Hurricane,
which, as we all know, was yet another effort to get Trump and his
associates, even if it meant breaking the law to get Trump.
The FBI agent also testified about Crosswind that there were
overzealous thoughts and bias that permeated the investigation and a
``let's get him'' attitude.
Even with these known material defects and objections to filing the
FISA renewal, then-Special Agent Walter Giardina ``signed it as Case
Agent,'' according to this FBI agent's statement under oath.
If the statements by this FBI agent are true and accurate, the FISA
application process described was a false filing intended to improperly
target a known innocent person.
These are criminal allegations that the Justice Department and the
FBI ought to fully investigate. In fact, this FBI agent implored the
FBI to do just that. This agent encouraged the FBI to get copies of the
FISA and the predicating documents.
This Senator asked for the same, and the government has failed to
produce these important documents. And I don't know why they would be
afraid to let this Senator have access to those documents, because
transparency is going to bring accountability. And for the sake of
justice and for the sake of exposing things that have been political
weaponization in our government, they should be exposed so they don't
happen again.
Now, Crosswind wasn't the only investigation this FBI agent gave a
statement about. So this brings us more up to more recent months, at
least the recent year and a half.
The agent also discussed the known defects of the case against Trump
adviser Tom Barrack. The agent said the ``get someone'' attitude that
led to the FISA renewal and search warrants also led to the
investigation of Tom Barrack.
The agent's statement noted that these matters ``relate to ethical
dilemmas.'' The FBI agent further stated that ``there was no authority
for the [Special Counsel's Office] to open a case on Tom Barrack.''
Even the FBI Washington Field Office had, at that point in time,
declined to open a case on Barrack, and yet this FBI agent said:
``Giardina didn't want to open a case on Barrack but wanted to keep
people happy.''
So you do illegal things just to keep people happy. That is not
right. And the fact that we have this FBI agent's statement to verify
all of the wrongdoing that went on in this whole process, that is
obviously no basis to criminally investigate anyone.
What the Biden Justice Department and the FBI did to Barrack and his
staffer Matthew Grimes is worthy of note as another lesson of what the
government should not do.
Barrack gave an interview to the government way back in December 2017
and June 2019. Grimes also gave interviews. It appears they cooperated.
Then, years later--4 years later and 2 years later in another
instance--the Biden administration Justice Department, in July 2021,
decided to indict both Barrack and Grimes for acting as an agent of a
foreign government, for obstruction, and for false statements.
They were arrested by more than 20 Federal agents going to their
homes. At first, the government asked that Grimes not be given bail.
The government said that he was a flight risk, among other things.
Grimes, a 22- and 23-year-old at the time the crimes were alleged to
have occurred, was detained for 5 days and eventually released--can you
believe this?--on $5 million bond. Barrack's bond was set--can you
believe this?--at
[[Page S2487]]
$250 million, even though he had no criminal record.
Barrack and Grimes took their fight to a jury trial, and the jury
acquitted Barrack on all nine counts. Grimes was acquitted of the two
counts against him.
So I would like to share three quotes from that trial.
During the trial, the judge told the government:
I mean, I've had patent cases that I tried involving
algorithms that were easier for the jury to figure out than
this one is going to be.
Then a further quote from the judge also said, about some of the
government's theories in the case, that they ``were right in line
between barely permissible inference and impermissible speculation.''
And then there is the third, and last, quote from an alternate juror,
who stated publicly after the verdict:
I thought much of the prosecution's evidence was very
misleading and misrepresented the truth.
So that is what you have with political weaponization going on in the
American Government.
So now, to sum up, year after year, my investigative work has exposed
the overt bias by Federal law enforcement against Republicans. Here,
the same political government Agencies were involved in Crosswind, the
Barrack case, and Crossfire Hurricane. These cases went nowhere.
My Democratic colleagues never raised a finger about any of these
abuses. My Democratic colleagues did the opposite and went on partisan
television every day, falsely claiming crimes occurred.
And you can see from what I have said today and what the FBI's
statements--the agents' statements--say, that there was no crime. But
it appears the real crimes were committed by the Biden-Harris
government investigators.
Now, bringing this today, and the responsibility of President Trump's
administration, it is clear that this administration has a
responsibility to fully investigate these matters.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sheehy). The Senator from Montana.
Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to
5 minutes before the scheduled rollcall vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Confirmation of Kathleen S. Lane
Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, today, I urge my colleagues to vote in
favor of confirming Katie Lane to serve as the next judge of the U.S.
District Court for the District of Montana.
I have known Katie a long time. In fact, she attended kindergarten
through 12th grade in my hometown of Bozeman. In fact, we went to the
same high school. I was a little ahead of her. We are both Bozeman High
Hawks.
She spent her childhood summers skiing, camping, and hiking, which
instilled in her a deep and profound love of the Treasure State and the
values that truly make it the ``Last Best Place.''
But then she went on to do even bigger things. She went on to attend
George Mason University's Antonin Scalia Law School, where she
graduated with highest honors. She then clerked at both the trial and
appellate levels of the Federal judiciary for two Federal judges.
She returned to Montana to serve as the deputy solicitor general
under Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, from 2021 to 2023.
During her time in Helena, Katie worked zealously to defend Montana's
laws and challenge Federal overreach. She litigated cases in both State
and Federal courts on issues important to Montanans, including
defending the Second Amendment, multiple land use and grazing rights
cases, as well as defending Montana's coal industry.
As Montanans know well, Federal judges play a critical role in our
daily lives. For many years, we have dealt with an activist judiciary
that repeatedly rules against the interests of Montanans. That is why
it is essential we pick principled, thoughtful jurists who are
committed to upholding the Constitution and making decisions based on
the rule of law, not on personal politics or viewpoints.
With this in mind, Senator Sheehy and I are confident that Katie is
the right choice to serve Montana as our next Federal judge. Her values
are rooted in Montana and grounded in the Constitution. Katie's
distinguished record of public service and experience in both the
Federal and State judiciaries makes her well-qualified to serve on the
Federal bench. I am confident she will be fairminded; she will be
principled; and she will bring honor, decency, integrity and--let's
face it--a lot of smarts to the bench.
I cannot recommend Katie highly enough, and I urge my colleagues to
vote today to confirm her without delay.
Vote on Lane Nomination
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Will the Senate advise and
consent to the Lane nomination?
Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. BARRASSO. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the
Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Rounds).
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Colorado (Mr. Bennet) is
necessarily absent.
The result was announced--yeas 52, nays 46, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 132 Ex.]
YEAS--52
Armstrong
Banks
Barrasso
Blackburn
Boozman
Britt
Budd
Capito
Cassidy
Collins
Cornyn
Cotton
Cramer
Crapo
Cruz
Curtis
Daines
Ernst
Fischer
Graham
Grassley
Hagerty
Hawley
Hoeven
Husted
Hyde-Smith
Johnson
Justice
Kennedy
Lankford
Lee
Lummis
Marshall
McConnell
McCormick
Moody
Moran
Moreno
Murkowski
Paul
Ricketts
Risch
Schmitt
Scott (FL)
Scott (SC)
Sheehy
Sullivan
Thune
Tillis
Tuberville
Wicker
Young
NAYS--46
Alsobrooks
Baldwin
Blumenthal
Blunt Rochester
Booker
Cantwell
Coons
Cortez Masto
Duckworth
Durbin
Fetterman
Gallego
Gillibrand
Hassan
Heinrich
Hickenlooper
Hirono
Kaine
Kelly
Kim
King
Klobuchar
Lujan
Markey
Merkley
Murphy
Murray
Ossoff
Padilla
Peters
Reed
Rosen
Sanders
Schatz
Schiff
Schumer
Shaheen
Slotkin
Smith
Van Hollen
Warner
Warnock
Warren
Welch
Whitehouse
Wyden
NOT VOTING--2
Bennet
Rounds
The nomination was confirmed.
(Mrs. CAPITO assumed the Chair.)
(Mr. SHEEHY assumed the Chair.)
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Armstrong). Under the previous order, the
motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table, and
the President will be immediately notified of the Senate's action.
____________________