[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 16]
[House]
[Pages 23687-23688]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                  FUTURE JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 6, 1999, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, in just a few short weeks, we will be 
electing a new President of the United States on Tuesday, November 7. 
This is the centerpiece of our democracy, the election of a President.
  The President has his own powers according to the Constitution, but 
also the power of appointment of the third branch of government, the 
Supreme Court. So a great deal is at stake in this election: the 
presidency and the President's appointments to the court.
  If the next President appoints just one or two more justices to the 
court, and they do not support some of our basic fundamental rights, 
fundamental rights could be abolished or curtailed. The Supreme Court's 
decisions affect all aspect of our lives including basic civil rights 
and day-to-day pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness.

                              {time}  2045

  It is significant to note, I think, that no Supreme Court justice has 
retired in 6 years, the longest interval without a new appointment in 
177 years. In the last 50 years, every President except one has 
appointed at least one justice, and 8 of the last 10 Presidents have 
appointed 2 justices. Court watchers expect several justices to retire 
soon, and, thus, the next President is likely to appoint several 
justices to fill these vacancies.
  I mention this, Mr. Speaker, because many have asked, well, how do 
these elections affect young people in our country? Well, the election 
of the President affects them very directly in the decisions that that 
President will make but also very directly in terms of his power of 
appointment of the court, the Supreme Court, and indeed many, many 
scores of Federal Court justices.
  As I have said, the Supreme Court makes many decisions that 
fundamentally affect and change our lives, and so young people should 
be very interested in these judges, this President, and the decisions 
that this court will make because it will have an impact for 
generations to come.
  Soon the court will be deciding cases governing civil rights, 
workers' rights, reproductive freedom, voting rights, and campaign 
finance reform. The court will decide Congress' authority to apply 
Federal laws protecting individuals and our environment to the States, 
including the Americans with Disabilities Act. The court will address 
electoral redistricting and minority voting rights, free speech, 
criminal cases involving unreasonable search and seizure, and the scope 
of Federal regulations, really protections and safeguards, for all 
Americans.
  How do the courts' decisions on these issues affect our lives? For 
women, the court has an impact on reproductive freedom. For workers, 
the court affects the ability to sue employers who violate employees' 
civil rights. Again, for women, the court affects access to family 
planning clinics and access to safe and appropriate medical care. For 
gay and lesbian Americans, the court affects civil rights protections 
and equal opportunity. For people with disabilities, the court affects 
protections in the Americans with Disabilities Act.
  I asked one volunteer in a political campaign why she was 
volunteering, and she said I have looked around, studied the issues, 
and I realize that people in politics make decisions about the air I 
breathe and the water I drink. The same applies to the Supreme Court, 
Mr. Speaker. The court affects the air we breathe and the water we 
drink by determining the legality of the Clean Air and Clean Water Act. 
This volunteer went on to say, so I guess I should be interested in 
politics, at least for as long as I drink water and I breathe air.
  Young people should be, and we should all be interested in the court 
and the person who will name justices to that court for at least as 
long as we breathe air and drink water.
  The two issues that I would like to just focus on, in the interest of 
time, because I know the hour is late, are a woman's right to choose 
and the issue of the protection of our environment and how those issues 
will be affected by the court. The next President will likely appoint 
two, perhaps three Supreme Court justices, enough to overturn Roe v. 
Wade and allow States to enact severe and sweeping restrictions on 
women's reproductive rights. If the anti-choice majority maintains its 
control over the Senate, the Supreme Court nominations of an anti-
choice President are likely to be quickly confirmed.
  Governor George Bush is an anti-choice governor with a record to 
prove it. In 1999 alone, Governor Bush, along with Michigan's Governor 
Engler signed more anti-choice provisions into law than any other 
governor in the U.S. Governor Bush has said he believes Roe v. Wade 
went too far and has characterized the 1973 ruling as a reach. Governor 
Bush has also said that Justice Antonin Scalia, arguably the most 
ardent opponent of abortion on the Supreme Court, would be his model 
justice.
  Governor Bush wants to end legal reproductive freedom in the U.S. Al 
Gore would protect a woman's right to choose. The choice is clear: Pro-
choice Americans must understand that Governor Bush will use the power 
of the Presidency to end legal reproductive choice and take away a 
woman's right to choose.
  In terms of the environment, moving on to that because I know that is 
an issue that young people are interested in as well, I mentioned that 
Governor Bush has said that his model justice was Justice Scalia. 
Sadly, Justice Scalia's environmental philosophy is just as dismal as 
some of the other issues that I mentioned here. Legal scholars who have 
studied the Supreme Court have found that Justice Scalia sided against 
the environment more than any other person in the history of the court.
  How bad is his record? Eighty-seven percent of the time an 
environmental

[[Page 23688]]

case came before the Supreme Court Justice Scalia decided against the 
environment. In Justice Scalia's world, citizens would not be allowed 
to stop pollution just because a company is poisoning their backyards. 
In a case decided earlier this year, a factory had dumped toxic mercury 
into a nearby river 489 times. How would you like that, Mr. Speaker, in 
your backyard? But even though the factory poisoned the river nearly 
500 times, the Justice felt that the court was making it far too easy 
to halt an environmental crime.
  So when we come to issues that young people are interested in, such 
as protecting the environment, this environment that we have only on 
loan because it belongs to them, it is their future, we must protect it 
in every way that we can. We can do that by our own personal behavior; 
through conservation; by the people we elect to office to make 
decisions about the environment; by the President of the United States, 
who leads the country in protecting our environment and the justices 
that he will appoint to the court who will make decisions about the air 
we breathe and the water we drink. For as long as we breathe air and 
drink water, Mr. Speaker, we should be very interested in those 
decisions.
  Again, on the issue of a woman's right to choose, which I think is a 
matter that is at risk, we are at a crossroads and one that will be 
very much affected by the outcome of the election on November 7.
  In the interest of time, I will not go into all the other issues, Mr. 
Speaker, except to say that November 7 is an important day, a day when 
we will be choosing not only a President but that President's 
appointees. There is a great deal at stake for young people. I hope 
they will pay attention to the election and its ramifications.

                          ____________________