[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 16]
[Senate]
[Page 22840]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                     COURT SECURITY IMPROVEMENT ACT

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, one of the first actions I took this year 
was to reintroduce the Court Security Improvement Act of 2007, S. 378, 
on January 24, 2007. This bipartisan bill has a dozen cosponsors here 
in the Senate. In February we held a Judiciary Committee hearing at 
which we heard from Justice Anthony Kennedy. In March the Judiciary 
Committee considered and then reported the bill by unanimous consent.
  I thank the majority leader and the assistant majority leader for 
their interest in these matters. Each has witnessed violence against 
judges in their home States. With their leadership, in April the Senate 
was called upon to consider the measure. I was amazed when it took a 
cloture motion to proceed to consideration of court security. Cloture 
on the motion to proceed was obtained by a vote of 93 to 3. Thereafter, 
this important measure was considered and passed by the Senate on April 
19 by a unanimous vote of 97 to 0. Not a single Senator voted against 
it, not even those Senators who objected to proceeding to the bill 
initially or the three Senators who voted against cloture on the motion 
to proceed.
  A companion bill was considered by the House of Representatives and 
passed on a voice vote. To resolve the remaining difference between the 
Senate-passed measure and the House-passed measure we sought to 
substitute the Senate-passed text into the House bill and to request a 
House-Senate conference. This is hardly a novel procedure. It is a 
standard way to resolve differences and to complete action on 
legislation. This routine request has cleared the Democratic side of 
the aisle here in the Senate. No Democratic Senator has objected to 
proceeding. But, once again, an anonymous objection on the Republican 
side is thwarting progress. Just as Republican Senators objected to 
proceeding to consider legislation to bolster court security in April, 
now, an anonymous Republican objection is preventing the Senate from 
acting, requesting a conference and moving forward to resolve the 
differences and enact this long overdue legislation. Despite the broad 
bipartisan support for both the Senate bill and for the House bill, we 
are being blocked from going to conference to resolve the minor 
differences between them by an anonymous Republican Senator.
  This obstruction delays the useful provisions in these bills and 
threatens important safety measures for our Federal judges and their 
families. For our justice system to function, our judges must be able 
to dispense justice. They and their families must be free from the fear 
of retaliation. Witnesses who come forward must be protected, and the 
courthouses where our laws are enforced must be secure. We are in 
danger of letting this chance to improve the security of our Federal 
courts slip through our fingers. I am disappointed and troubled that we 
will not be improving the security for our Federal judges and 
courthouses around the Nation before we go into recess.
  I hope that the Republican Senator who has placed this anonymous 
objection would remove it, to let us go to conference, and to let us 
improve the security that our Federal courts need.

                          ____________________