[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 5]
[Senate]
[Pages 6685-6691]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  NOMINATION OF GEORGE LEVI RUSSELL III, TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT 
                   JUDGE FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

                                 ______
                                 

 NOMINATION OF JOHN J. THARP, JR., TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 
                 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations, 
which the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read the nominations of George Levi Russell, 
III, of Maryland, to be United States District Judge for the District 
of Maryland, and John J. Tharp, Jr., of Illinois, to be United States 
District Judge for the Northern District of Illinois.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 60 
minutes of debate equally divided in the usual form.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time run 
until 5:30 p.m. on the nominees, which would be approximately 50 
minutes, but that time be divided in the usual form.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
   Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, last week, 5 months into the year, the 
Senate finally was allowed to finish clearing the backlog of 19 
judicial nominees who were needlessly stalled since last year by Senate 
Republicans. Today the Senate is being allowed to consider two of the 
19 judicial nominees now awaiting final Senate action. George Levi 
Russell is nominated to fill a judicial emergency vacancy in the U.S. 
District Court for the District of Maryland and John Tharp to fill a 
judicial emergency vacancy in the Northern District of Illinois. These 
nominees have the support of their home State Senators and were 
reported 3 months ago with the bipartisan majority of the Judiciary 
Committee.
  I hope the fact that the majority leader was able to obtain consent 
to move these nominations signals that the Senate is being allowed to 
return to regular order, and that the majority leader will be able to 
schedule a vote without further delay on the nomination of Paul Watford 
of California to fill a judicial emergency vacancy on the Ninth 
Circuit. His nomination was reported before those being considered 
today and has been skipped in the order. He is a fine nominee with 
outstanding qualifications and bipartisan support.
  Last week, we were finally able to confirm Judge Jacqueline Nguyen of 
California to fill a judicial emergency vacancy on the Ninth Circuit 
after a needless 5-month delay. Her nomination had been reported 
unanimously by

[[Page 6686]]

the Judiciary Committee and was confirmed by a vote of 91 3. It took 
the filing of 17 cloture petitions in March to get Senate Republicans 
to agree to consider her nomination.
  The Ninth Circuit is still in dire need of judges. With nearly three 
times the number of cases pending as the next busiest circuit, we 
cannot afford to further delay Senate votes on the other two 
nominations to the Ninth Circuit. Paul Watford of California passed the 
Committee more than 3 months ago. Andrew Hurwitz of Arizona passed the 
Committee more than 2 months ago. There is no good reason for Senate 
Republicans to further delay votes on these Ninth Circuit nominees. The 
61 million people served by the Ninth Circuit are not served by this 
delay. The circuit is being forced to handle more than double the 
caseload of any other without its full complement of judges. The Senate 
should be expediting consideration of Paul Watford and Justice Andrew 
Hurwitz, not delaying them.
  The Chief Judge of the Ninth Circuit, Judge Alex Kozinski, a Reagan 
appointee, along with the members of the Judicial Council of the Ninth 
Circuit, wrote to the Senate months ago emphasizing the Ninth Circuit's 
``desperate need for judges,'' urging the Senate to ``act on judicial 
nominees without delay,'' and concluding ``we fear that the public will 
suffer unless our vacancies are filled very promptly.'' The judicial 
emergency vacancies on the Ninth Circuit are harming litigants by 
creating unnecessary and costly delays. The Administrative Office of 
U.S. Courts reports that it takes nearly 5 months longer for the Ninth 
Circuit to issue an opinion after an appeal is filed, compared to all 
other circuits. The Ninth Circuit's backlog of pending cases far 
exceeds other Federal courts. As of the end of 2011, the Ninth Circuit 
had 14,041 cases pending before it, far more than any other circuit.
  If caseloads were really a concern of Republican Senators, as they 
contended last year when they filibustered the nomination of Caitlin 
Halligan to the D.C. Circuit, they would not be delaying the 
nominations to fill judicial emergency vacancies in the Ninth Circuit. 
If caseloads were really a concern, Senate Republicans would consent to 
move forward with votes on Paul Watford and Andrew Hurwitz without 
these months of unnecessary delays.
  Paul Watford was rated unanimously well qualified by the ABA's 
Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, the highest rating 
possible. He clerked at the United States Supreme Court for Justice 
Ruth Bader Ginsburg and on the Ninth Circuit for now Chief Judge Alex 
Kozinski. He was a Federal prosecutor in Los Angeles. He has the 
support of his home State Senators and bipartisan support from noted 
conservatives such as Daniel Collins, who served as associate deputy 
attorney general in the Bush administration; professors Eugene Volokh 
and Orin Kerr; and Jeremy Rosen, the former president of the Los 
Angeles chapter of the Federalist Society.
  Justice Hurwitz is a respected and experienced jurist on the Arizona 
Supreme Court. His nomination has the strong support of both his 
Republican home state Senators, Senator John McCain and Senator Jon 
Kyl, who introduced him to the Judiciary Committee at his hearing in 
January. Senator Kyl said of Justice Hurwitz:

       It is very easy to see and it is obvious to those of us who 
     have been in Arizona a long time why Justice Hurwitz was 
     awarded the ABA's highest rating, unanimous well qualified. 
     So it will be my privilege to support his nomination, and I 
     am honored to be able to introduce him to the panel today.

  Given that both nominees are superbly qualified mainstream nominees 
with bipartisan support, the long delays that have plagued these 
nominations are hard to understand.
  While discussing the Ninth Circuit, I should also clear up the 
history of President Bush's Ninth Circuit nominees. Senate Democrats 
did not oppose Randy Smith joining the Ninth Circuit. Judge Smith was 
confirmed unanimously by a vote of 94-0. His nomination was 
unnecessarily complicated and delayed by President Bush who initially 
insisted on nominating Judge Smith to a California seat on the Ninth 
Circuit. He is not a Californian and was not supported by the 
California Senators. When President Bush took my advice and renominated 
Judge Smith to fill an Idaho vacancy on the Ninth Circuit at the 
beginning of 2007, he was confirmed quickly.
  Carolyn Kuhl was another nominee President Bush tried to ram through 
the Senate in spite of the opposition of her home State Senators. It 
was Senate Republicans and the Republican chairman who blatantly 
disregarded Senate Judiciary procedure by proceeding with that 
nomination despite the objection of both home State Senators. At the 
time I noted that this was a provocative step that ratcheted up 
partisanship and the use of judicial nominees for partisan political 
purposes. By contrast, I have respected objections of Republican home 
State Senators, even when they change their position from support to 
opposition, as happened recently with a Kansas nominee to the Tenth 
Circuit.
  Senate Democrats opposed William Gerry Myers because he was an 
ideologue who spent over 20 years of his career as a lobbyist and as an 
outspoken antagonist against long-established environmental 
protections. Mr. Myers' advocacy often took positions that were legally 
unsupportable. Mr. Myers' record as a partisan ideologue was not offset 
by other qualifications to be a court of appeals nominee; he received a 
partial not qualified rating from the American Bar Association, had 
never tried a jury case, nor had he served as counsel in any criminal 
litigation.
  The fact is, even after the Senate was forced to invoke cloture to 
overcome Republican filibusters of President Clinton's nominations of 
Richard Paez and Marsha Berzon to the Ninth Circuit, the Senate 
proceeded to confirm seven of the nine Ninth Circuit nominees of 
President Bush. We reduced vacancies on the Ninth Circuit during 
President Bush's two terms to only a single vacancy. Four of President 
Bush's Ninth Circuit nominees were confirmed during his first 4-year 
term: Judge Richard Clifton, Judge Jay Bybee, Judge Consuelo Callahan, 
and Judge Carlos Bea. By contrast, Senate Republicans are opposing our 
moving forward to consider and confirm Paul Watford and Andrew Hurwitz, 
who are both strongly supported by their home State Senators, to fill 
judicial emergency vacancies, and they filibustered the nomination of 
Goodwin Liu, who also had the strong support of his home State 
Senators.
  The American people deserve better. Our courts need qualified Federal 
judges, not vacancies, if they are to reduce the excessive wait times 
that burden litigants seeking their day in court. It is unacceptable 
for hardworking Americans who turn to their courts for justice to 
suffer unnecessary delays. When an injured plaintiff sues to help cover 
the cost of his or her medical expenses, that plaintiff should not have 
to wait 3 years before a judge hears the case. When two small business 
owners disagree over a contract, they should not have to wait years for 
a court to resolve their dispute.
  We have much more work to do to help resolve the judicial vacancy 
crisis that has persisted for more than 3 years. When the Majority 
Leader and the Republican leader came to their interim understanding in 
March, it resulted in votes on 14 of the 22 judicial nominations then 
awaiting final consideration. Because the arrangement took months to 
implement what the Senate could have done in hours, the backlog of 
judicial vacancies and judicial nominees continues. Today we are almost 
back to where we started with 19 judicial nominees awaiting action.
  We are still lagging far behind what we accomplished during the first 
term of President George W. Bush. During President Bush's first term we 
reduced the number of judicial vacancies by almost 75 percent. When I 
became Chairman in the summer of 2001, there were 110 vacancies. As 
Chairman, I worked with the administration and Senators from both sides 
of the aisle to confirm 100 judicial nominees of a conservative 
Republican President in 17 months.
  We continued when in the minority to work with Senate Republicans to 
confirm President Bush's consensus judicial nominations well into 2004, 
a

[[Page 6687]]

Presidential election year. At the end of that Presidential term, the 
Senate had acted to confirm 205 circuit and district court nominees. In 
May 2004, we reduced judicial vacancies to below 50 on the way to 28 
that August. Despite 2004 being an election year, we were able to 
reduce vacancies to the lowest level in the last 20 years. At a time of 
great turmoil and political confrontation, despite the attack on 9/11, 
the anthrax letters shutting down Senate offices, and the ideologically 
driven judicial selections of President Bush, we worked together to 
promptly confirm consensus nominees and significantly reduce judicial 
vacancies.
  In October 2008, another Presidential election year, we again worked 
to reduce judicial vacancies and were able to get back down to 34 
vacancies. I accommodated Senate Republicans and continued holding 
expedited hearings and votes on judicial nominations into September 
2008. We lowered vacancy rates more than twice as quickly as Senate 
Republicans have allowed during President Obama's first term.
  By comparison, the vacancy rate remains nearly twice what it was at 
this point in the first term of President Bush, and has remained near 
or above 80 for nearly three years. Again, if we could move forward to 
Senate votes on the 19 judicial nominees ready for final action, the 
Senate could reduce vacancies below 60 and make progress.
  The Senate needs to consider these judicial nominees if we are to 
make real progress in reducing the burden of judicial vacancies. That 
is what we did in the most recent Presidential election years of 2004 
and 2008 and what we should be doing this year. We have a long way to 
go. We need to work to reduce the vacancies that are burdening the 
Federal judiciary and the millions of Americans who rely on our Federal 
courts to seek justice. Let us work in a bipartisan fashion to confirm 
these qualified judicial nominees so that we can address the judicial 
vacancy crisis and so they can serve the American people.
  Today, we can finally fill two judicial emergency vacancies with 
excellent nominees. George Levi Russell III is nominated to fill a 
judicial emergency vacancy on the District of Maryland, where he has 
been an active member of the legal community for over 20 years. 
Currently an Associate Judge in the Circuit Court of Maryland for 
Baltimore City, he previously spent 10 years as an Assistant U.S. 
Attorney in the District of Maryland, serving in both the criminal and 
civil divisions. Judge Russell's nomination has the strong support of 
the Maryland Senators, Senators Mikulski and Cardin.
  John ``Jay'' Tharp is nominated to fill a judicial emergency vacancy 
on the Northern District of Illinois. This is the second time Mr. Tharp 
has been nominated to that position, having also been nominated by 
President George W. Bush in July 2008. A former Captain in the Marine 
Corps, Mr. Tharp is currently a partner in the Chicago office of Mayer 
Brown LLP. He began his legal career as a Federal prosecutor in the 
Northern District of Illinois and clerked for Judge Joel Flaum on the 
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. The ABA Standing 
Committee on the Federal Judiciary unanimously rated Mr. Tharp well 
qualified, its highest rating. Mr. Tharp's nomination has the 
bipartisan support of Illinois' Democratic Senator Dick Durbin and 
Republican Senator Mark Kirk.
  Both Judge Russell and Mr. Tharp were favorably reported by the 
Judiciary Committee on February 16th of this year. I look forward to 
their confirmations today.
  Mr. President, using the time allocated to the majority, I ask 
unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The remarks of Senator Leahy are printed in today's Record under 
``Morning Business.'')
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum and ask 
unanimous consent that the remaining time between now and 5:30 be 
equally divided.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  At the request of Mr. Durbin, the following statement was ordered to 
be printed in the Record.
 Mr. KIRK. Mr. President, I wish to offer my strong endorsement 
for the nomination of John ``Jay'' Tharp to the U.S. District Court for 
the Northern District of Illinois.
  Jay Tharp will be an outstanding addition to the Federal bench. He 
made a name for himself as an assistant U.S. attorney whose cases 
included political corruption and money laundering. His impressive 
tenure in that office includes service in the General Crimes Division 
and the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force. Since leaving the 
U.S. Attorney's office in 1997, Tharp has worked at Mayer Brown LLP, 
where he was made partner in 1999. He is currently coleader of Mayer 
Brown's securities litigation and enforcement practice.
  I want to thank Senator Durbin for his continued dedication and hard 
work to ensure the Senate's timely confirmation of both Illinois 
judicial nominees, Jay Tharp and John Lee.
  Under Senate tradition for Illinois, the senator from the party not 
in control of the White House makes nomination recommendations to the 
White House for one Federal district court judgeship for every three of 
the party in power. The arrangement is intended to ensure the orderly 
filing of Federal judge vacancies on the Illinois bench. Under that 
tradition, John Tharp was my first recommendation.
  Jay served our country in the Marine Corps from 1982 to 1988, 
achieving the rank of Captain and earning the Navy Achievement Medal 
and the Navy Distinguished Midshipman Award. He subsequently attended 
Northwestern University Law School on a full merit John Henry Wigmore 
Scholarship. While at Northwestern, Jay served as book review editor of 
the Northwestern Law Review. He graduated magna cum laude in 1990.
  Last week, the Senate voted to confirm John Lee to fill one of the 
vacancies for the Northern District. Senator Durbin and I worked 
closely to recommend both Jay Tharp and John Lee and today's vote on 
Jay's nomination will hopefully conclude the process to fill these two 
vacancies.
  I would also like to thank my Judicial Review Advisory Board, chaired 
by Peter Baugher of Schopf & Weiss LLP, for their hard work in 
selecting Jay Tharp. In February 2011, I formed this 14-member 
bipartisan, Statewide screening committee and charged it with 
identifying ``the strongest applicants from Illinois for consideration 
by the President and U.S. Senate.''
  My Advisory Board received nearly 50 applications, met five times, 
and spent over 300 man-hours to review judicial candidates. The 
Advisory Board's review process included personal interviews as well as 
calls to colleagues, opposing counsel, and judges.
  I urge my colleagues to support Jay Tharp's nomination.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, pending before the Senate is the 
nomination of Jay Tharp to serve on the District Court for the Northern 
District of Illinois. Senator Kirk and I have agreed on a bipartisan 
approach to this. We each have appointed bipartisan committees who 
review prospective applicants and then make recommendations. We each 
have a veto over the other's recommendation, so it is totally 
bipartisan. In the case of Jay Tharp, there was no veto--certainly not 
by me--and in this case, he was sponsored by Senator Kirk. He is an 
extraordinarily talented individual.
  The reason I have entered into the Congressional Record the official 
statement of Senator Kirk is because, obviously, he can't be here. He 
is in rehab at this point from a stroke he suffered in January, and 
there was an encouraging video released last week showing the progress 
he is making. We are all anxious for him to return. I promised him in a 
phone conversation last week that I would move this nomination as 
quickly as possible so that

[[Page 6688]]

his nominee is approved. His statement now in the Record speaks to his 
feelings about Jay Tharp's nomination, and it speaks for itself. I will 
now add my own comments.
  I am glad Mr. Tharp is finally getting a vote in the Senate. It has 
taken a long time. In fact, it has taken too long for this day to come. 
Nominees who are noncontroversial, eminently qualified, who go through 
the committee without even a hint of resistance from Democrats or 
Republicans shouldn't have to sit on this calendar for week after week 
and month after month. It has now become standard around here, as have 
these mind-numbing filibusters become standard around here, and it 
isn't fair.
  It isn't fair first to the country to leave vacancies on the Federal 
bench, creating hardships in courts around the Nation where people come 
to the courthouse expecting timely consideration of important matters, 
from criminal charges to civil litigation.
  It isn't fair to the nominees. It really takes a pretty stalwart 
individual to put their name up to be a Federal judge because they are 
going to go through three or four different levels of investigation and 
some pretty serious investigation by the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation, for example. That is part of the process. There are 
investigations by the White House, by the Senators' offices, by the 
Senate Judiciary Committee. So it is not an easy undertaking. There 
might have been a time--I know there was--when these nominations were 
made in 48 hours with hardly a question asked. It doesn't happen 
anymore. Hard questions are asked, and then comes the suspense of 
starting the process and waiting for it to end. These poor nominees sit 
there with their professional and personal lives on hold, having said 
they are prepared to step forward and serve a lifetime appointment on 
the Federal judiciary, and then they wait day after weary day, week 
after weary week, month after month, sitting on this Executive Calendar 
so that at some point there will be a bargaining session and some names 
will go forward and some won't.
  This is what happened to Jay Tharp, but it shouldn't have, nor should 
it have happened to John Lee, the nominee who was approved last week 
for Illinois. Both nominees are extraordinarily qualified and should 
have gone through without this resistance, but this reflects what is 
happening in the Senate.
  What is interesting about Jay Tharp is that every aspect of his 
nomination has been bipartisan. As I said, Senator Kirk put him through 
a bipartisan process for selection, and Senator Kirk reviewed and 
approved all of the candidates and then recommended him. It was last 
November 10 that the White House sent two nominations to the Senate to 
fill vacancies: John Lee, who was approved last Monday, and Jay Tharp, 
who we will be considering this evening.
  John Lee was my choice; Jay Tharp was Senator Kirk's choice. We 
agreed, as I said, on both nominees. They were both nominated on the 
same day. They appeared together at the hearing before the Judiciary 
Committee in January. Both were reported out of the committee in 
February--about 3 or 4 months ago--in a bipartisan voice vote.
  It was my hope we could bring them to a quick vote. There was an 
urgent need to fill the vacancies. We had been contacted by the chief 
judge of the district in Chicago, Jim Holderman. He had written to both 
of us, Senator Kirk and myself, and asked: Please move on these judges.
  I felt an obligation, after Senator Kirk's illness, to try to get 
this job done. I knew Senator Kirk would be here in person if it were 
humanly possible. I put his statement in the Record. I know how 
strongly he feels about the qualities of Jay Tharp.
  Unfortunately, for reasons hard to understand, this has dragged on 
for almost 6 months since their nominations were sent to the Senate. Up 
until a few years ago, this, as I said, was not the way things were 
handled--not when it came to bipartisan nominees who were coming out of 
the committee with no controversy. That certainly is the case now. We 
now see routine objections. There is a presumption that something must 
be wrong with a nominee, and we will just sit on it for weeks and 
months. That is not good. It is not fair to the nominees. It is not 
fair to the process. It certainly is not good for the judiciary.
  Under the last nominations agreement negotiated in March, for some 
reason John Lee made the cut, Jay Tharp did not. I appealed to Senator 
Kyl, to Senator McConnell. I sent a letter in writing and spoke to it 
on the Senate floor.
  This is Senator Mark Kirk's first nomination for a Federal judgeship, 
and I know how important it is to him. I thank those who were 
responsible for bringing it forward today. I am sure he will be 
relieved. I know Jay Tharp will be relieved when this is over.
  I have been very happy to stand and support Jay Tharp, as well as 
John Lee. They are both extraordinary individuals. There are other 
well-qualified nominees sitting on this Senate calendar in a similar 
circumstance. After today's votes, there will be 17 nominees pending on 
the calendar, and nearly all of them--almost all of them--were voted 
out of committee without any dissenting votes, with the exception of 
Senator Lee of Utah, who votes customarily against all judicial 
nominees. These nominees, but for a few, have not had any controversy. 
Six of these nominees are in areas designated as judicial emergencies, 
including two nominees for seats in the Ninth Circuit--Paul Watford and 
Andrew Hurwitz, who are extraordinarily well qualified.
  I hope my Republican colleagues will give us a break. These people 
deserve to get their moment on the Senate floor. They deserve a vote, 
and the areas they are going to serve deserve a full complement of 
competent jurists.
  It is time to restore sanity, comity, and good faith to the way we 
treat judicial nominations on the Senate floor. That should start 
today.
  Let me discuss Jay Tharp's background for the record. He was 
nominated when a judgeship opened up after Judge Blanche Manning took 
senior status. He is currently a partner in the Chicago office of Mayer 
Brown, where he is the co-leader of the firm's securities litigation 
and enforcement practice.
  He was born into a military family--he is very proud of it--as the 
son of a lieutenant colonel in the Marine Corps.
  Jay Tharp attended Duke University on an ROTC scholarship. He 
received his undergraduate degree summa cum laude and was commissioned 
as a second lieutenant in the Marine Corps.
  He served on Active Duty with the Marines for 6 years, achieving the 
rank of captain and earning the Navy Achievement Medal and the Navy 
Distinguished Midshipman Award.
  After his military service, he attended Northwestern University Law 
School. He graduated magna cum laude and served on their Law Review. 
Upon graduation, he was a clerk for Judge Joel Flaum on the Seventh 
Circuit, and then worked as an assistant U.S. attorney in Chicago for 6 
years.
  After his tenure as a Federal prosecutor, he joined Mayer Brown, 
where his practice has been in complex commercial litigation and 
criminal investigations. He has received numerous recognitions. He has 
served as an adjunct professor of trial advocacy at Northwestern 
University Law School, and he is a member of the Law Fund Board at 
Northwestern, which oversees fundraising efforts.
  In short, Jay Tharp is a picture-perfect nominee for the Federal 
bench. He has the qualifications, temperament, and integrity to serve 
the Northern District well. I urge my colleagues to support his 
nomination.
  I just say to Jay Tharp, the day has come, finally. I am sorry you 
got caught up in what has become a tiring political exercise, where 
people are just stuck on a calendar waiting for something to happen 
which springs them loose. This evening will be your opportunity.
  I hope the Senate--and I know Senator Kirk will join me in saying 
this--will give Jay Tharp the unanimous vote he deserves. He is an 
extraordinarily well-qualified nominee, and I am happy to support his 
nomination.

[[Page 6689]]

  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I will be urging the people in my caucus 
to vote for these nominees, both of them. Today, the Senate is expected 
to confirm these two nominees: Judge Russell to the District of 
Maryland and Mr. Tharp to the Northern District of Illinois. As I said, 
I support the nominees, and I do, in fact, expect that both of them 
will be confirmed.
  We continue to confirm the President's nominees at a brisk pace. In 
fact, with today's confirmations, we will have confirmed 145 of 
President Obama's district and circuit court nominees. I would like to 
put this in perspective.
  We confirmed two Supreme Court nominees during President Obama's term 
so far. Everyone knows it takes a tremendous amount of time and 
resources to consider Supreme Court nominees.
  The last time the Senate confirmed two Supreme Court nominees was 
during President Bush's second term. During President Bush's entire 
second term, the Senate confirmed only 120 district and circuit court 
nominees.
  Compare that, if you will, to the 145 district and circuit court 
nominees we have confirmed so far since President Obama has become 
President. Let me say that same thing a different way. We have 
confirmed 25 more nominees for President Obama than we did for 
President Bush in a similar time period. Of course, President Obama's 
term is not over yet.
  With these facts in mind, I hope my colleagues will understand why I 
get a little frustrated when I hear all of these complaints about how 
we are not confirming enough nominees. The fact is President Obama is 
being treated much more fairly than Senate Democrats treated President 
Bush.
  It is especially frustrating to hear the other side complain about 
the vacancy rate. The fact is the Senate is doing its job. We are 
confirming the nominees who are sent to us. Of course, we cannot 
confirm nominees who are not up here from the White House. If there is 
a problem, then it rests with the President.
  Right now, there are 77 judicial vacancies. But the President has 
made only 29 nominations. That means 48 vacancies or over 60 percent--
actually, nearly 63 percent--have no nominee. Stating it another way, 
there are currently 44 million Americans living in districts with 
vacancies where the President has not submitted a nominee to the 
Senate.
  I suspect the President neglected to share that statistic with all 
the groups he summoned to the White House 1 week ago today to discuss 
judicial nominees, probably with the point of getting those 
organizations to put more pressure on the Congress to approve more 
nominees, and somehow approve nominees who are not even here yet for us 
to approve.
  I could go on, but I do not intend to. I do not like to get into this 
back-and-forth with the other side. But it gets a little tiresome to 
hear the same misleading statements over and over. I want to set the 
record straight, and I have done that.
  I congratulate the nominees who will be confirmed tonight. Both the 
nominees and their families should be proud.
  George Levi Russell III, presently serving as an associate judge to 
the Circuit Court of Maryland, is nominated to be U.S. District Judge 
for the District of Maryland. Judge Russell received his BA from 
Morehouse College in 1988 and his JD from the University of Maryland 
School of Law in 1991. Upon graduation from law school, he clerked for 
Hon. Robert M. Bell, chief judge for the Court of Appeals of Maryland. 
Judge Russell then worked as an associate at the law firms Hazel and 
Thomas, P.C. and Whiteford, Taylor, and Preston, where he handled cases 
involving personal injury, product liability, and medical malpractice. 
In 1994, Judge Russell became an assistant U.S. attorney for the U.S. 
Attorney's Office for the District of Maryland. He worked in the civil 
division for 5 years, defending government agencies in discrimination, 
automobile accident, and medical malpractice cases. In 2000, Judge 
Russell rejoined the private sector for 2 years, working at the law 
offices of Peter G. Angelos, where he represented plaintiffs in class 
action and private personal injury cases. In 2002, he returned to the 
U.S. Attorney's Office and joined the criminal division for 5 years. 
There Judge Russell prosecuted those accused of violent crimes and 
narcotics cases.
  In 2007, then-Governor Robert Ehrlich appointed Judge Russell to be 
an associate judge on the Circuit Court of Maryland for Baltimore City. 
In November 2008, he was elected to a 15-year term. Judge Russell has 
sat on each of the four dockets of this court: criminal, civil, family, 
and juvenile.
  The ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary has given Judge 
Russell a rating of Substantial Majority ``Qualified'' and Minority 
``Not Qualified'' for this position.
  John J. Tharp, Jr., is nominated to be U.S. district judge for the 
Northern District of Illinois. Mr. Tharp was first nominated to this 
position by President Bush in 2008. Mr. Tharp received his BA from Duke 
University in 1982 and his JD from Northwestern University School of 
Law in 1990. Mr. Tharp served in the U.S. Marine Corps from 1982 to 
1988, became a captain in 1987, and has received several military 
honors. Following graduation from Northwestern University School of Law 
in 1990, Mr. Tharp began his legal career as a clerk for Judge Flaum on 
the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. After working as an associate at 
Kirkland & Ellis for a year, he joined the U.S. Attorney's Office for 
the Northern District of Illinois, Chicago, as a Federal prosecutor 
where he served in the Criminal Receiving and Appellate Division, 
General Crimes Division, and Organized Drug Enforcement Task Force. He 
handled cases involving narcotics and money laundering investigations, 
financial frauds, political corruption, tax crimes, bank robberies, and 
firearms offenses.
  In 1997, Mr. Tharp left the U.S. Attorney's Office and moved to his 
current firm, Mayer Brown, where his practice focuses on civil 
concerns, including tort, contract, intellectual property, environment, 
tax, and unfair competition claims, securities fraud, professional 
liability, and governmental investigations.
  In 2009, Mr. Tharp's firm selected him to serve as coleader of the 
securities enforcement practice. In 2010, that group merged with the 
securities litigation group, and he continues to serve as coleader of 
the combined Mayer Brown securities litigation and enforcement 
practice. He has an ABA rating of Unanimous ``Well Qualified.'''
  I urge my colleagues to support these nominees. I think they probably 
will be supported overwhelmingly.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. CARDIN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I am so proud to be here on the floor of 
the Senate to support the nomination of Judge George Russell III. He is 
nominated to the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, and 
he has the enthusiastic support of Senator Cardin and myself. Senator 
Cardin will speak right after me.
  I thank Senators Leahy and Grassley for moving this nomination, and I 
thank Senators Reid and McConnell for their cooperation.
  I take my advice-and-consent responsibilities very seriously. When I 
consider someone for the Federal bench, I have four criteria: absolute 
personal integrity, judicial competence and temperament, a commitment 
to core constitutional principles, and a history of civic engagement in 
Maryland.
  I cite these standards because I mean it. I must say Judge Russell--
he is currently on the Circuit Court of Baltimore City--brings the 
right values to the bench. He has the necessary experience. He has seen 
the legal system

[[Page 6690]]

from all perspectives and brings forth a top-notch background.
  He is nominated to fill the seat of Judge Peter Messitte, who took 
senior status 3 years ago. I think it is a matter of urgency to confirm 
Judge Russell because of the backlog we have in our Maryland Federal 
court.
  Prior to taking the bench, Judge Russell spent his legal career as a 
litigator. He spent 10 years as an assistant U.S. attorney in Maryland. 
He handled both criminal and civil cases. While there he was also a 
community outreach coordinator. What does that mean? For an assistant 
U.S. attorney, it meant he worked with the community creating vital 
programs to reduce violent crimes.
  As a young attorney, Mr. Russell also served as a law clerk for Judge 
Robert Bell. Judge Bell is the chief judge of the Maryland Court of 
Appeals. I might add, Judge Bell enthusiastically endorses this 
Nominee.
  Judge Russell is a man born and raised in Baltimore. He graduated 
from the University of Maryland School of Law and has spent his entire 
career in Maryland. His father, also a judge, was a legal pioneer in 
Maryland, serving as the city's first African-American circuit judge.
  This judge, Judge Russell, has public service in his DNA, both 
working as a U.S. attorney and on the Federal bench and also in his 
connection to the everyday life of people. He has been on the board of 
directors of the Enoch Pratt Library, Big Brothers and Big Sisters, and 
the Community Law Center. He has often been recruited to be a 
motivational speaker, an inspirational speaker, particularly to high 
school and middle school students to encourage them to stay in school 
and off the street. He has particularly been enthusiastic about 
mentoring young attorneys and law students.
  The reason I talk about his civic engagement is that we want judges 
who do not live in a bubble. It is great to be a legal scholar, it is 
great to know the law inside and out, but a great judge knows people. 
This man, Judge George Russell III, by being out there--whether it is 
making sure the library is there for young people who want to move up; 
Big Brothers and Sisters, to keep young people out of trouble; or 
working at the Community Law Center--he has involved himself in the 
gritty aspects of Baltimore City. He is a devoted public servant. He 
comes with a great background.
  He brings together recommendations from both the public and private 
sector. I urge my colleagues to endorse the nomination of Judge 
Russell. I ask their support in voting for him.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, first, I thank Senator Mikulski for her 
leadership on the process we have used in Maryland on filling judicial 
vacancies. I am very proud to work with Senator Mikulski in a process 
that screens lawyers who are interested in becoming Federal judges in 
order that we can get the very best to recommend to the President.
  We think the President has chosen the very best in Judge Russell to 
fill the district court vacancy for the District of Maryland. But I 
really wanted to applaud my colleague in the Senate for the seriousness 
that we both take on filling these vacancies. We understand these are 
lifetime appointments. We want to make sure we get individuals who have 
the qualifications, who have the temperament, who have the integrity, 
and have the commitment to public service to serve our judiciary.
  I rise today to urge the Senate to confirm Judge George Levi Russell 
III, of Maryland, to be U.S. District Judge for the District of 
Maryland. Judge Russell was reported by voice vote out of the Judiciary 
Committee on February 16. Judge Russell currently sits as a trial judge 
in the Baltimore City Circuit Court.
  Judge Russell is an excellent candidate. He received bipartisan 
support from the Judiciary Committee and is ready to take office upon 
confirmation of the Senate. Judge Russell brings a wealth of experience 
to this position in both State and Federal courts. Earlier in his 
career he served as a Federal prosecutor and as an attorney in private 
law practice. He now sits as a State court trial judge in Maryland.
  Judge Russell graduated from Moorehouse College with a B.A. in 
political science and a J.D. from the Maryland Law School in 1991. He 
passed the Maryland Bar and was admitted to practice in Maryland in 
1991. He then clerked for Chief Judge Robert Bell on the Maryland Court 
of Appeals, which is our highest State court. He worked as a litigation 
associate for 2 years at Hazel & Thomas, and then briefly at Whiteford, 
Taylor. He then served as an assistant U.S. attorney for the District 
of Maryland from 1994 to 1999, handling civil cases. In that capacity 
he represented various Federal Government agencies in discrimination, 
accident, and medical malpractice cases. He then worked as an associate 
at the Peter Angelos law firm for 2 years.
  In 2002, he went back to the U.S. Attorney's Office, handling 
criminal cases until 2007. He represented the United States in the 
criminal prosecution of violent crimes and narcotic cases during the 
investigatory stage, at trial, and on appeal. This included the 
initiation of monitoring of wiretaps to infiltrate and break up violent 
gangs in Baltimore City.
  He also served as the Project Safe neighborhood coordinator for the 
office from 2002 until 2005. He participated in community outreach 
programs in coordination with the Baltimore City State's Attorney's 
Office to reduce violent crime in Baltimore communities.
  In 2007, Governor Ehrlich, a Republican, appointed him to serve as an 
associate judge of the Baltimore City Circuit Court for a term of 15 
years. As a trial judge, Judge Russell has presided over hundreds of 
trials that have gone to verdict or judgment and he has experience in 
handling jury trials, bench trials, civil cases, and criminal cases. He 
has the professional experience which has been recognized by a 
Republican Governor and a Democratic President.
  Judge Russell has strong roots, legal experience, and community 
involvement in the State of Maryland. He was born and raised in 
Baltimore City and has extended family who live in Baltimore. He served 
as a director and trustee of the board of the Enoch Pratt Free Library, 
which serves the disadvantaged throughout the State of Maryland. He 
served on the board of directors of the Community Law Center, which is 
an organization designed to help neighborhood organizations improve the 
quality of life for their residences.
  He has also served as a board member on several organizations that 
devote substantial resources to helping the disadvantaged, including 
the Big Brothers and Big Sisters of Maryland. I know he has often 
spoken to young people in school about the obligations, duty, and 
mandate of a judge, and he tries to demystify the role of a judge in a 
black robe.
  Judge Russell is particularly concerned with addressing the drug, 
violence, and mental health problems that plague Baltimore City. Judge 
Russell comes from a very distinguished family in the legal profession 
of Maryland. Judge Russell's father, George L. Russell, Jr., was also a 
groundbreaking African-American lawyer in Maryland. He was the first 
African-American judge on the Maryland Circuit Court in the 1960s and 
was later Baltimore's first African-American Solicitor.
  He was also the first African-American president of the Baltimore 
City Bar Association. In later years, Judge Russell was named by the 
Governor to chair the Maryland Museum of African-American History and 
Cultural Commission and served as chairman of the board of the Maryland 
African-American Museum Corporation.
  He was also asked to chair Baltimore's Judicial Nominating 
Commission. He has received numerous awards from the Maryland Bar 
Foundation and NAACP.
  His family is deep in public service, including his wife who serves 
as a judge on the District Court of Maryland for Baltimore City. I am 
absolutely convinced that Judge Russell possesses the qualifications, 
temperament, and passion for justice that will make him an

[[Page 6691]]

outstanding Federal trial judge. He will serve the people of Maryland 
very well in this position. I therefore urge my colleagues to vote for 
the confirmation of Judge Russell to serve as a judge for the U.S. 
District Court for the District of Maryland.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call 
be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                 Unanimous Consent Agreement--H.R. 2072

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 11:15 a.m, 
Tuesday, May 15, the motion to proceed to Calendar No. 396, H.R. 2072, 
be adopted; that the only first-degree amendments in order to the bill 
be Lee No. 2100, Paul No. 2101, Corker No. 2102, Vitter No. 2103, and 
Toomey No. 2104; that there be no amendments in order to any of the 
amendments prior to the votes; that there be no motions or points of 
order in order other then budget points of order and the applicable 
motions to waive; that there be up to 2 hours of debate to run 
concurrently on the amendments and the bill equally divided between the 
two leaders or their designees prior to votes in relation to the 
amendments in the order listed; that upon disposition of the 
amendments, the Senate proceed to vote on passage of the bill, as 
amended, if amended; that there be 2 minutes equally divided prior to 
each vote, and all after the first vote be 10-minute votes; that the 
amendments and passage of the bill require 60 votes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, we have pending now a cloture vote. I have 
spoken to the Republican leader very recently. We think it would be in 
the best interests of the Senate to do away with the cloture vote. 
Therefore, I ask unanimous consent that the cloture vote scheduled for 
this evening be vitiated.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. There should only be one rollcall vote tonight because the 
Maryland judge we expect to be able to voice-vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time is expired.
  Under the previous order, the question is, Will the Senate advise and 
consent to the nomination of George Levi Russell III, of Maryland, to 
be United States District Judge for the District of Maryland.
  The nomination was confirmed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Will the Senate advise and 
consent to the nomination of John J. Tharp, Jr., of Illinois, to be 
United States District Judge for the Northern District of Illinois.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Casey), the Senator from North Carolina (Mrs. Hagan), and the Senator 
from Florida (Mr. Nelson) are necessarily absent.
  Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Missouri (Mr. Blunt), the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Burr), 
the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cornyn), the Senator from South Carolina 
(Mr. DeMint), the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Kirk), the Senator from 
Kansas (Mr. Moran), the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski), the 
Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Paul), the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. 
Thune), and the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker).
  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cornyn) 
would have voted ``yea'' and the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. 
DeMint) would have voted ``nay.''
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Merkley). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 86, nays 1, as follows:

                       [Rollcall Vote No. 90 Ex.]

                                YEAS--86

     Akaka
     Alexander
     Ayotte
     Barrasso
     Baucus
     Begich
     Bennet
     Bingaman
     Blumenthal
     Boozman
     Boxer
     Brown (MA)
     Brown (OH)
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Chambliss
     Coats
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Coons
     Corker
     Crapo
     Durbin
     Enzi
     Feinstein
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Grassley
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Heller
     Hoeven
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Isakson
     Johanns
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson (WI)
     Kerry
     Klobuchar
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lugar
     Manchin
     McCain
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (NE)
     Portman
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Rubio
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Snowe
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Toomey
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Vitter
     Warner
     Webb
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                                NAYS--1

       
       
     Lee
       

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Blunt
     Burr
     Casey
     Cornyn
     DeMint
     Hagan
     Kirk
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Nelson (FL)
     Paul
     Thune
     Wicker
  The nomination was confirmed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motions to 
reconsider are considered made and laid upon the table and the 
President will be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

                          ____________________