Skip to main content

Mitch McConnell
  U.S. Senate Sen. Mc Connell on Kavanaugh  CSPAN  July 10, 2018 7:29pm-7:39pm EDT

7:29 pm
consideration of the benczkowski nomination and that all time during adjournment, leader remarks and morning business count postcloture on the nomination. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. mcconnell: if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the the presiding officer: the the u.s. senate confirmed mark bennett to be a judge on the court of appeals. they also voted to go to conference on the defense authorization bill. tomorrow more work on executive branch nominations. there's a number of senate floor speeches about the president's nomination of bret cavanaugh to the u.s. supreme court. mitch mcconnell leads off the comment. >> president trump has made a superb selection to serve as associate justice of the
7:30 pm
supreme court of the united states. judge cavanaugh of the d.c. circuit possesses an impressive resume, an outstanding legal mind and an exemplary judicial temperament. he served 12 years nominations most consequential circuitt court. he has proven to be one a most thorough and thoughtful in the country. that demonstrates an understanding of the proper role in our constitutional republic..r constitutional judges are not super legislators and we select with their personal views or policies and preferences. a judge's duty is to interpret the plain meaning of our law and our constitution according to how they are written. judges need to be unbiased for the need to treat all parties
7:31 pm
fairly. they need to approach every case with open ears and an open mind. the decisions must turn on the facts of each case and be based on the text that it is their job to interpret. by all accounts they are precisely the kind of judge. his resume is top-notch. a lot of group from you, ad lecturing position at harvard law school of which he was appointed dean. he quickly built a reputation as a start walk-through clerk including onur the supreme cour. one of the preeminent legal minds of his generation, in
7:32 pm
2006 the senate confirmed him to the d.c. circuit. he is o compiled an extensive record of the federal bench, published more than 300 opinions and earned considerable praise for his writing and reasoning. madam president, judge ntvanaugh has built a long and distinguished record. if pointed clear picture of how he would conduct himself. it's a firm understanding of the judges mustt interpret laws as they are written. we do not choose them to make policy, to pick favorites or to craft novel legislation from the bench. some of our colleagues and others on the left to the role of judges very differently. president obama summed up this alternate view well when he was running for president. he sought to appoint judges who harbor particular empathy for certain parties in certain
7:33 pm
case cases. that's great if you happen to be the party in the case who the judge likes. not so great if you're the other guy. it doesn't allow our historical understanding of the rule of law or the role that federal courts play in our democracy. so, i would respectfully submit that then and now some of our democratic colleagues seem to be a little confused. they seem to be confusing the nature of a political office with the nature of a judicial office. two grilled judge cavanaugh on policy outcomes like voters rightly grill all of us only
7:34 pm
run proceeds here in the senate. some democratic senators have telegraphed that they will heed the demand of the far left special-interest groups and try to commit under oath decisions he might make him potential issues and hypothetical cases. forget that the cases don't even exist yet. forget the total absence of facts or legal arguments or research. forget how inappropriate it would be for a judge to predetermine a ruling before other lawyers uttered a single word. madam president that's simply not how this process has ever worked or ever could work. i'm not the one thing this.
7:35 pm
a prior supreme court nominee settlements very subject, a judge one to decide impartially can offer no forecast, no for that would show natalie disregard for the specifics of the particular case but it would displayt disdain for the entire judicial process. those are the words of another d.c. circuit court judge and current supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg. during her senate confirmation tn 1993. i think we all should remember that standard. we will do well to remember that we are evaluating a judge not debating a candidate for political office.
7:36 pm
even more regrettably a number of our colleagues cannot even wait until the president's announcement last night before launching attacks on his this was in some cases a fill in the blank opposition. they wrote statements of opposition only to fill in the name later. sadly this is not an approach for the far left special-interest groups. just like last year they met with partisan opposition before the ink was even dropped on his nomination. i'm sorry to say that he seems broken that record. just fill in the name. whoever does before the ink was even dry on justice kennedy's resignation adam present us with a telltale
7:37 pm
sign of some of our colleagues are throwing independent judgment out the window. there's been a lot of talk about outsourcing. if anybody's outsourcing it's the democrats. outsourcing what they say to these outside groups that are demanding opposition to anyone at all costs matter who it is. as i discussed on the floor we know exactly what the partisan playbook looks like. it's been hauled out. [inaudible] 40 years. it's like clockwork. i fully anticipate will hear all kinds of fantastic stories about the pain and suffering of this perfectly qualified widely respected judge will somehow unleash on america if
7:38 pm
we confirm him to the court. that kind of cheap clinical fear mongering insults the intelligence of the american people. they understand the difference between a political office in a judicial office. they understand the difference between policymakers who throw pitches and the policymakers who thro call balls and strikes. i look forward to the fair consideration of this most impressive nomination. i look forward toe meeting with judge cavanaugh to hearing his testimony in committee and to voting on his confirmation right here on the senate floor.