Wrap Up (The Senate Stands Adjourned), Lankford, Perdue, Portman

Executive Session (Gorsuch Nomination)

 

 

Tomorrow, April 7 -

  • The Senate will convene at 9:30 a.m. 
  • Following any leader remarks, the Senate will resume consideration of Executive Calendar #33, Neil Gorsuch, of Colorado, to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States with up to two hours of debate, equally divided.
  • At approximately 11:45 a.m the Senate will VOTE on confirmation of Executive Calendar #33, Neil Gorsuch, of Colorado, to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.

 

Senator Lankford: (6:19 p.m.)

  • Spoke on the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.
    • "It is remarkable that this has been more about character destruction than policy differences. I understand that there are policy differences, but why does it have to come to this? In the past few weeks I heard on this floor that Neil Gorsuch shouldn't be a justice on the Supreme Court because he has no Independence from president trump. Number two, I heard he was hand-picked by far-right groups like the federalist society, a group of legal minds committed to the original interpretation of the constitution. Clearly a scadalous group of radicals. I heard that judge Gorsuch supports torture, against privacy, hates truckers, step on the little guy, will only help big corporations, and he's just not mainstream. And I heard he shouldn't be selected because he was not approved first by the Democratic Senate leadership. All of these reasons have been given for a historic change in the Senate tradition, not to give a Supreme Court justice an up-or-down vote, block him on a procedural motion for the first time ever with a partisan vote."

 

Senator Perdue: (6:34 p.m.)

  • Spoke on the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.
    • "In 2003, the Democratic party threw out over 200 years of precedent when it comes to circuit judge nominees and killed a circuit judge nomination. Today, they attempted to do the same thing when it comes to a nominee to the highest court in the United States. It should be noted Republicans did not attempt to do this to either Justice Sotomayor or Justice Kagan when they were nominated by President Obama just a few years ago. Throughout our history, even the most controversial Supreme Court nominees have gotten an up-or-down vote, a simple majority vote, Mr. President. On that note, I also would like to point out that there is no long-standing rule or tradition that a Supreme Court nominee must obtain 60 votes to be confirmed. Judge Clarence Thomas was confirmed by a narrow 52-48 margin. Even though a single senator, could have required 60 votes to invoke cloture, none did. Likewise, Justice Samuel Alito was confirmed by a 58-42 margin. Again, no senator required 60 votes to invoke cloture. Neither of those nominees were filibustered to death. They got an up-or-down vote. Mainstream media outlets have repeatedly fact checked the minority party on this. For example, last week, "The Washington Post" said once again there is no traditional 60-vote standard or rule for Supreme Court nominations, no matter how much or how often Democrats claim otherwise, end quote. Even Politifact has repeatedly pointed out, and I quote, Gorsuch, like all other Supreme Court justice nominees, needs only a simple majority to be confirmed by the Senate. Clearly, outside of this body, it's recognized in the media and on both sides of the aisle, for that matter, that there is no such thing as a 60-vote standard when it comes to the nomination of confirmation of Supreme Court justices."

 

Senator Portman: (6:48 p.m.)

  • Spoke on the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.
    • "This guy, Neil Gorsuch, is the right person for the job. He's qualified, he's smart, he's fair. A bipartisan majority of the United States Senate will vote for this worthy candidate tomorrow. Let me underscore that. A bipartisan majority of the United States Senate will vote for this worthy candidate tomorrow, and he'll end up getting on the court. I must tell you, I regret that some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle refuse to provide him that up-or-down vote without going through the process we've had to go through today. As someone who's gone through two Senate confirmations myself, I know they're not always easy, but I will tell you it's a whole lot better for this institution and for our country when we figure out ways to work together, and in this case to continue a senate tradition of allowing up-or-down votes. I like to work across the aisle. I've done that through my career. I can point to 50 bills that I authored or coauthored that have become law in the last six years, they were bipartisan by definition because they got through this body. They were signed into law by President Obama. I have voted for the president's nominees, President Obama's nominees before President Trump. When President Obama has a well-qualified judge on the floor, I voted for that judge. I voted for Loretta lynch. Not an easy vote. I took heat for it back home but I thought she was qualified. I think that's what we ought to do in this body and I'm disappointed in the situation we're in."