DOCSLIB.ORG

Congressional Record on Choice

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Congressional Record on Choice 2019 Congressional Record on Choice Government Relations Department 1725 I Street, NW Suite 900 Washington, DC 20006 202.973.3000 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON CHOICE 116TH CONGRESS, 1ST SESSION NARAL Pro-Choice America’s 2019 Congressional Record on Choice documents the key House and Senate votes on reproduc- For over 50 years, NARAL Pro-Choice tive freedom taken during the first session of the 116th Congress. The 116th Congress reflects a wave of historic firsts—most America has led the fight for repro- significantly the first pro-choice majority in the House of Representatives. There are a record number of women serving ductive freedom for everyone, includ- in the House, and more LGBTQ people serving in Congress than ever before. The freshman class is also younger than most ing the right to access abortion. recent incoming classes and the 116th Congress reflects record breaking racial, ethnic, and religious diversity. Nowhere was the new pro-choice House majority more NARAL Pro-Choice America is powered evident than in the appropriations process. House spending bills for fiscal year 2020 reflected increased funding for vital by our 2.5 million members—in every family planning programs, defunded harmful abstinence-on- ly-until-marriage programs, and blocked many of the Trump administration’s efforts to use the regulatory process to state and congressional district. restrict access to abortion and family planning services. Though the House bills were not passed by the Senate, we We represent the more than 7 in 10 now see what can happen when lawmakers committed to reproductive rights are in control. Unfortunately, some long- Americans who believe every person standing abortion restrictions remained in the funding bills, but we will continue to work with champions for reproductive should have the freedom to make the freedom to find ways to chip away at these barriers. best decision for themselves about if, Notably, co-sponsorship of the EACH Woman Act continued to grow, bringing the total number of co-sponsors when, and how to raise a family to a record high in the U.S. House of Representatives. The bill, which would repeal bans on abortion coverage in government healthcare programs, reflects a growing movement calling for an end to these restrictions. The Women’s Health Protection Act also achieved a record number of co-sponsors this year. The Women’s Health Protection Act would establish a federal 2019 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON CHOICE 1 statutory right to abortion and would block the onslaught of Our legislative victories in the House are a preview of state bans and restrictions on abortion. Given continued state the potential wins ahead for reproductive freedom under a efforts to ban and restrict abortion access across the country, pro-choice legislative majority. Despite these victories, Roe we need this legislation now more than ever. v. Wade is more vulnerable than ever. This term the Supreme Court decided to take up its first major abortion case since The progressive majority in the House also put an end Justice Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed. As we head into a to the onslaught of Congressional attacks on the Affordable presidential election year, NARAL Pro-Choice America and Care Act (ACA) and legislative efforts to defund Planned our 2.5 million member-activists will hold accountable the Parenthood. Unfortunately, the Trump administration’s lawmakers who are attacking reproductive freedom, and we dangerous domestic gag rule and efforts to undermine the will fight for our champions who know that women and fami- ACA in the courts and through the regulatory process could lies don’t deserve to pay the price for a political agenda. We still have devastating consequences on access to reproductive remain vigilant in our commitment to defend and advance healthcare across the country. our fundamental rights and freedoms, including the right to While the House worked its way through the appropriations decide freely if, when, and how to start a family, and we know process, the Senate was hard at work confirming anti-choice that 7 in 10 Americans stand with us. nominees to executive and judicial posts, in most cases handing them lifetime positions that will allow them to promote Trump and the Senate GOP’s anti-choice agenda for decades to come. In doing so, the Senate has allowed Trump to change the face of the judiciary—for the worse—for at least a generation. It is hard to overstate the impact that this president has had on the federal court system. Trump has now confirmed over 160 judicial nominees, many of them with reprehensible records on reproductive freedom and some rated as “not qualified” by the nonpartisan American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on the Judiciary for their lack of legal experience. The list of Trump’s nominees is woefully lacking in gender, racial, and ethnic diversity. Senate Republicans, critical allies in Trump’s strategy to flood the courts with anti-choice judges, have been working to confirm these nominees as fast as possible. Trump judges now account for more than a quarter of federal appellate judges. Senate Republicans’ attacks on reproductive freedom have not been limited to the courts. The anti-choice Senate majority took breaks from stacking the federal judiciary to introduce bills that would restrict access to abortion by elimi- nating insurance coverage of abortion (including in the private market) and interfering in the medical practice of abortion care. Thankfully these bills failed on procedural votes. 2 NARAL PRO-CHOICE AMERICA 2019 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON CHOICE 3 Sixth Circuit. Confirmed 52-47. A pro-choice vote (+) was against confirmation. (3/6/19). 6. Murphy Confirmation. Vote to confirm anti-choice nominee Eric Murphy to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the VOTE DESCRIPTIONS Sixth Circuit. Confirmed 52-46. A pro-choice vote (+) was SENATE against confirmation. (3/7/19). 7. Rao Confirmation. Vote to confirm anti-choice nominee 1. No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act: Motion to End Neomi Rao to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Debate. No Taxpayer Funding For Abortion Act, S.109. Columbia Circuit. Confirmed 53-46. A pro-choice vote (+) Motion to invoke cloture (end debate) on Wicker (R-MS) was against confirmation. (3/13/19). bill to effectively ban abortion coverage in the state 8. Wyrick Confirmation. Vote to confirm anti-choice health insurance exchanges, penalize small businesses nominee Patrick Wyrick to the U.S. District Court for that purchase private health plans that include abor- the Western District of Oklahoma. Confirmed 53-47. A tion coverage, mandate that health plans make biased, pro-choice vote (+) was against confirmation. (4/9/19). one-sided “disclosures” of abortion coverage, and reiterate and expand bans on public insurance coverage of abor- 9. Barker Confirmation. Vote to confirm anti-choice nominee tion. Three-fifths of the Senate (60 votes) is required to J. Campbell Barker to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern invoke cloture on legislation. Cloture motion failed 48-47. District of Texas. Confirmed 51-47. A pro-choice vote (+) A pro-choice vote (+) was against cloture. (1/17/19). was against confirmation. (5/1/19). 2. Barr Confirmation. Vote to confirm anti-choice nominee 10. Brasher Confirmation. Vote to confirm anti-choice William Barr to the post of Attorney General. Confirmed nominee Andrew Brasher to the U.S. District Court for the 54-45. A pro-choice vote (+) was against confirmation. Middle District of Alabama. Confirmed 52-47. A pro-choice (2/14/19). vote (+) was against confirmation. (5/1/19). 3. Interference in Abortion Practice: Motion to End Debate. 11. Park Confirmation. Vote to confirm anti-choice nominee Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, S.311. Motion Michael Park to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second to invoke cloture (end debate) on the motion to proceed Circuit. Confirmed 52-41. A pro-choice vote (+) was against to the Sasse (R-NE) bill to interfere with the medical prac- confirmation. (5/9/19). tice of abortion care under the threat of severe penalties. 12. Truncale Confirmation. Vote to confirm anti-choice Three-fifths of the Senate (60 votes) is required to invoke nominee Michael Truncale to the U.S. District Court for the cloture on legislation. Cloture motion failed 53-44. A Eastern District of Texas. Confirmed 49-46. A pro-choice pro-choice vote (+) was against cloture. (2/25/19). vote (+) was against confirmation. (5/14/19). 4. Miller Confirmation. Vote to confirm anti-choice nominee 13. Lee Confirmation. Vote to confirm anti-choice nominee Eric Miller to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Kenneth Lee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Confirmed 53-46. A pro-choice vote (+) was against Circuit. Confirmed 52-45. A pro-choice vote (+) was against confirmation. (2/26/19). confirmation. (5/15/19). 5. Readler Confirmation. Vote to confirm anti-choice 14. Vitter Confirmation. Vote to confirm anti-choice nominee nominee Chad Readler to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Wendy Vitter to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern 4 NARAL PRO-CHOICE AMERICA 2019 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON CHOICE 5 District of Louisiana. Confirmed 52-45. A pro-choice vote Third Circuit. Confirmed 56-40. A pro-choice vote (+) was (+) was against confirmation. (5/16/19). against confirmation. (7/16/19). 15. Collins Confirmation. Vote to confirm anti-choice 24. Berger Confirmation. Vote to confirm anti-choice nominee nominee Daniel Collins to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Wendy Williams Berger to the U.S. District Court for the Ninth Circuit. Confirmed 53-46. A pro-choice vote (+) was Middle District of Florida.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ben Sasse & Deb Fischer
    NEBRASKA TAXPAYERS FOR FREEDOM: CONGRESS WATCH BULLETIN. THE VOTING RECORD OF YOUR SENATORS: 2019. 304 North 168 Cir. #213 11819 Miracle Hills Dr. #205 Omaha, NE. 68118 Omaha, NE. 68154 Phone: 402-550-8040 Phone: 402-391-3411 Fax: 402-391-4725 Sen. Ben Sasse Sen. Deb Fischer 116th CONGRESS – 2019 NTF voting scores during this session: FISCHER: 99% 1st Session SASSE: 95% Taxes. S.J. Res. 50: To disapprove a conservative IRS rule relating to charitable contributions and estate tax deductions when a taxpayer receives or expects to receive a corresponding state or local tax credit. BAD BILL/ FAILED Fischer: NO Sasse: NO Spending. HR 3055 Amend. 1019: To reduce amounts appropriated by 2% than amount appropriated in FY 2019 for several federal programs. GOOD AMENDMENT/ FAILED Fischer: YES Sasse: YES Amend. 1141: To prohibit a liberal test for mass transit expenditures. GOOD AMENDMENT/ PASSED Fischer: YES Sasse: YES Amend. 1250: To not reduce amount appropriated by 1% and put savings towards EPA infrastructure assistance. BAD AMENDMENT/ PASSED Fischer: NO Sasse: NO HR 3877: To amend the Balanced Budget Act of 1985 to suspend the federal debt limit. BAD BILL/ PASSED Fischer: NO Sasse: NO HR 4378 Amend. 942: To reduce appropriated amount by 2% for several federal agencies. GOOD AMENDMENT/ FAILED Fischer: YES Sasse: YES PN 150: To confirm Gordon Hartogensis as Director of Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation. GOOD RESOLUTION/ CONFIRMED Fisher: YES Sasse: YES Government Regulations. PN 22: To confirm Andrew Wheeler as EPA administrator. GOOD RESOLUTION/ CONFIRMED Fischer: YES Sasse: YES PN 47: To confirm Spencer Bacchus III as member of the Export-Import Bank of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Report Card
    Congressional Report Card NOTE FROM BRIAN DIXON Senior Vice President for Media POPULATION CONNECTION and Government Relations ACTION FUND 2120 L St NW, Suite 500 Washington, DC 20037 ou’ll notice that this year’s (202) 332–2200 Y Congressional Report Card (800) 767–1956 has a new format. We’ve grouped [email protected] legislators together based on their popconnectaction.org scores. In recent years, it became twitter.com/popconnect apparent that nearly everyone in facebook.com/popconnectaction Congress had either a 100 percent instagram.com/popconnectaction record, or a zero. That’s what you’ll popconnectaction.org/116thCongress see here, with a tiny number of U.S. Capitol switchboard: (202) 224-3121 exceptions in each house. Calling this number will allow you to We’ve also included information connect directly to the offices of your about some of the candidates senators and representative. that we’ve endorsed in this COVER CARTOON year’s election. It’s a small sample of the truly impressive people we’re Nick Anderson editorial cartoon used with supporting. You can find the entire list at popconnectaction.org/2020- the permission of Nick Anderson, the endorsements. Washington Post Writers Group, and the Cartoonist Group. All rights reserved. One of the candidates you’ll read about is Joe Biden, whom we endorsed prior to his naming Sen. Kamala Harris his running mate. They say that BOARD OF DIRECTORS the first important decision a president makes is choosing a vice president, Donna Crane (Secretary) and in his choice of Sen. Harris, Joe Biden struck gold. Carol Ann Kell (Treasurer) Robert K.
    [Show full text]
  • Steven Menashi President Trump Nominated Steven Menashi to Serve
    Steven Menashi President Trump nominated Steven Menashi to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on August 14, 2019. Menashi is anti-choice. Career1 Bachelor of Arts, Dartmouth College, 2001 Assistant Editor, Policy Review, Hoover Institution, 2001-2002 Associate Editor, Policy Review, Hoover Institution, 2002-2004 Public Affairs Fellow, Hoover Institution, 2002-2004 Editorial Writer, The New York Sun, 2004-2005 Juris Doctorate, Stanford Law School, 2008 Clerk, Judge Douglas Ginsburg, U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 2008-2009 Olin-Searle Fellow, Georgetown University Law Center, 2009-2010 Clerk, Associate Justice Samuel Alito, U.S. Supreme Court, 2010-2011 Associate, Kirkland & Ellis, 2011-2013 Of Counsel, Kirkland & Ellis, 2013-2015, 2016-2017 Partner, Kirkland & Ellis, 2015-2016 Koch-Searle Research Fellow, New York University School of Law, 2013-2015 Assistant Professor, George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School, 2016-2019 (on leave 2017-2019) Acting General Counsel, U.S. Department of Education, 2017-2018 Principal Deputy General Counsel, U.S. Department of Education, 2018 Special Assistant to the President/Associate Counsel, Office of White House Counsel, The White House, 2018-present Record on Reproductive Freedom Menashi submitted an amicus brief on behalf of former U.S. Department of Justice officials in Zubik v. Burwell arguing that the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive- coverage policy forced certain religious groups into “moral complicity” with the use of contraception, despite an accommodation put in place for such groups by the Obama administration.2 Menashi compared such groups’ “moral complicity” in the use of contraception to providing weapons to help someone commit a crime.3 As editor-in-chief of the Dartmouth Review, Menashi wrote several anti-choice articles and editorials.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapman Law Review
    Chapman Law Review Volume 21 Board of Editors 2017–2018 Executive Board Editor-in-Chief LAUREN K. FITZPATRICK Managing Editor RYAN W. COOPER Senior Articles Editors Production Editor SUNEETA H. ISRANI MARISSA N. HAMILTON TAYLOR A. KENDZIERSKI CLARE M. WERNET Senior Notes & Comments Editor TAYLOR B. BROWN Senior Symposium Editor CINDY PARK Senior Submissions & Online Editor ALBERTO WILCHES –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Articles Editors ASHLEY C. ANDERSON KRISTEN N. KOVACICH ARLENE GALARZA STEVEN L. RIMMER NATALIE M. GAONA AMANDA M. SHAUGHNESSY-FORD ANAM A. JAVED DAMION M. YOUNG __________________________________________________________________ Staff Editors RAYMOND AUBELE AMY N. HUDACK JAMIE L. RICE CARLOS BACIO MEGAN A. LEE JAMIE L. TRAXLER HOPE C. BLAIN DANTE P. LOGIE BRANDON R. SALVATIERRA GEORGE E. BRIETIGAM DRAKE A. MIRSCH HANNAH B. STETSON KATHERINE A. BURGESS MARLENA MLYNARSKA SYDNEY L. WEST KYLEY S. CHELWICK NICHOLE N. MOVASSAGHI Faculty Advisor CELESTINE MCCONVILLE, Professor of Law CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY HAZEM H. CHEHABI ADMINISTRATION JEROME W. CWIERTNIA DALE E. FOWLER ’58 DANIELE C. STRUPPA BARRY GOLDFARB President STAN HARRELSON GAVIN S. HERBERT,JR. GLENN M. PFEIFFER WILLIAM K. HOOD Provost and Executive Vice ANDY HOROWITZ President for Academic Affairs MARK CHAPIN JOHNSON ’05 JENNIFER L. KELLER HAROLD W. HEWITT,JR. THOMAS E. MALLOY Executive Vice President and Chief SEBASTIAN PAUL MUSCO Operating Officer RICHARD MUTH (MBA ’05) JAMES J. PETERSON SHERYL A. BOURGEOIS HARRY S. RINKER Executive Vice President for JAMES B. ROSZAK University Advancement THE HONORABLE LORETTA SANCHEZ ’82 HELEN NORRIS MOHINDAR S. SANDHU Vice President and Chief RONALD M. SIMON Information Officer RONALD E. SODERLING KAREN R. WILKINSON ’69 THOMAS C. PIECHOTA DAVID W.
    [Show full text]
  • Shredding the Social Safety Net
    Shredding the Social Safety Net Introduction The coronavirus pandemic of 2020 has revealed an urgent need to shore up our nation’s infrastructure for supporting public health and welfare, as millions of Americans struggle to access health care and financial resources. Yet that infrastructure is in fact more endangered than ever – thanks in large part to a quiet right-wing revolution that has been taking place within the federal court system. Even after the current health crisis is over, this transformation will have the potential to change the nature of American life and, if it proceeds unchecked, could effectively choke off the next president’s ability to govern. Through strategic appointments to the federal bench, the far right has in recent years achieved astonishing progress toward its long-held goal to do away with a wide range of government powers and authorities that it sees as impeding the “free market.” Most alarmingly, these efforts have been focused on using the federal courts as tools to gut protections for public health, safety and welfare. It’s a plan that aims to do nothing less than to shred the social safety net that has underpinned American society for decades, including all the landmark achievements of the New Deal. No electorate would ever vote for candidates pledging to dirty the water, pollute the air, deprive senior citizens of Social Security or strip health care coverage for people with preexisting conditions. So Republicans have chosen to pursue these goals through the federal courts, which essentially allows them to achieve their ends while flying under the radar.
    [Show full text]
  • Contempt of Courts? President Trump's
    CONTEMPT OF COURTS? PRESIDENT TRUMP’S TRANSFORMATION OF THE JUDICIARY Brendan Williams* Faced with a letter from the American Bar Association (ABA) assessing him as “arrogant, lazy, an ideologue, and lacking in knowledge of the day-to-day practice,” Lawrence VanDyke, nominated by President Trump to serve on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, cried during an October 2019 confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.1 Republican senators dutifully attacked the ABA as liberally-biased.2 In a Wall Street Journal column, a defender of VanDyke assailed what he called a “smear campaign” and wrote that “[t]he ABA’s aggressive politicization is especially frustrating for someone like me, an active member of the ABA[.]”3 VanDyke was confirmed anyway.4 Contrary to Republican protestations, the ABA has deemed 97% of President Trump’s nominees to be “well qualified” or “qualified.”5 Indeed, in the most polarizing judicial nomination of the Trump Administration, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Kavanaugh’s defenders pointed to the ABA having rated him “well qualified” despite the association having once, in 2006, dropped his rating to “qualified” due to concerns about his temperament.6 *Attorney Brendan Williams is the author of over 30 law review articles, predominantly on civil rights and health care issues. A former Washington Supreme Court judicial clerk, Brendan is a New Hampshire long-term care advocate. This article is dedicated to his father Wayne Williams, admitted to the Washington bar in 1970. 1Hannah Knowles, Trump Judicial Nominee Cries over Scathing Letter from the American Bar Association, WASH. POST (Oct. 30, 2015). 2Id.
    [Show full text]
  • Trump Judges: Even More Extreme Than Reagan and Bush Judges
    Trump Judges: Even More Extreme Than Reagan and Bush Judges September 3, 2020 Executive Summary In June, President Donald Trump pledged to release a new short list of potential Supreme Court nominees by September 1, 2020, for his consideration should he be reelected in November. While Trump has not yet released such a list, it likely would include several people he has already picked for powerful lifetime seats on the federal courts of appeals. Trump appointees' records raise alarms about the extremism they would bring to the highest court in the United States – and the people he would put on the appellate bench if he is reelected to a second term. According to People For the American Way’s ongoing research, these judges (including those likely to be on Trump’s short list), have written or joined more than 100 opinions or dissents as of August 31 that are so far to the right that in nearly one out of every four cases we have reviewed, other Republican-appointed judges, including those on Trump’s previous Supreme Court short lists, have disagreed with them.1 Considering that every Republican president since Ronald Reagan has made a considerable effort to pick very conservative judges, the likelihood that Trump could elevate even more of his extreme judicial picks raises serious concerns. On issues including reproductive rights, voting rights, police violence, gun safety, consumer rights against corporations, and the environment, Trump judges have consistently sided with right-wing special interests over the American people – even measured against other Republican-appointed judges. Many of these cases concern majority rulings issued or joined by Trump judges.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record on Choice
    2019 Congressional Record on Choice Government Relations Department 1725 I Street, NW Suite 900 Washington, DC 20006 202.973.3000 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ON CHOICE 116TH CONGRESS, 1ST SESSION NARAL Pro-Choice America’s 2019 Congressional Record on Choice documents the key House and Senate votes on reproduc- For over 50 years, NARAL Pro-Choice tive freedom taken during the first session of the 116th Congress. The 116th Congress reflects a wave of historic firsts—most America has led the fight for repro- significantly the first pro-choice majority in the House of Representatives. There are a record number of women serving ductive freedom for everyone, includ- in the House, and more LGBTQ people serving in Congress than ever before. The freshman class is also younger than most ing the right to access abortion. recent incoming classes and the 116th Congress reflects record breaking racial, ethnic, and religious diversity. Nowhere was the new pro-choice House majority more NARAL Pro-Choice America is powered evident than in the appropriations process. House spending bills for fiscal year 2020 reflected increased funding for vital by our 2.5 million members—in every family planning programs, defunded harmful abstinence-on- ly-until-marriage programs, and blocked many of the Trump administration’s efforts to use the regulatory process to state and congressional district. restrict access to abortion and family planning services. Though the House bills were not passed by the Senate, we We represent the more than 7 in 10 now see what can happen when lawmakers committed to reproductive rights are in control.
    [Show full text]
  • The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies 2009 Annual Report
    The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies 2009 Annual Report “The Courts must declare the sense of the law; and if they should be disposed to exercise will instead of JUDGMENT, the consequences would be the substitution of their pleasure for that of the legislative body.” The Federalist 78 THE FEDERALIST SOCIETY aw schools and the legal profession are currently strongly dominated by a L form of orthodox liberal ideology which advocates a centralized and uniform society. While some members of the academic community have dissented from these views, by and large they are taught simultaneously with (and indeed as if they were) the law. The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities. This entails reordering priorities within the legal system to place a premium on individual liberty, traditional values, and the rule of law. It also requires restoring the recognition of the importance of these norms among lawyers, judges, law students and professors. In working to achieve these goals, the Society has created a conservative intellectual network that extends to all levels of the legal community.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 116 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 116 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 165 WASHINGTON, THURSDAY, DECEMBER 19, 2019 No. 206 Senate The Senate met at 9:30 a.m. and was U.S. SENATE, House amendment to the Senate called to order by the Honorable THOM PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE, amendment), to change the enactment TILLIS, a Senator from the State of Washington, DC, December 19, 2019. date. North Carolina. To the Senate: McConnell Amendment No. 1259 (to Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, Amendment No. 1258), of a perfecting f of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby appoint the Honorable THOM TILLIS, a Sen- nature. McConnell motion to refer the mes- PRAYER ator from the State of North Carolina, to perform the duties of the Chair. sage of the House on the bill to the The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, of- CHUCK GRASSLEY, Committee on Appropriations, with in- fered the following prayer: President pro tempore. structions, McConnell Amendment No. Let us pray. Mr. TILLIS thereupon assumed the 1260, to change the enactment date. Eternal God, You are our light and Chair as Acting President pro tempore. McConnell Amendment No. 1261 (the salvation, and we are not afraid. You instructions (Amendment No. 1260) of f protect us from danger so we do not the motion to refer), of a perfecting na- tremble. RESERVATION OF LEADER TIME ture. Mighty God, You are not intimidated The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- McConnell Amendment No. 1262 (to by the challenges that confront our Na- pore.
    [Show full text]
  • 13 Troubling Judicial Nominees You Missed This Year by Tony Hanna and Abbey Meller December 20, 2018
    13 Troubling Judicial Nominees You Missed This Year By Tony Hanna and Abbey Meller December 20, 2018 The bitter nomination process involving now-U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, which culminated in a contested confirmation vote on October 6, brought the importance of the federal judiciary to the forefront of American politi- cal consciousness. Around the country, tens of thousands of people rallied to protest the influence and effects of the judicial system on issues affecting everyone: health care reproductive rights, civil rights, disability justice, gun violence prevention, and more.1 Although Senate Republican leaders worked hard to shield Kavanaugh’s record from public oversight, hundreds of brave people risked arrest to protest both outside and inside Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing and, later, at the sham hear- ing2 to investigate the legitimate claim of sexual assault made against Kavanaugh by Christine Blasey Ford. Yet, while concerned citizens were rightfully paying attention to the important debate taking place over the future of the U.S. Supreme Court, the Trump administration and its allies in the Senate were also busy reshaping the lower federal courts. This year, the Senate confirmed a record 65 lower court judges3 to lifetime seats on the federal judiciary. An additional 67 judicial nominees are currently pending Senate action;4 the Senate could still vote on these nominations before the end of the year. In short, the Trump administration and its allies in the Senate are working at a breakneck pace to turn the federal courts into a hyper-conservative body that will implement a partisan political agenda from the bench.
    [Show full text]
  • October 9, 2018 United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary 224
    October 9, 2018 United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary 224 Dirksen Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510 Dear Chairman Grassley, Ranking Member Feinstein, and Committee Members: On behalf of our hundreds of thousands of members throughout the United States, People For the American Way opposes the nomination of Eric Murphy of Ohio to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. His record demonstrates that he should not be given the power and responsibility that come with a lifetime seat on the body that is just one step below the Supreme Court in importance and influence. President Trump has bypassed traditional norms in selecting him (as well as Chad Readler) over the objections of their home state senator, Sherrod Brown, and the Judiciary Committee is bypassing traditional norms by holding a hearing for them anyway. Chairman Grassley’s policy on home-state senators’ consent changes, depending on the party of the president making the nominations. As a result of this corruption, several far-right nominees strongly opposed by their home state senators have appeared before the committee: David Porter (Third Circuit), Michael Brennan (Seventh Circuit), David Stras (Eighth Circuit), and Ryan Bounds (Ninth Circuit). The latest beneficiary of this corruption is Eric Murphy (along with Chad Readler). A 2005 law school graduate and former clerk of Justice Kennedy, Eric Murphy left Jones Day in 2013 and accepted a political appointment from the state attorney general to be state solicitor of Ohio. In that capacity, he has taken a number of extremely disturbing positions. Of course, the role of a judge is wholly different from that of an advocate, and nominees do not necessarily agree with the legal arguments they make as part of their zealous representation of their clients.
    [Show full text]