Transcripts For CSPAN2 Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats

Before restart a couple of members are coming over and we have a number of civics teachers and the audience. If they will raise their hands please. I was telling, i was telling some of them i am delighted to see schools teaching civics and history. And when you get done it might be good for you to come and do a little seminar for the senators. Im sorry, that was my out loud voice. You know this morning i called members here this morning, chairman grassley convened at Judiciary Senate confirmation hearing. I wish we would confirm some of the people that are then voted out but the glaring omission in the hearing was chief judge Merrick Garland. Its been two months since he was nominated to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court. In fact, its totally impressive than it. He had a public hearing. He would be poised to report out of the committee. What bothers me is because he does not have a hearing and we do not allow him to have a hearing his record is being smeared by outside groups. Some of these packs and others to Senate Republicans have denied this distinguished jurist a public hearing and a fair opportunity. I cant convened confirmation hearing. We are in the minority but just because republicans refuse to do their job on judge garlands nomination doesnt mean that we democrats we take her constitutional duties seriously and if theres any doubt about the need to have a fully functioning Supreme Court, decisions handed down this week are the latest evidence of the harm stemming from it. The Supreme Court has repeatedly failed to have the decision. They let the courts repeal in limbo because they dont have a full court and cant make a decision. Now, i know that the decision not to give them a hearing was done in a closeddoor hearing. This is an open one. We have four people here who know him personally. We have don bucella from arlington vermont. She is a former prosecutor. She worked for the Justice Department from 1993 to 1997 area she is part of the team that investigated and prosecuted the Oklahoma City bombing one of the most complex investigations and prosecutions we have had in this country. Justin driver is a professor of law the university of chicago. Before he clerked for the Supreme Court for Justice Sandra day oconnor and Justice Stephen breyer and as you know we have now retired Justice Oconnor and we should be having a full nomination hearing. Secretary rodney slader is a former secretary of transportation under president bill clinton. He previously served as the first africanamerican administrative highway administration. Judge timothy k. Lewis is a former judge on the u. S. Circuit court of appeals with the Third Circuit so he knows very well how circuit courts work. He was appointed by president george h. W. Bush in 1992. I had the privilege of voting to confirm him. He also served as a Federal District judge of the Western District of pennsylvania so what i would suggest we do. We will put their full statement in the record but we could ask questions of the witnesses and i wonder not just because of the vermont connection or the fact that you are both former prosecutors. You could say because she is a woman. As we also have ancestry. And she is a woman. She should go first. I will be the last person to argue with senator feinstein one of the most valuable members of this committee. Please go ahead ms. Bucella. Thank you. Its my honor and privilege to be here today to talk to you a little bit about someone who i know very very well who we worked closely together judge Merrick Garland. Marek and i have known one another. We were at doj in 1993 to 1997 but i think probably in the time we really bonded were the days of the Oklahoma City bombing. He and i were out there. We were probably the first people out there from the department of justice excluding the team from the Western District of oklahoma the Oklahoma City prosecutors. I got an opportunity at that time to see merrick firsthand deal with the utmost chaos and tragedy and the entire time just focusing on what needed to be done that the prosecution a ticker that the investigation needed to be done in the right way and to be sure that the rule of law was going to be followed and that emotions would not take any part of what we were doing. It was an interesting time. It was chaos. Everybody probably wanted to stop what they were doing because it was a worse crime on american soil at the time that we had to go forward. We had to bring the perpetrators to justice. We had to find out what was going on and what had actually happened. We also had, like it never seen before in my entire professional life, as a prosecutor more tools, more agents, more cops, more First Responders all in one spot and all anybody wanted to do was to help. We needed somebody to be the conductor. All that energy, all that smartness, all those brains, all that power to go ahead and investigate the case and i can answer plenty of questions but merrick and i literally when he got there, we walked the building, we walked through the building around the murder building. At the time we walked through the daycare center. Neither of us said anything. We just kept walking and there were cars that literally were still smoldering and between the building and the daily register. There were cadaver dogs rescued dogs and cadaver dogs trying to find the remains of the people that perished in that building that day. And walking through their, actually we didnt talk about it until the 20 year reunion we were both in Oklahoma City and we finally just talk about it and both of us had tears in her eyes the whole time. There was too much adrenaline and trying to make sure we were doing our job for the American People that there were a lot of people that had strong personalities and watching merrick literally navigate his way to make sure everybody had a role, everybody had their voices heard was just something remarkable. Merrick is calm under pressure. You never really know whats going on in his head and he is always 25 steps ahead of everybody else. Thank you and judge lewis, we have heard that we cant move forward because its Election Year. You were nominated to the Third Circuit, september 1992 which two which was an Election Year. It was a president ial Election Year. You are nominated by a republican president for the senate where the Senate Republicans were the majority. Am i correct on those dates . You are correct. So it would be safe to say that if the democrats had to nominate you and there was a Election Year exception, you would not have been confirmed. I think it is fair to say that. I think its also fair to say that especially when it comes to nominations for the United States Supreme Court, i have never been aware of and electionyear exception until this happens. Yes, i was nominated by president george hw w bush for vacancy on the Third Circuit court of appeals on september 18, 1992. This of course this of course was on the eve of president ial election. It was a hotly contested one, of course, as they they all are. I was unanimously confirmed on october 8. The election was november 3. I am living proof that that can happen. I am also living proof that the republic still survives and goes on and does fairly well, i hope. You know, its also true that not only did the party who then was the Majority Party in the senate and obviously on the committee proceed with my nomination and confirmation, as well as others, on the eve of the election, but that party also took the white house so there was, as i wrote wrote in my statement really no harm no foul and i think at that time, and this was now 24 years ago, there was a culture of bipartisanship that is severely lacking today. Thats most unfortunate. You know, i come from the wonderful commonwealth that has produced the likes of hugh scott, dick schweiger, arlen specter, my current senator casey. This is so unfortunate to those of us who have witnessed over the years my home state senators cross the aisle, reach out, work to get things done, in so many ways. John heinz, and today we are mired in a very unfortunate and dysfunctional place that is resulting in what is going on now with respect to a wonderful judge, a highly qualified nominee and incidentally, a terrific human human being america garland. So you ask why i am here. I am here because i refused to accept that. I think the country should refuse to accept that too. I believe that it is the responsibility of the United States senate, just as it is the responsibility of citizens of this country to rise above these petty self interests and to act with honor and decency, and i think that is compelled by the very oath that members of this body have taken. I think that we respect values and traditions that are timehonored such as the confirmation process, just a hearing, whether or not a confirmation even even happens remains to be seen, but a hearing. The decency to provide a hearing and let the American Public view judge garland under questioning vetted fully, at a minimum, is the decent thing to do. Whether or not it is compelled by law it is certainly compelled by tradition and decency. I am also here because i believe that the United States Supreme Court should never be viewed as a political arm in ideological arm of any party. I detest, as a former judge and citizen seeing that occur today. I believe the Supreme Court must remain above the fray because it is the symbol of our greatest aspirations of a society. I believe we have to do whatever we can and thats why im here today to help ensure that continues. Thank you. Thank you very much. I had the privilege of serving both senator hugh scott and john heinz. I agree with what you said. Of course we have former secretary Rodney Slater who i mentioned before and we talked about this and this nomination so i will turn to you secretary slater. Please go ahead. Thank you. Thank you senator, thank you senators. I would actually like to begin with reference to the comments just made by judge lewis because its interesting that i was making my way to washington, hopefully, because we were in the mist of a very Rigorous Campaign in 1992. I was working for young governor from a small state, arkansas, and for me, just the anticipation of what that journey could be about, it never became clear until now the interesting thread that actually ties us all together as we move across the political process through our system that can take us from one administration to the next, that allows our country to continue to move forward as a beacon of light for democracies around the world. Its clear from judge lewis comments that we gather not for any partisan purpose, but as believers in the constitution. The constitution that has caused us all to take a solid move to defend and support the constitution, and has given some of us the opportunity to be nominated by our president and then confirmed by the senate. That is a very sacred and special process. It is something to be treasured and guarded. It is also something to be defended. So in that spirit of just seeing how one administration can move to the next and a process can go forward to bring one appropriately to a seat on the bench and another into an administration, frankly that would have the opportunity to say to ms. Priscilla priscilla, thank thank you and thank you judge garland for the work that you did and responding to the Oklahoma City bombing. I was the federal highway administrator during my first stint in the federal government and we lost 11 individuals, members of our team who were part of the 168 killed that day. It was in that breach of a hollowed out federal building, of shattered lives and of grave uncertainty that ms. Priscilla and judge garland step forward to protect and defend. So i am here to say thanks for that effort. Im also here to say to judge garland and to say to all of you that he and i actually have the special relationship within individual that i would also like to lift up at this moment. His name is mr. William t coleman. He was the first africanamerican secretary of transportation. He was appointed, nominated and confirmed during the ford administration. He too came at a special time. He gave me counsel when i was going through the process, but he is also a very dear friend to judge garland. Interestingly, they both are honored and distinguished graduates of the Harvard School of law, they both clerk at the Supreme Court, and they both have a fond and committed respect for the law and the rule of law. So i lift up his connection as well. Finally i would just like to say this, when my wife and i came to washington we didnt know a lot of people. We had a young daughter, her name was bridget, and we met the garlands who had two daughters and their daughters rebecca and jesse gave us a sense of a place and helped us become comfortable in the place. Over the years, we have gone to a host of parentteacher meetings. Weve gone to parents nights, weve gone to sporting events, we have talked about the hopes and dreams and aspirations for our daughters, so i come also to say that this is a good man. He is a devoted husband and doting father and he is an engaged and committed parent. I am just very, very pleased to be here in this connected group of individuals to lift my voice in support of judge garlands nomination to the knopp and United States Supreme Court. Inc. You very much. He is also clerk for two Supreme Court justices, Sandra Day Oconnor who was nominated by Ronald Reagan who was nominated by president bill clinton. Please go ahead. Members of the senate, i am honored to have this opportunity to appear before you today in order to comment on the nomination of chief judge garland to be on the Supreme Court of the United States. I have the privilege of serving as a law clerk to judge carlin on the u. S. Court of appeals for the d. C. Circuit from 2005 2005 2006. Clerking for judge garland was an invaluable expense. It was without question, the most single year of my entire career. As has been well documented by now, he possesses an unbelievably sharp analytical mind. He works very long hours in order to make sure that his cases come out in the right way. He is, as many people have said, a judges judge. He is a judicial craftsman of the highest order and in order to do that it takes long hours immersing himself in the cases and the briefs, talking to the clerks about the case to make sure he is reaching the right conclusion. In his approach to the law deliberately avoids some sweeping pronouncements and instead keeps the opinions narrow so as to dispose of the cases that are before him and to honor the existing. He also make sure that he he never loses sight of how the opinions they produce impact the lives of ordinary citizens. Hes always aware of that. He is meticulous in his approach. Nothing better exemplifies that an idea than before he would circulate the opinions to his colleagues on the d. C. Circuit, he would have two law clerks, one standing on either side of him and he would read each word of the draft opinion allowed in order to make sure that everything was exactly right as he opened last minute. So that is his attitude toward the law. He is also measured in his approach to the law. He had an uncommon ability to identify Common Ground among his fellow judges. He brought people from different backgrounds and viewpoints together when fostering consensus. He did this on the d. C. Circuit. He has firstrate demeanor. One of the first questions he would ask after we would return is how was my demeanor on the bench. He wanted to make sure he was asking tough questions but that he was also being fair to the attorneys before him and demonstrating respect for these people who were working with him in order to shape our legal enterprise. Its that attitude and that willingness to see people and try to see things from their perspective that has won him a host of admirers on, who are republicans and he is openminded and fair and demonstrates all of the qualities of being a firstrate justice. I just want to close by saying some words about his personal characteristics which inspire deep loyalty among the law clerks. You clerk for judge garland for one year and he stands by you for the rest of your life. There are two instances in my own life that demonstrate that he stands by his law clerks through times difficult and joyous alike. My mother died a little more than two years ago. Judge garland wrote an incredibly warm note offering condolences for my loss. When i received an endowed chair at the university of chicago a few months ago, he was one of the first people to reach out and congratulate me on that honor. So through times difficult and joyous he is there by your side. So the other thing is that, one of the really vivid images from my time during the clerkship is that right around 6 00 p. M. , judge garland would be fiercely packing cases in binders into his briefcase and then rushing out of the office with a quick good night to make sure he made it home to have dinner with his wife lynn and his two daughters. T