On the recordAugust 3, 2010
I rise to speak in support of the nomination of our Solicitor General, Elena Kagan, as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. The power the Constitution gives the Senate to advise and consent to Presidential nominations is a very important one but never more significant than when we are called upon to respond to a President's nomination of a Justice to the U.S. Supreme Court because this nomination is for a lifetime to the Court, from which there is no appeal. It is the final arbiter of justice in our system of justice, in our system of government. So these are important moments, when we are called upon to respond to a President's nomination to the Supreme Court. I remember once, early on, after I came to the Senate, during a controversial nomination to the Supreme Court, and our late and truly great colleague, Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia, said something I will never forget. He said that, normally, when we consider whether to advise and consent to a President's nomination to a Federal position, we give, understandably, the benefit of the doubt to the nominee, the person whom the President has nominated; when it comes to the Supreme Court--Senator Byrd said and counseled--the benefit of the doubt should go to the Supreme Court because of the lifetime tenure of Justices of the Supreme Court and their beyond-appeal role in our system of government.
