Chris Coons

An extraordinary person who lived a remarkable life and career, and whose impact on the Department, on the Senate, on our Nation, on the world rooted in her commitment to democracy, to advancing the role of women was profound.

The best way to protect the American people from the next variant that might kill more Americans and more people around the world, is to ensure that the rest of the world has access to America's vaccines.

As we were fighting over this additional payment, this additional funding for Covid relief globally, one of my colleagues memorably said, well, my constituents are done with this pandemic.

I was so disappointed that we in Congress could not come together and deliver critically-needed global help, to deliver the vaccines that we've already invented, developed, and purchased.

We are going to lose millions of doses of vaccine that will expire.

Just because we're done with the pandemic doesn't mean it's done with us.

If Putin is shown how brutal he can be, and he`s allowed to continue to massacre civilians, to commit war crimes, I deeply worry what will happen next is, Ukraine will turn into Syria.

We need to be prepared to do more and sort of hinted at even U.S. military becoming involved.

Judge Jackson is not soft on crime. She is not a radical liberal activist judge.

Have you ever used employed relied upon critical race theory to determine the outcome of any case or to impose any sentence or as a framework for your decision making?

I've been struck at Judge Jackson's personal story and the central role that the doors of opportunity opened by HBCUs to her parents has played in that impressive arc of her story.

Is it your view that she, either in that case or in other cases you may have considered or reviewed, has overstepped the role of the Court and has engaged in a jurisprudence that gets outside her lane as a judge?

In my view, that is an individual who belongs on the Supreme Court.

We, here in the Senate, in this Committee today, are in the middle of a policy fight.

I view as an unfair misrepresentation of your record.

I know President Biden counts nominating a Supreme Court Justice among the most significant decisions of his Presidency.

We want to know if you'll be fair. We want to know if you'll be faithful to the Constitution and to the rule of law.

If you were, in fact, an activist judge, a motivated partisan determined to let these plaintiff environmental groups proceed, you certainly could have.

I don't see anything that remotely substantiates that claim.

The RNC made Freedom of Information Act requests for certain emails involving the former Secretary.

There was a lot special and important about it. It was a highly charged partisan and political issue.

I take it as a personal sort of badge or source of pride when someone with whom I really disagree on one issue is able to legislate with me on another.

So to the extent there seems to be some concerted effort to try and characterize you as being soft on crime or somehow unconcerned about child safety, I just wanted to take another moment and give you a chance to respond to that.

You understand the reason why the robes of our Federal judges are black, not red or blue.

The real question I think a President should consider when they make a nomination, the question that we as Senators need the answer to in order to perform our function of advice and consent, and the question that I think resonates best…