On the recordApril 4, 2017
Mr. President, within the next hour or so, we will learn whether the minority will come to their senses or whether they will engage in the very first partisan filibuster of a Supreme Court nominee. All indications are that they are committed to their course. That is unfortunate. It truly is. The question one has to ask is this: What, exactly, is so objectionable about this nominee that he should be subjected to the first partisan filibuster in U.S. history? Is he, really, not well qualified? He attended Columbia for his bachelor's, Harvard for law school, Oxford for his doctorate. He clerked for not one--but two--Supreme Court Justices. He has spent over 10 years on the circuit court and has heard 2,700 cases. It is clear, then, that he is extremely well qualified. So what is it? What makes this nominee so objectionable? The truth is, throughout this process, the minority, led by their leader, has been desperately searching for a justification for their preplanned filibuster. Over the course of the last couple of months, they have trotted out one excuse after another, but nothing will stick. They said he isn't mainstream, but that is not true. Everyone from Obama's Solicitor General to Rachel Maddow has said he is mainstream. They said he isn't independent, but everyone knows he is an independent judge. He is his own man, and he understands the role of a judge. Then they roll out this ridiculous argument that he is for the big guy and against the little guy.…





