On the recordFebruary 2, 2010
Mr. President, I wish to join my colleague from New Jersey and speak for just a few minutes about Judge Greenaway. I had come to the floor in hope and expectation that we could actually go to his nomination this afternoon. I am pleased we will get a vote on Monday but, even still, this process has taken much too long. This is a nominee for the Third Circuit Court of Appeals who has about as good as it gets in terms of bipartisan support. At the age of 40, he became a U.S. district court judge. Then, he passed by unanimous consent of this Chamber--Republicans and Democrats alike, unanimous consent. Now he passes out of the Judiciary Committee by, again, a unanimous agreement. Yet he has been held up for months on the Senate floor. Why? Simply because you can? That is not acceptable. It is not acceptable, when I have heard my colleagues on the other side of the aisle for years talk about an up- or-down vote: Give us an up-or-down vote on a nominee, particularly a nominee who is eminently qualified, who is noncontroversial by virtue of the fact that he has achieved the ability to be agreed to in terms of his nominations, both past and present, as it relates to the Judiciary Committee without qualification, without objection. So it is clear that up to this point the obstruction of this nominee is not about what is right for the Nation; it is not about acting in the best interests of an overburdened judicial system; it is not about ideology; it is not even about Judge Greenaway.…





