On the recordMarch 6, 2013
Mr. President, I rise in full support of Caitlin Halligan and must strongly disagree with my friend from Kentucky, the Republican leader. The bottom line is very simple: She is a well- qualified nominee, and we know that. The Republican leader acts as if Ms. Halligan were acting on her own. Whether the Senator from Kentucky agrees or disagrees, the Republican leader cannot cite a single instance where Ms. Halligan was not acting as an attorney representing the views of someone else. The same was true with what John Roberts did, and the same was true for what Sam Alito did. When those issues were brought up, our colleagues on the other side justifiably said we cannot attribute those views to them when they are representing somebody as an attorney. We all know that the obligation of an attorney is to represent his or her client, whether we agree or disagree with those views. When one works as solicitor general, they represent the State of New York. The State of New York's views on guns were clear, and Ms. Halligan ably represented those views. But nothing she has said about guns that was cited by my good friend the Republican leader was her own view. Similarly on the terrorism cases, she was representing an office that was prosecuting, not her views, so the comparison to Miguel Estrada is like night and day. Miguel Estrada had his own very, very clear views on the law, and he stated them in speeches, in articles, and in other ways. That is not so with Ms. Halligan.…
Source
govinfo.gov