On the recordMarch 7, 2019
This issue today we are about to vote on is about Eric Murphy. It is about confirming a very young, very inexperienced lawyer in Cleveland whose claim to fame is that he argued against marriage equality in the landmark Obergefell v. Hodges case. It is why Jim Obergefell has spoken out against his nomination. Here is what he said. He actually argued that marriage equality would be disruptive--disruptive--to our Nation. Telling people who love each other that they can marry is disruptive to our Nation? Who does that harm? Why would it matter? A couple in Atlanta or Decatur or a couple in Sioux Falls or Topeka or Omaha or Lincoln or Manchester or Laconia or Cleveland or Mansfield--why would it matter? Why would it be disruptive? This gentleman whom we are about to--I know every Republican, except maybe one courageous one, will vote for him because that is how we do it nowadays. You can't win through the democratic process; you win through the back door of the judiciary. That is what they are going to do. They are going to vote for a man who said it is disruptive to allow people who love each other to marry. He will make decisions on the rights of LGBTQ couples. Some in this body like to claim they support people regardless of their orientation. He has moved to restrict access to contraceptives for women. We are going to have women Republicans vote for somebody like that? He has defended Big Tobacco, as if there is any defense for addicting our children to tobacco.…
Source
govinfo.gov




