John Cornyn: “reserving the right to object, let me start by saying to my friend from Oregon that I admire his passion and I admire…”

“reserving the right to object, let me start by saying to my friend from Oregon that I admire his passion and I admire his creativity at branding legislation. But for reasons I will explain, this is a commonsense procedure that doesn't relate to the Fourth Amendment--the constitutional right to be protected from unreasonable searches and seizures. This is a venue provision. This has to do with what court to go to in order to get a court order and to get permission of a court, after establishing probable cause, to conduct that search. Senator Wyden is seeking consent to block proposed changes in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure that have already been the product of thoughtful and lengthy consideration, including public hearing and deliberation. These rules, as all rules that are plied in the courts are, have been approved by the rules advisory committee. This is a group of judges, law professors, and practicing attorneys. Then they were approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States. Then, most significantly perhaps, they were endorsed by the U.S. Supreme Court. So if there were constitutional or other legal issues and concerns about this, one would think the highest Court in the land would have flagged those and declined to endorse them, but they didn't. These changes have been approved because they are commonsense measures, as I said a moment ago, that relate solely to the appropriate venue for a search warrant.…”