On the recordAugust 3, 2010
I appreciate Chairman Leahy. He is a strong and effective leader of our committee. We agree a lot of times. I try to work with him, and sometimes we disagree. One thing we will soon be doing that I look forward to very much is going to the White House--maybe in 30 minutes or so--to participate in the signing of a bill to eliminate the vast disparity between crack and powder cocaine sentences. The sentencing mechanism under the guidelines I think was unfair and needed to be corrected. I have been working on that issue for some time, and so has Chairman Leahy. We certainly agree on a lot of issues and get some things done, but we do not agree on this nomination. The office of Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court is one of the most important positions in our National Government. Justices are granted a degree of independence unequaled anywhere in the United States. Justices hold lifetime terms, subject only to impeachment, and Congress may not even reduce their pay. Why did the Founders take such a step? They wanted our courts to be impartial, doing justice to the poor and the rich under the Constitution and laws of the United States, as their oath says, and they did not want them subject to political or other pressures that might affect their objectivity. They wanted judges who could do the right thing year after year, day after day. Presidents get to nominate, but the Senate must confirm.
