That is certainly a distinct and obvious difference. Both of these nominees were moved forward by the action of Trent Lott, the Republican leader, to move a Clinton nominee for an up-or-down vote. He got the up-or-down vote. Both those nominees were confirmed. That is exactly correct. And you want to talk about consistency, I ask the Senator from New York if he still stands by his statement he made that the basic issue of holding up judgeships is the issue before us, not the qualifications, which we can always debate; it is an example of Government not fulfilling its constitutional mandate because the President nominates and we are charged with voting on the nominees? And Patrick Leahy, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee----
Pete Sessions: “That is certainly a distinct and obvious difference. Both of these nominees were moved forward by the action of Trent…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing judicial nominations and the Senate's constitutional responsibilities.
Share
More from Pete Sessions
Mr. Chairman, thank you very much, and I want to thank our witness for being here and the conversation that she is having with the Committee.
I thank the chairwoman for the time, and I appreciate the gentleman from California standing in support of this bill, H.R. 2622. In fact, this was a bipartisan agreement that we came to. The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Gottheimer), and…
I think that the protection of the innocents is always paramount, and I think that a humanitarian corridor must be established for those to leave so that they are not going to be subjected to conflict.
It seems like we have gotten off into equity and diversity and all these other matters. I would like to, if I can, go a little bit higher and go to the challenges of politically driven agendas.





