Republicans continue to object to requests for unanimous consent on basic things we should be able to do in a bipartisan manner here in the Senate. In addition to my request about gender discrimination, Republicans have previously objected to unanimous consent requests to allow votes on noncontroversial judicial nominees with bipartisan support to fill vacancies in our Federal judiciary. These requests are not remotely controversial; yet the Republicans continue to obstruct for obstruction's sake. Since the Republicans took over in January, their leadership has allowed only nine judges to be confirmed. A few district court judges have been confirmed in the last few weeks, but this recent increase in activity is in sharp contrast to their inaction all year. When Senate Democrats were in the majority during the last 2 years of the Bush Presidency, we had already confirmed 34 judges by this point--nearly four times more judges than Republicans have confirmed this year. Republicans have tried to justify their poor record by accusing Senate Democrats of scheduling votes for 11 judges during the lameduck session last December. They suggest that those 11 confirmations under last year's Democratic majority should somehow be counted towards this year's confirmation numbers. First, it is well-established Senate precedent to approve all pending consensus nominees before the end of a year.…
Share
More from Patrick Leahy
reserving the right to object, and I will, but let me explain why. The bill offered by my colleague on the other side of the aisle is shortsighted and premature. We have been working on this omnibus for months. I would have been happy to…
I rise today to celebrate the 90th anniversary of World Learning, a nonprofit organization based in Brattleboro, VT, that is dedicated to building stronger human connections through people-to-people exchanges, international education, and…
Do not turn your material, do not turn your reports over to the Executive Branch and let them tell you what is or is not classified.
I can say with absolute certainty that the proposed rules directly conflict with the legislation on a variety of matters, especially on provisions that limit access to the PTAB.





