Hirono references op-ed that staff secretaries are not traffic cops.
Hirono just named a few judges for praise, including Ketanji Brown Jackson, who have limited certain executive actions. These judges stood firm in defense of the Constitution.
Hirono: These are not normal times. We are here to decide whether to nominate Trump's choice who was selected for his belief in shielding president from criminal charges while in office.
Hirono: Trump turned to right-wing groups for the names of judges. Heritage Foundation considers policy to stop efforts to limit climate change, among other conservative efforts.
Hirono: Trump did as promised. He did not nominate someone who demonstrates independence and fidelity to the rule of law. He picked someone pre-approved as someone who would further causes. And in particular, he picked someone who would protect him from criminal charges.
Hirono: If we know one thing about Trump, it's that he's committed to self-preservation.
Hirono is now naming some federal appellate judges nominated by Trump, including Ho and Willett, who have stated views for different conservative causes.
Hirono: Kavanaugh knee-deep in Republican politics, and position on DC Circuit was first reward for that service.
Hirono: Because Justice Kennedy has left the court, forces opposed to worker rights, women's rights, environmental protections, etc., have been on the move. They know that a single vote is all it takes for radical changes in this country.
Hirono: Why go through the motions when we know the Republicans will do anything to promote this administration's nominations? Some battles are worth fighting.
Hirono: This is the president's latest attempt to rig the system in his favor.
Hirono: Just 18 months ago, Gorsuch said all precedent of the Supreme Court deserves respect as anchor of the law.
Hirono: Instead of just enduring this hearing, Judge Kavanaugh, don't you think you owe it to the American people to disclose your records because you have nothing to hide? If you stand behind your record, fairness would recommend suspending this hearing. Your failure to do so would respect a fundamental mistrust of the American people.
A staffer just brought Judge Kavanaugh more water.
Now Sen. Mike Crapo, Republican of Idaho
Crapo: Mentions Kavanaugh's book (with Gorsuch, and others) on the law of judicial precedent. Sadly, much of the discussion not about past opinions, philosophy, or temperament, but the notion that the chairman has not been transparent in the document production efforts. Those claims are wholly without foundation.
Crapo is repeating a point of past Republicans: more documents from Kavanaugh than past five nominees combined. Democrats largely have not contested this claim (although some have been saying that many of the documents are duplicate emails). The Dems' larger point is about the percentage of his documents that have been released, which is still small.
Crapo: Argument going on about documents is a trumped up argument.
Crapo: Their motives are clear. Use any possibility to delay nomination of a qualified nominee.
Crapo: Much of what we are hearing today is an effort to relitigate the last presidential election. We just heard Judge Kavanaugh attacked because he is a Trump nominee. The attack is on President Trump, not his nominees, because of an unwillingness to accept the outcome of the last election.
Crapo: There are more on the DC Circuit (where Kavanaugh now serves) appointed by Democratic presidents than Republican presidents, yet Kavanaugh's unanimous agreement with these colleagues in north of 90%.
Crapo: He's a judge's judge.
The interruptions start again, and Crapo finishes.
Okay, Sen. Booker, D-N.J., now up.
Booker: I was appealing to your integrity and decency this morning, not questioning it. (This was about the motion to adjourn the hearing that Grassley denied.)
Grassley: If you worry about our friendship being affected, it will not be. I would like to remind the public that it's not as if Republicans and Democrats don't speak to each other.
Booker: But I fundamentally disagree with the way you've been conducting today.
Booker, like Judge Kavanaugh, went to Yale Law School; Senator Crapo, whose remarks preceded Booker, went to Harvard Law School.
Booker: When I was new to the Senate, I was told by older senators (like McCain) to be objective, because what goes around comes around. And I've been struggling with this lately. If Republicans were being denied about 90% of documents about a person's public record, ...
Booker: What we are doing here is insulting to ideals we try to achieve of some sense of comity. But I want to go deeper than that. What would the jeopardy be if we just waited for the documents?
Booker: We haven't even gotten all the documents that you asked for, Sen. Grassley.
Booker: There is no rush for a lifetime process. This is absurd, unfair process that could easily be solved by a pause.
Booker: I do not think it is unreasonable for us to wait for a week or two.
Grassley is claiming that we have in fact gotten all the documents that he requested.
Every time someone refers to "Committee Confidential" I think it's a TV show.
Booker also made the claim that he could not ask Kavanaugh about the contents of documents marked as "committee confidential," or else he'd be ousted from Senate. [I'm not in a position right now to confirm whether that's really what could happen, to answer one question that came in.]
Booker: I oppose this nomination happening right now for the moment we're in in American history. We are dealing with attacks going to the core of what our democracy is about: voting.
Booker: The special counsel has already indicted and charged multiple people. Amid all of this, we have a judge chosen who was not on either of Trump's first two lists. He got put on Trump's list after the president was already in jeopardy from the special counsel -- the one person who has already spoken vastly about a president's ability to end an investigation.
Judge Learn Hand [perhaps most famous non-Supreme Court judge in U.S. history] -- founding documents don't mean anything if the people lose faith in them, Booker says.
Booker: Will rights for workers be limited? What about people with disabilities who rely on the Affordable Care Act's protections for people with pre-existing conditions.
Submit Event
