Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.
[Pages S1287-S1288]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Nomination of Michael Park
Mr. President, on another matter, today the Judiciary Committee is
holding a confirmation hearing on the nomination of Mr. Michael Park
for the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers my home State of
New York.
I have always assessed judges on three criteria: excellence,
moderation, diversity. While Michael Park satisfies the first and third
prongs of my test, he fails miserably on the second--modification.
Mr. Park has spent much of his career working in opposition to civil
rights and seeking to advance the rightwing agenda that lies at the
very core of the Federalist Society's mission. Mr. Park is currently
working to defend the Trump administration's effort to insert a
citizenship question into the 2020 census--a cynical effort to
discourage people from responding to the census.
He has been on the frontlines of the effort to dismantle affirmative
action policies in education. In 2012, he submitted an amicus brief to
the Supreme Court, writing on behalf of the petitioner who sought to
have the university's use of race, as one consideration among many, in
the admissions process struck down as unconstitutional.
He is currently representing the plaintiffs in a suit challenging
Harvard's affirmative action policy. He has worked to deny women's
reproductive freedoms when he represented the State of Kansas against a
challenge to its attempt to defund Planned Parenthood and ban it from
participating in the State Medicaid Program.
In 2012, he submitted a brief to the Supreme Court in NFIB v.
Sebelius urging the Court to strike down the entire Affordable Care
Act. This nominee rather wants to get rid of the whole ACA.
If the American people knew the kind of nominees President Trump is
nominating and the kind of nominees the Republican majority is
supporting, so against everything they believe in--America believes in
Roe v. Wade, America believes in keeping the ACA, America believes in
voting rights--if they knew all these details, they would be appalled,
and our Republican colleagues rarely bring these things to the floor
legislatively. They know they would be roundly defeated, but it is sort
of an end run--pick judges who in the courts will uphold these
unpopular positions.
Mr. Park has a long and detailed record of support for the most
conservative legal causes. A judge is asked to interpret the law rather
than make the law, to apply fairly the legal principles set forth by
precedent, not reread the Constitution to fit the political cause of
the moment.
Mr. Park's career does not give me the confidence that he can be an
impartial arbiter on the Second Circuit. I will oppose his nomination,
and I will urge my colleagues to do the same.
Now, in the not-so-distant past, my objection to this nomination
would mean that the chairman of the Judiciary Committee would not move
forward with the nomination out of respect for home State Senators in
the blue-slip tradition--but not in this Congress, not with this
Republican majority.
Since the election of President Trump, Senate Republicans, led by
Leader McConnell, Chairman Grassley, and now Chairman Graham, have
unceremoniously discarded the blue-slip tradition. My colleagues on the
other side will say it is because we haven't worked with them in a
timely manner to fill these vacancies, but let's not kid ourselves.
This is about one thing and one thing alone--the desire of the
Republican majority to ram through more of the Federalist Society's
handpicked, hard-right judges.
Last Congress, the majority confirmed two judges over the blue-slip
objections of Democratic Senators Baldwin and Casey. A third, Ryan
Bounds, would have been confirmed over the objections of Senators Wyden
and Merkley if not for Senator Scott's principled objection to Bounds'
past racist writings.
The practice continues, unfortunately, in this Congress. Last week,
the Judiciary Committee voted along party lines to advance an
additional four circuit court nominees over the blue-slip objections of
five Democratic Senators--Brown, Murray, Cantwell, Booker, Menendez--
and in the coming weeks, the committee will move forward with two
additional court nominees over the objections of Ranking Member
Feinstein and Senator Hatch.
Last Congress, we worked with the White House to move eight New York
judges--one circuit, seven district--through the Judiciary Committee in
a bipartisan way. That is how it should work. I would like to cooperate
on New York judges this Congress, but the continued consideration of
Michael Park, combined with the majority's clear intentions to ignore
the blue-slip tradition, makes this very difficult, if not impossible.
I know the leader is proud of what he is doing on judges. I don't think
history will look very kindly on it; A, putting such hard-right judges,
so against what the American people believe, in office. History will
not look kindly on that as their decisions come down; but second,
eliminating the last
[[Page S1288]]
vestiges of bipartisanship as we select judges.
