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.
[Page S1641]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Nomination of Chad A. Readler
Mr. President, the second nominee is Chad Readler, a 46-year-old
attorney in the Trump Justice Department. When he was nominated to
another circuit court of appeals, the Sixth Circuit, it was a clear
sign of the Trump administration's strong negative feelings about the
Affordable Care Act and the fact that that act covers preexisting
conditions.
Mr. Readler filed the Trump administration's brief in the Texas v.
United States case, in which he opposed the Affordable Care Act's
preexisting coverage requirement. Do you remember that issue from the
last election? It was a big one. It might have been the biggest one.
We basically said that we think health insurance should be available
to you even if you don't have a perfect medical record. And who does?
Hardly any of us. Certainly, each of us knows someone in their family
who struggles with a medical challenge, and without a perfect medical
record, you can be denied insurance or charged premiums you can't pay,
unless you have the protection of the law. The law is known as the
Affordable Care Act, or ObamaCare.
Mr. Readler argued that this requirement of covering people with
preexisting conditions, which benefits tens of millions of Americans,
had to be stricken from the law. The brief Mr. Readler signed was
deeply controversial. Our colleague Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican
from Tennessee, called the argument that Mr. Readler made in his brief
opposing ObamaCare ``as far-fetched as any I ever heard.'' Thank you,
Lamar.
Two Department of Justice attorneys withdrew from the case when they
were asked to sign the crazy arguments in this brief, and a senior
Department of Justice litigator resigned in protest of the bizarre
arguments that Mr. Readler signed up for.
However, almost immediately, after Mr. Readler signed this crazy
brief, he was nominated by the White House for a lifetime appointment
to a Federal judiciary.
What message is the Trump administration sending with this
nomination? They are doubling down on their attack on coverage of
people with preexisting conditions. They are putting in a lifetime
appointment a circuit court judge who will be watching for vindication.
They are rewarding those who have led the fight against the preexisting
coverage requirement. This is deeply troubling.
That is not my only concern with Mr. Readler. He has also defended
the Trump administration's unconscionable family separation policy. Do
you remember that one? Remember when, in March of last year, Attorney
General Sessions came forward and proudly announced the family
separation policy? Do you remember then that 2,800 infants, toddlers,
and children were forcibly, physically removed from their parents and
placed in detention and that these infants, toddlers, and children were
then lost in the system? They didn't keep a computer check on where
they were sent or who their parents were.
It took a Federal judge in San Diego, CA, to mandate and require this
administration to account for these children. It is one of the most
shameful chapters in recent American history, and, of course, Mr.
Readler, this nominee, defended it.
He argued in favor of the Trump administration's efforts to end the
DACA Program--790,000 young people brought here as children to this
country, who went through all of the hoops and paid the fees and
qualified to have a chance to stay in America without fear of
deportation. Well, it turns out Mr. Readler thinks that is a bad idea.
He litigated against the rights of same-sex couples and opposed anti-
discrimination protections for LGBTQ Americans. He advocated for making
the death penalty more widely available and applying it to children. He
argued for denying Byrne JAG violence prevention funds to a city I
represent: Chicago.
It is hard to imagine a more controversial partisan nominee than Mr.
Readler. Yet his nomination is going to be rammed through this week.
