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 S2505]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Nomination of J. Campbell Barker
Madam President, the Republicans' nomination antics, of course, go
far beyond those important Agencies. The Republicans are also
continuing to work with President Trump to veer our courts far right by
stacking them with ideological judges, especially when it comes to
women's health and reproductive rights, which brings me to another
nominee before us whom I strongly oppose--Mr. John Campbell Barker. As
we have seen with Justice Kavanaugh and with so many other nominees,
President Trump is seizing every opportunity he gets to appoint judges
who will be willing to chip away at the right to safe, legal abortion.
Unfortunately, Mr. Barker fits that pattern to a tee.
As deputy solicitor general of Texas, in the Whole Woman's Health
case, he defended a law that imposed medically unnecessary requirements
on physicians and clinics that were meant to make it harder for women
to access safe, legal care. He has also made it clear that he believes
employers should be able to decide whether the women who work for them
can get birth control through their insurance coverage. These alarming
positions are just a few of the reasons I oppose Mr. Barker's
nomination. I urge my colleagues to do the same.
The Republicans may be determined to continue their crusade of
tipping the judiciary against women's health and reproductive rights,
but they should know that the Democrats and women and men across the
country are just as determined to stand up, call them out, and fight
back.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cassidy). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, all postcloture time
has expired.
The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the
Hartogensis nomination?
Mr. GRASSLEY. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
Mr. GRASSLEY. Yes, there is.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Ms. Harris)
is necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. McSally). Are there any other Senators in
the Chamber desiring to vote or change their vote?
The result was announced--yeas 72, nays 27, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 83 Ex.]
YEAS--72
Alexander
Barrasso
Bennet
Blackburn
Blumenthal
Blunt
Boozman
Braun
Brown
Burr
Cantwell
Capito
Carper
Casey
Cassidy
Collins
Cornyn
Cortez Masto
Cotton
Cramer
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Durbin
Enzi
Ernst
Feinstein
Fischer
Gardner
Graham
Grassley
Hassan
Hawley
Hoeven
Hyde-Smith
Inhofe
Isakson
Johnson
Jones
Kennedy
King
Lankford
Lee
Manchin
McConnell
McSally
Moran
Murkowski
Murphy
Paul
Perdue
Portman
Risch
Roberts
Romney
Rosen
Rounds
Rubio
Sasse
Scott (FL)
Scott (SC)
Shaheen
Shelby
Sinema
Sullivan
Thune
Tillis
Toomey
Warner
Wicker
Wyden
Young
NAYS--27
Baldwin
Booker
Cardin
Coons
Duckworth
Gillibrand
Heinrich
Hirono
Kaine
Klobuchar
Leahy
Markey
Menendez
Merkley
Murray
Peters
Reed
Sanders
Schatz
Schumer
Smith
Stabenow
Tester
Udall
Van Hollen
Warren
Whitehouse
NOT VOTING--1
Harris
The nomination was confirmed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motion to
reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table, and the
President will be immediately notified of the Senate's action.
____________________
