tv Senate Judiciary Chair Grassley Response to Minority Leader Reid CSPAN February 29, 2016 7:12pm-7:29pm EST
end. that was headlined last week i was largest newspaper. i hope the chairman judiciary committee does not continue down this path. it will not benefit him, his committee, the senate, the state of iowa, or this great country. should follow the example of his predecessors and give a meeting and the hearing and the vote, simply to do his job. if he does not come of the burlington hawkeye his right. history will never forget this unprecedented misstep. never forget this misstep by grassley. i yield the floor. >> well, madam president, it is another day and another tantrum from them in order leader. but it does not matter how much the minority leader jumps up and down, how much
the majority leader stomps his feet, we are not going to let liberals get away with denying the american people an opportunity to be heard. letting the american people decide this question is a reasonable approach, a fair approach it is the approach the other side advocated in the shoes on the other foot and is with the american people deserve. they deserve the right to be heard, the american people want our reasonable justice,
a persona person that will make the right decisions. madam president, as the american people continue voting during the presidential election they face a choice, do they want just another justice who will look to her heart and apply her own ethics and perspectives when deciding important constitutional questions that impact every american, or do they want a justice who, like justice scalia, adheres to the constitution and the rule law and decides cases based decide cases based on whatever, wherever the text takes him or her. we cannot overstate, madam president, how critical it is for the american people to understand what is at stake in this debate today. take a little bit of time to
discuss the impact that these two different visions would have on everyday americans. many leading court observers believe that adding yet another liberal justice of the court his decisions are on board from the constitutional text would lead to major changes in the courts jurisprudence. as a recent new york times article put it, adding another liberal to the supreme court would be the most consequential ideological shift on the court creating a liberal majority that would almost certainly reshape american law and american life. so it will impact all of us.
a host of supreme court precedents on free speech the right to keep and bear arms, the death penalty, abortion would be overturned. the articles speculate that abortion rights would become more secure, gun rights less so, first amendment arguments in cases on campaign finance and commercial speech would meet a more skeptical reception. in that same article one law school dean noted that with another liberal on the court the judicial debate over the fundamental possibility of obama care would likely draw
to an end. let's consider a few of the supreme court precedents that would likely be overturned with another liberal justice on the court first and foremost it is our 2nd amendment rights that would fall squarely within the liberals cite, the heller decision authored by justice scalia recognize based on the intent of the framers that the second amendment guarantees and individual constitutional rights to gun ownership again is as one law professor noted in the new york times with another liberal in the court, the five would narrow heller to the point of irrelevancy, end of quote.
another said this, if we get a 5th liberal on the court the pendulum and swing pretty quickly on gun control. pikes back through would see a major shift in aa kind of gun control laws i get approved by the court. the individual constitutional rights would be turned into a relic. it would be an ornament without any practical limiting effect and the government's infringement upon the constitutional right of an individual to have gun ownership. once this happens all bets are off on the right to keep and bear arms. next,. next, the first amendment right of the american people to make voices heard would
be drastically curtailed if the court overturns citizens united. in fact, as university of chicago law professor said in the new york times citizens united is on every liberals list of opinions that ought to go. other liberal justice could allow them to force americans to comply with laws that violate the deeply held religious themes. for example, a new justice could provide the 5th vote to overturn the recent hobby lobby decision which recognize the right of owners to resist laws on religious vows such as obama care contraception mandate.
we all know, of course, the free-speech protections are being eroded and deleted in this country. you know, on college campuses across the country speeches and being protected is a cisco it always did and muzzle anybody who disagrees with it. incredibly important precedents under the first amendment establishment clause, of course i'm talking about supreme court cases allowing prayer at town hall meetings or permitting low income parents to receive public school vouchers to defray
the cost of the child's private school including religious schools, another liberal justice degree literally the 1st and 2nd amendments that are in the constitution. he or she could read broadly those rights all the another liberal nominated to the court, even reasonable restrictions on abortion enacted in the law through the democratic process would be swept away. just a few years ago the court upheld the ban on partial-birth abortion by a five to four vote. partial-birth abortion is a horrific practice that pushes an unborn baby school , killing it well its head is still in the womb.
it is one very small step short of infanticide. infanticide. if the american people elected liberal during his presidential election and that president nominates another liberal to replace justice clear, we can all expect the constitutional right to abortion on demand without limitation. in other words, and the words of one law professor, at risk precedents run from campaign-finance to commerce, from race to religion and improves the signature scalia projects such as the second amendment , some will go quickly, like citizens united and some will go slower. >> senator, your time is expired. >> asked for five more -- well, no, maybe four more
minutes. >> without objection. >> some will go quickly like citizens united, and some will go slower but will go. that leads me to a broader point. is more at stake than the results of any particular case is important as those cases are. the american people need to consider whether they want their justice to be deciding cases based upon the text of the constitution as it was understood at the time it was adopted whether justices are free to update the constitution according to their own moral and political philosophies. should justices apply accepted legal principles through sound reasoning of new facts, or should they do legal backflips to reach
their desired public policy goals? the 2nd approach, of course, is not law. instead, it is what justice scalia calls legalistic argot barco. that is a quote. another quote, jaggery potpourri. justice scalia knew that the rule of law was a lot of rules, the rule of law is not a law, whatever is in the justices art. when i justice believes, as president obama does, that anytime a views the constitution is unfair unclear he can apply his own life experience.
unless the constitution specifically prohibits the democratic process from reflecting the we will of the people the decisions are made by elected individuals who are accountable to voters. the supreme court plays an important role in keeping the branches of the federal government within constitutional powers. keeping the federal and state governments within the constitutional fear, sphere. it ensures the government complies with the bill of rights. that is the basis for its legitimacy. when the court leaves the constitution in ways that reflect the justices personal policy views rather than the text it does not act legitimately. instead it denies the people the legal right to govern themselves.
the more the courts reach out it is entitled a hold. the more it legislates from the bench, the more decision it robs from the american people. as aa direct result step-by-step an inch by inch liberty is lost. and as john adams observed, liberty was lost is lost forever. this is what liberal justices have done, under the guise of constitutional interpretation they have posed liberalism on the american people, done it on issues and in ways that they could not achieve through the ballot box. this isbox. this is the decision facing the american people during this presidential election.
if the american people elect 255 seconds. the american people elected liberal as their next president and he or she dominates a like-minded judge to replace justice clear liberalism will be imposed on the american people to a degree this country has never before witnessed. issues i hope will take very serious note. i yield. >> super tuesday with presidential primaries and caucuses in several states. >> a whole different campaign. we have moved beyond the early primary and caucus states and are in super tuesday. twelve states, voters in each we will have a defining impact on who the democrats and republicans nominate.
it is a different phase because we have moved from retail campaigning, the one-on-one and now we are campaigning in 12 states12 states where the candidates are literally going from airport to airport trying to appeal to as many voters as possible. advertising is key, organization is key, but it has moved to aa different level of the campaign with a candidates hope the voters know who they are and so with the candidates have to do is convince those voters that is the person they should vote for. since this network began one of the hallmarks has been the ability for people to call in, ask questions, provide opinions, a lot of polls out there. especially if you talk to voters in the states were primaries or caucuses were held. what with allies like? how solid is your support? you really get a sense of the
IN COLLECTIONSCSPAN2 Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on