tell them about your own experiences. tell them about you know, you know so that they can learn from your experience why it's important. and i just hadad to close because i i've got 30 seconds i'm going to take them all. couple weeks ago i was invited to the state dinner. now, had two high school commencement speeches that day. those are tough speeches by way high school college you can tell them for things, you're but high school she would like you know you're going to be a freshman again right? but i but i got invited to the state dinner and this was for the president of kenya. at 19 and left america. i went to the u.n. conference -- >> the senate will work president biden's nominations including two judges to d.c. the d.c. superior court. votes expected soon. live now to the floor of the u.s. senate on c-span2.

mr. bennet.mr. booker. mr. boozman. mr. braun. mrs. britt. mr. brown. mr. budd. ms. butler. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. the clerk: mr. cardin. mr. carper. mr. casey. mr. coons.

mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan. mr. hawley. . heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven.

mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. manchin. mr. markey. mr. marsha mr. mcconnell. mr. meneez. mr. merkley. mr. moran. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. risch. mr. romney.

the clerk: ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. rubio. mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. the clerk: mr. schatz. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. ms. sinema. ms. smith. ms. stabenow. mr. sullivan. mr. tester. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. vance. mr. warner. mr. warnock.

ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young. the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative -- baldwin, carper casey, cortez masto, duckworth, hassan heinrich lujan, manchin, murphy padilla, reed rounds shaheen, smith, stabenow warner warren and whitehouse. senators voting in the negative -- barrasso capito cornyn daines ernst, fischer hyde-smith johnson, kennedy, lee, marshall mcconnell, sullivan and wicker.

the clerk: ms. ms. lummis, no. mr. cramer, no. the clerk: mr. cotton, no. mr. bennet, aye. mr. tester, aye.

the clerk: mr. thune, no.

the clerk: mr. cassidy, no. mr. mr. graham, aye.

the clerk: mr. merkley, aye. the clerk: mr. collins, aye. mrs. gillibrand, aye. cardin, aye.

mrs. murray, aye. mr. schumer, aye. the clerk: ms. klobuchar, aye. ms. hirono, aye.

mr. cruz, no. the clerk: mr. hagerty, no. mr. welch, aye.

mr. peters, aye. mr. wyden, aye.

the clerk: mr. paul, no. the clerk: mr. ka

the clerk: ms. rosen, aye. e' vote:

the clerk: mr. rubio, no. mr. coons, aye. ms. butler, aye. mr. van hollen, aye.

the clerk: mr. romney, aye. mr. durbin, aye. the clerk: ms. murkowski, aye.

the clerk: mr. risch, no. mr. moran, no.

the clerk: mr. hickenlooper, aye. mr. ossoff, aye. ]

the k:r. blumenthal, aye. the clerk: mr. ricketts, no.

the clerk: mr. schatz, aye. the clerk: mr. booker, aye.

the clerk: mr. king, aye. the clerk: mr. fetterman, aye.

the clerk: mr. mr. young, no.

mr.

vote:

the clerk: mr. sanders, aye. the clerk: mr. boozman, no.

the clerk: mr. crapo, no.

the clerk: mr. lankford aye. mr. scott of florida, no.

the clerk: mr. kelly, aye. the clerk: mr. hoeven no. mr. grassley, no.

the clerk: mr. tuberville no.

the clerk: mr. scott of south carolina, no.

the clerk: mr. tillis aye.

the clerk: mr. budd, no.

vote:

the clerk: mrs. blackburn, no.

the clerk: ms. cantwell, aye.

the clerk: mr. brown, aye.

the clerk: mr. vance, no.

the clerk: mr. hawley, no. the clerk: ms. sinema, aye. mrs. britt, no.

the clerk: on this vote t yeas are 57 and the nays are 41. and the nomination is agreed to. under the previous order the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon ll be immediately notified of the senate's action. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive c number 511 judith e. pipe of

the district of columbia to be an associate judge of the superior court of the district of columbia signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory walker has been waived. -- walker has been waived. is it the sense of the senate debate on the nomination of judith e. pipe to be an associate judge of the superior court of the district of columbia shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote: the clerk: ms. baldwin. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mr. blumenthal. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mr. braun. mrs. britt.

mr. brown. mr. budd. ms. butler. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. mr. cardin. mr. carper. mr. casey. mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer.mr

mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. harty. ms. hassan. mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. manchin. mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. menendez. mr. merkley. mr. moran. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. paul.

mr. peters. mr. ricketts. mr. risch. mr. romney. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. rubio. mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen.q÷ ms. sinema. ms. smith. ms. stabenow. mr. sullivan. mr. tester. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. vance. mr. warner. mr. warnock. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker.

mr. wyden. mr. young.

vote: the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative -- brown, butler cantwell graham hirono liuna, merkley, murray shaheen, sinema tillis welch.

senators voting in the negative -- barasso, blackburn, britt, budd cotton grassley hawley ricketts risch, scott o south carolina tubervil the clerk: mr. mr. blumenthal, aye.

ms. smith, aye.

the clerk: kaine, aye. -- mr. kaine

the clerk: mr. schmitt, no. ms. cortez masto, aye. ms. collins, aye. mr. hagerty, no.

the clerk: mr. reed, aye.

the clerk: mr. warnock, aye. ms. ernst, no.

the clerk: mr. tester, aye.

the clerk: ms. hassan, aye. tf

the clerk: mr. padilla, aye.

the clerk: mr. kelly, aye., no.

the clerk: mr. markey, aye.ñójkb

the clerk: mr. lankford, aye.

the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye.ht the clerk: mr. marshall, no.wñ

the clerk: mr. van hollen, ay

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, no.

the department of homeland security has a clo new rules for this asylum-seekers in criminal conviction and move them to the united states. my administration going after criminal net works. >> that has made a huge difference. work closely with our mexican neighbors instead of attacking mexico and it worked. building a strong partnership and i will do the same with the mexican elected president that iterday. we have chosen to work together with mexico. the facts are clear. due to the arrangements i have

met a number of migrants coming to our shared border has dropped dramatically. while these steps are important they are not enough to truly secure the border we have to change our laws and congress needs to provide what is necessary to hire 1500 border security agents. to help tackle the backlog of cases, more than 2 million of them. they make decisions lessn six months instead of six years. around 100 more high-tech. fentanyl being smuggled into the united states. one of the primary reasons that the border patrol union endorsed the bipartisan deal in the first place. these investments are essential.

if you are not willing to and the money to hire more border patrol agents or asylum officers or judges you just are not serious about protecting our border. it is as simple as that. immigration has always been the wife blood of america. we are constantly renewed by a fusion of people and new talent. the statue of liberty is not some relic of american history. it stands for who we are as united states. i will never demo nice immigrants. the poisoning of the blood of a country. children from their families at the border. i will not ban people from this country because of their religious beliefs. i won't use them to go into the neighboring countries to pull people out of their homes and away from families awaiting deportation as my predecessor if he occupies his office again. day as president i introduce a comprehensiveorm plan

to fix our broken system. secure our border. provide a more i am still fighting to get that done. we must face a simple truth to protect america as a land that welcomes immigrants and secure the border and secure it now. the simple truth is there is a worldwide crisis and if the united states does not secure our border there is no limit to the number of people that may try to come here. for those that say the steps i've taken are too strict i say to you be patient and goodwill american people are wearing thin right now. doing nothing is not an option. we have to act. both our values. take these steps not to walk away from who we are as americans but make sure we preserve who we are for future generations to come.

today i spoke about what we need to do to secure the border. in the weeks ahead i will speak to how we can make our system more fair and more just. let's fix the problem and stop fighting about it. i'm doing my part. the rest of the republican should do their part. thank you very much. [inaudible] e-mail what was that? met _-dash mr. netanyahu playing politics with the war. [inaudible]yó

the cler mr. ossoff, aye.

the clerk: mr. warner, aye.

the clerk: mr. rounds, no. the presiding officer: on this vote the yeas are 55 and the nays are 42, and the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomina judith

e. pipeline of the district of columbia to be an associate judge of the superior court of the district of columbia. mr. marshall: mr. president. the presiding officer: the mr. marshall: thank you, mr. president. i rise today to discuss topic, viral gain of function research. and i'm calling on this body to place a pause on all viral gain of function research like president obama did in 2014 start with an analogy. could you imagine the united states participating in nuclear sending our money to foreign adversaries to help with their nuclear weapons research say like a country like iran or north korea. but of course no one in this body would suggesthat that's a

smart thing to do. but people cannot see what viral function gain is. nuclear bombs have killed three, maybe 400,000 people at the max, but viral gain of function research through covid, has killed over a million americs and worldwide it's at least ten times that, maybe 20 times that. and we still have 15 million long covid suffers, but we continue to fund and participate in viral gain of function research. i would stop and ask thio we have to show for it? 30 years of viral gain function research what have we gained from this? just like in 2020 when i was the first member to sound the alarm of the covid virus and the pandemic that was coming i'm here once again to sound this

alarm. think about this. why is this a concern to anybody? first, i want to talk about the risk of lab leaks. no matter what bioresearch is done there is a risk of lab leaks, there's human error, people not following protocols, that's what led to the pause in 2014 by president obama. regardless of biosafety levels are not unforeseen accidents can lead to the escape the population the consequences of such an event has proven to be catastrophicrophic. we witnessed through this the covid pandemic. a virus that is engineered to be more con tablus or more deadly can cause an even more severe global death crisis even worse than what we saw with covid people seldom talk about is the threat of

bioresearch, biosecurity when it comes to our food supply just like the chinese developed a covid virus to attack human lungs, they could develop new viruss that could attack our beef cattle our pigs our dairy, they could find new viruss to attack the wheat in kansas. all of this is feasible by viral gain of function research. and i'm very concerned about the risk of weaponization of these viruss that all of these have a military potential, what we would call bioterrorism. everything has a dual purpose. in america we don't thi that we think of science being research for the good but what we've found is rogue nations can use this research for the very worst. i want to dive a little bit deeper into this subject and bioterrorism knowledge of technique through gain of function research can be misused by malicious actors if this is published or otherwise become

accessible, they easily exploited to create bioloej kal weapons -- biological weapons, they wouldn't have to go through time and expense of developing a nuclear weapon they could -- more easily develop biological weapons, which is more deadly this makes the dissemination of research findings perilous and it lowers the barrier for entry for those who want to cause us harm. gain of research raises questions, is it morally -- knowing the immense suffering they could cause by accidently or deliberately released. this musced with responsibility and aware dmefs of the -- awareness of the broader consequences. the principles i s to as a physician, do no harm it should actions when we fund science,

but viral gain of function research is a tightrope between benefits and risks. public trust and science and research institutes is another critical aspect. higher profile access or ethical breaches have eroded public confidence making it difficult to garner support for scientific endeavors, frameworks are essential to maintain this trust. and that's why we're here today, calling for this body to pass our viral gain of function research moratorium act. our bill will prohibit federal funding, allowing time for an honest conversation of the pros cons of viral gain of function research and to ensure a system of checks getting transparency for the american people for what happened during the pandemic shouldn't be controversial. i hope my colleagues will join me in agreeing that if we can't measure it we can't manage it especially when we discuss

creating lethal viruss at the taxpayer's expense, the government shouldn't provide another time for viral gain of function research and the -- in the deceptive name of global health. for these reasons i'm here to sound the alarm again and call for the immediate passage of the viral gain of function research moratorium act and i thank senators braun and lee for their support of this resolution and we look forward to continue this disc our colleagues. mr. president, as if in legislative session, and notwithstanding rule 22, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of senate resolution 718, which is at the desk. further, that the resolution be agreed to the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? a senator: mr. president, reserving the right to object. the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. mr. markey: thank you, mr. reserving the right to object. this resolution threatens

fundamental life research. research is a field of medicine's dreams which gives hope to families. over one million people died from covid-19 and tens of thousands of americans die anally from the seasonal flu. it is scientific research that develops the vacancies and treatments that save livelear that we need every tool at our disposal illnesses and families in labs -- and labs across the country are developing research that will create the vaccines and the therapeutics of tomorrow. what this resolution does is create overbroad restrictions on scientific research in order to accomplish a goal which unfortunately is unrelated to what should be our highest goals. bans like those envisioned by this resolution would tie the hands of researchers who are

doing life-saving work. this resolution would send a dangerous signal that the united states senate does not value lifesaving research being conducted by our federal research ancies and at our world class research universities. we mus prepared for future families especially as climate change accelerates the trans transtranstrans -- transmission of deadly diseases. we have seen bird flu transmitted from dairy cattle to humans. this could block researchers from understanding the mutations of how bird flu affects people banning us from outbreaks. medical research is an issue research means stronger security this would not prepare us for emerging disease threats and would not make our nation safer.

bowing to political pressure to promote a ban on research without understanding research biosecurity or safety is dangerous and reckless. investments in biomedical research are investments in hope health, and safety that serve our country today and into the future. and for those reasons, mr. president, i object. mr. marshall: mrl. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the senator from kansas. mr. marshall: ihe senator from massachusetts's comments and his concerns. to argue that the benefits have not outweighed the risks. the whole concept of just going back to what the of what viral gain of function research is rewouldn't do it -- we wouldn't do it it could harm we could continue to research flu vacancies, but n make influenza worse, let's not

make a it that will make it stick to lung cells. the justice -- this hinges of viral gain of function research hinges on the code of benefits such as improved preparedness for families we need to know if this is reliable and outweigh the risk. critics acknowledge that this can be obtained through safer means such as computational studying outbreaks. these researches risk research could be restricted towarh infrastructure improving our surveillance system and developing broad spectrum anti-virals and vacancies, let's stop throwing good money after bad money and that will protect americans from future families. i yield the floor.

mr. budd: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from north carolina. mr. budd: thank you, mr. president. under president biden, nearly 10 million illegal immigrants have entered our country. now, among those 10 million, arenown number of dangerous individuals. we know that hundreds of individuals appear on the terrorism watch list. we know that a significant number of transnational cartel members are in this population. other categories include drug smugglers, human traffickers, and many more. there is hale a laundry -- there's a laundry list of bad e no

business stepping foot in our country. and, sadly it is not a surprise when we allow over half a million illegal immigrants with criminal records into the homeland. that they commit crimes against american citizens. even members of law enforcement, the very people entrusted with keeping us safe are now on the front lines of the border crisis. and, no, i'm not tag about police and -- i'm not talking about police in border states like texas and arizona. i am talking about north carolina my state. i'm talking about new york city. two years ago in my home state of north carolina, wake county deputy sheriff ned killed in the line of duty by an illegal gang member who crossed the border under president biden. and just this week in queens new york nypd officers were shot. one was shot in and the other was shot in the leg. thankfully they are going to survive. our prayers are with them and their families and we're

grateful for their service. but the suspect was identified as a 19-year-old from venezuela who crossed the border illegally through eagle pass texas, in july of last year. worse yet he was caught and then he was released with a court date that he predictably ignored. so enough is enough. i'm back here on the senate moore to once floor to once again pass a trial called the straightforward bill. it simply states that an alien can be deported for assaulting a police officer or a firefighter. this bill has already passed the house and can be sent to the pacing it right here today. pretty simple. the last time i tried to pass this bill the senator from connecticut blocked it and he called it nothing. that's 100% wrong. specifically the amends the immigration and nationality act to explicitly state that an illegal immigrant

may be deported for assault something a police officer. it is importa to point out that the current law does not cover all asuttles against law enforcement. that means that some immigrants can remain in the country even against cops. and we know that under the biden administration that is a very real possibility, unfortunately. but the truth is that we cannot trust this administration to do the right thing or enforce the law and to keep our communities safe. that's why we need to pass the police act today. any senator who claims to back the blue should have no problem at all supporting this bill. sincerely hope that in the face of yet another attack on pass this bill today. as in legislative session, and not withstand ago rule 22 i ask unanimous consent that the committee on the judiciary be discharged from further consideration of h.r. 2494 and the senate proceed to its mediate consideration. further, that the bill be considered read a third time and

passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made d laid upon thing officer: is there objection? mr. murphy: mr. president. the presiding officer: the reserving the right to object the border patrol union are law enforcement officers who patrol the southern and northern border serve is this country, protect this country, endorsed the bipartisan border security bill that my friend from north carolina opposed. -- as did almost all of his colleagues. the border patrol union, the organization that represents law enforcement officers supported that bill for a number of reasons. it would haverces to the southern border to make sure that we properly administered our border and made sure that only people are coming

to this country who have legitimate asylum claims. it would have invested in technogy to make those border patrol officers' jobs easier. it would haveew hiring authorities to make sure we can get people down to the border faster rather than just redeploying agents from the . but it's likely that they supported that bill for an additional reason. under current law if you are coming to this country a ply -- to apply for asylum if you have a criminal history in the united states during a prior visit, or in your home country that question is not relevant under existingaw until you go before an asylum judge, before you go before an immigration judge to make your asylum claim. senator lankford myself senator sinema we thought that didn't make sense. we thought that that question of your prior criminal history

should be relevant the minute that you show up at the border that you don't get into the united states to make your claim of asylum if you have a criminal history. was part of the bipartisan border bill. that would have protected the country. that would have protected our law enforcement officers. my republican colleagues turned down the opportunity to pass bipartisan legislation that would prevent individuals with criminal records from coming into the country and applying for asylum. because under current law law that the president is bound to administer and enforce, those questions are not brought into the process until that asylum claim is being heard by a judge. and so it's just another example of the ways in which the bipartisan border bill the bill that republicans asked for demanded democrats negotiate, would have made this country safer, would have created a more

efficient and more secure border and i am still furious and heartbroken that republicans decided to keep the border a mess because it helps their presidential candate trying to solve a problem. as for this specific measure, as i said last time i came to t floor to object, it is already under current law a deportable offense if you commit a crime of violence. it is already under current law a deportable offense if you commit and are convicted of any crime involving moral turpitude. and, further noncitizens who are convicted of any aggravated felony including misdemeanor deportable as well. so thisil seeking to solve a problem that doesn't exist because current law says if you

commit an assault on a law enforcement officer, you are going to be deported. and so why are we debating this bill if current law already says you can be for assaulting a police officer? well i don't the answer but what i know is that there is effort under foot by former president trump and my republican colleagues to try to make americans believe specific unique threat posed to you by immigrants that you should fear people tha to this country to seek a better life or to flee terror or torture. it's a familiar trope because it was used against my forefathers when they cameere from ireland. it was used against those who came to the generations, you should fear the irish, you should fear the today it's you should fear those who are coming from central and

south america. but it's just not the truth. i know it is hard to hear for some folks that believe everything they watch on fox news butndividuals who are first-generation immigrants to this country are less likely to be convicted of violent crimes than individuals who are born in this country. in 2020, the trump doj sought to prove that false. they actually commissioned research to examine the rate of crime between noncitizens and citizens because they couldn't believe the data because fox news says that we should fear immigrants. here's one of the papers that was commissioned by the trump dovjt we find that undocumented im substantially lower crime rates than

native-born citizens across a range of felony offenses relative to immigrants u.s.-born citizens are more than two times more likely to be arrested for crimes and over four times more likely to be arrested for property crimes. these are direct -- these are quotes directly from a trump-funded justice report. i don't disagree with my colleague from north carolina -- of course if someone commits an assault against a law enforcement office they should be deported from this country. if somebody commits an assault against a community member regardless of their occupation they should be deported from this country. that's what the existing law says. if you are convicted of a felony or a assault, any crime of moral turpitude, you are deportable. and so, to me, this is

duplicative, at best, and, at worst, a reinforce this very dangerous mythology thatnt has something to fear from immigrants who are coming to this country to flee economic desperation and violence and terror and torture. and for that reason, i would object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the senator from north carolina. mr. budd: i appreciate my colleague's commentses. let's not get lost in the swirl of evidence here. i would submit that illegally enter the united states and beat up a police officer, you a american. the only thing we should care about is that you are can lead to die portation but it is not necessary that they do particularly under this

legislation. i refer to my prior remarks. there's been half million of the illegal immigrants a half million, with criminal records that have come into the homeland illegally. it is no surprise that they commit crimes against americans. so this bill, which he seems to support -- i am a little confused at his language. it seems like he might support this unanimous consent effort here. it is important because the current law does not cover all assaults against law enforcement. deporting an illegal alien who aassaults a law enforcement officer requires a complex legal analysis to prove that the illegal alien committed an aggravated felony or crime involving moral turpitude. so the police act creates a simple straightforward, commonsense rule that says illegal aliens who assault cops are deportable period, end of story. we saw it in north carolina. we've recently seen it in new

york city. and it can happen in a community near you. i yield the floor.

úu a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. welch: mr. president, we have had a dismal recently with the united states supreme court, in my view. it's totally failed the american

people. in the name of the supreme court has taken away freedom and caused distress and uncertainty for women and individuals across the country. outrageous that because of this courtpeople have fewer rights today than they did 50 years ago. of course i refer to the dobbs y decision which to its ever lasting shame is a decision that the supreme court for its infamy took away a constitutional right. and it should be noted that in a postdobbs world women are leaning on contraceptive care more and doctors see more demand. that now is threatened. and anyone who read that dobbs decision in the thomas- and the thomas concurrence in that e laid it out at least where he intends to go. there confusion among my colleagues across the

aisle a and how important reproductive health care is. i thank the president for his leadership on this with our colleague from hawaii. it's very important, and everyone needs access both to whatever birth control options make the most sensem and to whatever preventive health care makes sense to them. contraceptives can help prevent this is about ensuring every person in every zip code has access to the birth control that they need if they need it. this is a right of women and every individual to make decisions about their bodies and their futures. politicians should not be involved. the court shouldn't even be intimating it is threatening to take that away and this legislation is neededwon't. after roe was overturned in june 2022 vermont voters went to the polls. they took their own liberty into their own hands, not being able to rely on th supreme court to protect it.

in an article 22 of the vermont constitution a new amendment, it permanently protected reproductive liberties. it said that an individual's right to personal reproductive autonomynd dignity to determine one's own life course and shall not be denied or infringed unless justified by alling state interest achieved by the least restrictive means. this would stop future anti-choice legislation from of vermont. we enacted c 2019 in vermont under a republican governor that would, quote recognize as a fundamental right the freedom of reproductive choice and prohibit public entities from interfering with our restricting the right of an individual to term -- terminate the individual's pregnancy. in far back as 1972 the vermont supreme court became then to legalize

abortion. vermont has a long history of protecting reproductive rights and standing up for the rights of women. also mr. president, contraception is supported by the american people. it's widelyused. women and people who can get pregnant need it and use it. nine of ten voters want it to be legal, and three out of four want it to have easier access. 78% said they see it as basic health care for women and 72% are thankful it allows them to manage several health conditions. so mr. president, it is absolutely essential that in the face of the united states supreme court, what it did to deprive women of their own by reversing the roe v. wade decision that was so enshrined in our law and 50 years that we in the senate take all action possi's rights will be

protected. mr. president, i yield back.

mr. schumer: mr. president. mr. pr sew glad to -- so glad to come to the my colleagues, you, champion a great and necessary bill the right to conception abt. i'm proud to stand with my colleagues and i'm so proud to support this bill. you know today should have been a day of celebration. it was the 105th anniversary of the senate passing the 19th amendment, one of the greatest amendments ever passed granting women the right to vote under the u.s. constitution.

that was truly a proud moment for this chamber and one of the greatest victories ever in the march towards women's equality a march that new york proudly advanced. upstate new york was a hotbed of women's movement including places like seneca falls. on this 105th anniversary we must confront the truth that women have fewer freedoms today. a few weeks from now america will oerve a different anniversary, a much darker anniversary, that of the maga supreme court overturning be roe v. wade. thanks to that decision and thanks to the hard right's war on women, reproductive are at their lowest point in modern history. and who knows how far the hard right will go. two years ago the maga court eeliminated the protections of roe. tomorrow it could be something else. maybe it could be the griswold

decision that protected the right to use birth control. to those who think that's outlandish or impossible to happen just remember clarence thomas himself opened the door to this possibility in his concurring opinion the day roe was overturned. we're kidding ourselves if we think the hard right is simply overturning roe. and for all those who say ihappen remember people said that before dobbs that roe would never be overturned and of course unfortunately it was by the right wing maga court appointed by donald trump and our colleagues in the senate. tomorrow the senate will act. we'll vote move forward on the right to conception act. it should be a definition of what a -- if you want access to birth control or a health care provider wanting to prescribe birth control, the government has no right to interfere.

doesn't that seem like common sense. access to birth control is something 90% of americans support. of course we're hearing the same predictable and retired retorts from the other side that birth control could never be at risk. that this is much ado about nothing. that is simply not true. for those who argued that federal protections for birth control are unnecessary ask the people of havevirginia what they think that would have vetoed a bill that would have protected contraception, and go to nevada and ask their governor. for those who say that birth control will never fall under risk, go ask the people of idaho, florida, or missouri republican governance --

governors are -- it is unacceptable simply unacceptable for americans to even question whether minority access to birth control should fall at risk. but that is precisely the worry one in five americans have today. we can eliminate that worry in one fell swoop by passing the right to contraception act. i hope both sides join together to show strong support for this essential bill tomorrow when we vote on it. i yield the floor. not yet. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the confirmation vote on the pipe nomination be 12 noon tomorrow wednesday, june 5, than the cloture vote with respect to the sullivan nomination occur upon disposition of the pipe nomination. further, that if cloture is invoked on the sullivan

nomination all time be considered expired and the confirmation vote be determined after consultation with the republican leader. after cloture vote on the sullivan nomination the senateh resume legislative session and go to the calendar 400, s. 4381, a respect to the motion to proceed occur p.m. finally, that if any of the nominations are confirmed during wednesday's session, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be needily notified of the senate's actions -- immediately notified of the senate aactions. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. ms. warren: mr. president. cer: the senior senator from massachusetts. ms. warren: thank president. i rise today because reproductive freedom is under attack. in 2022, donald trump's far-right supreme court took away the constitutional right to an abortion completing the

republican party's decades-long plan to overturn roe. now, in some states the court's decision revived abortion bans that had lane dormant since the 1800's. in other states the decision triggered new abortion restrictionings prewritten to go into effect the very day that roe v. wade was overturned. the res have been horrific. but here's the thing the republican party missed from kansas to ohio to california reproductive rights are popular. americans overwhelmingly support the right to an abortion right to ivf, and the right to contraception. in fact these rights are so popular that republicans want you to believe they support them but their actions speak for themselves. first, republicans said they wouldn't overturn roe v. wade.

donald trump and hiscourt did. and trump is still bragging about it. now, over 20 states have banned or severely restricted abortion access passed laws criminalizing doctors who perform abortions, or threaten access to pregnancy care miscarriage care fertility assistance and more. then republicans claimed they wouldn't go after ivf. just this year alabama supreme court virtually outlawed ivf in state. and just a few weeks later, my colleagues in the republican party blocked federal legislation that would protect access to this care. now, the republican is saying they won't go after contraception. well that sense since 92% of americans support birth but,what.

republicans now have contraception in their sights and they are even trying to redefine what constitutes contraception. sure they support contraception but not an iud, or they're all for contraception, but not plan b. contraception is a must except republicans in congress have a bill quote, the life at conception act that would give an embryo so-called personhood rights which would outlaw outlaw ivf, and, yes, outlaw some forms of contraception. that bill has the majority support republican caucus including speaker of t johnson. on top of that republicans blocked democrats from passing this very same bill to protect the right to contraception last year.

but tomorrow every senator will have to say where they stand, proving that no matter what republicans wanting to support contraception, when it comes down to it they won't. tomorrow's vote should be ae we take these republican lawmakers at their word. millions of people across this country are already experiencing a new form of hell thanks to the extremist supreme court that overturned roe. and black, brown, and low-income communities are feeling a disproportionate impact. so now, as donald trump continues to push for a nationwide he is looking at contraception, democrats are standing up and fighting back. already president biden and vice president harris have taken a series of strengths t access to affordable

high-quality contraception and adequate being aaccess to reproductive and tomorrow i will be joining my democratic colleagues led by my partner, senator markey and by senator hirono and senator duckworth in voting for the right to contraception act. birth control is effective and an important part of reproductive health care. it is time that we fight back against the republican war it's time we codify the right to contraception into law. i am furious that millions of women have lost fundamental rights. i am furious that their freedom to make theiras been taken away by a small number ofists. i am alarmed by what the extremist supreme court and congressional republicans are prepared to do to unravel a

future of protection for women under a republican presidency. the right to make decisions about our own our own futures. it's all on the line and we need these protections written into law. that is what tomorrow's vote is about. i don't want to hear from republicans who say they support contraception but c't me it the law of the land. if they really support contraception, then they will vote yes on the bill that comes up not, actions speak louder than words. they will demonstrate that it's not only going after abortion it's not only going after ivf, it's also all about going after contraception. these are the decisions women should make for themselves. they should have the freedom to do that. these are not the decisions that should be made by extremist

republican lawmakers. mr. president, i yield the floor. mrs. blackburn: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mrs. blackburn: thank you, mr. president. 105 years ago today this chamber something truly historic. it passed the 19tsecure the right to vote for american women. the amendment's ratification by the state's one year later marked the largest en enfranchisement in u.s. history, extending the voto 26 million americans. this incredible achievement fulfilled more than 70 years of tireless efforts brave suffrages to make this a more perfect union, tennessee women. abbey crawford from chattanooga,

ida b. wells from memphis. on this anniversary, i'm especially reminded of feb burn of tennessee. in december of 1920, the tennessee general assembly was inate about whether tennessee would ratify the 19th amendment. at the time 19 states voted to one more was needed to make the 19th amendment the law of the land. on the day of the vote in nashville, feb burn wrote a o his son harry burn the youngest member of the tennessee state legislature. she urged her son to support the amendment. she wrote, and i quote, vote for sufrj and don't -- suffrage and don't keep them in doubt. end quote.

at first harry pinned a red rose, the sim doll -- symbol of anti-suffrage amendment the vote. but with his mother's letter in his coat pocket harry ultimately listened to her advice switched his vote and switched to a yellow rose on that lapel, making tennessee the 36th and final state to ratify the 19th amendment. as the snt tennessee in the u.s. senate i have praappreciation for theork to honor their legacy and advance their cause, but as we remember the suffragists on this anniversary, it's important to women are still fighting for a seat at the table and for their achievements. look no furtheral mall right here

in our nation's capital. this two-mile stretch of land america's front beyond a resonable doubt, as it is -- america's front beyond a resonable doubt, honors its history oforials and statues of incredible americans who have made incredible sacrifices to make our country a more perfect ng the 40 monuments, not one is dedicatedo women. that's why introduced the bipartisan women's suffrage national monument location act which would finally secure a mon monument honoring women's history on the national mall. this commemorate the women suffrage movement the passage of the 19th amendment, and the incredible women who fought to secure the vote for millions of americans. the house unanimously passed

this legislation invember now the senate should vote to make this memorial a reality and honor the giant who paved the way for generations of american women. urge every member of this chamber to join senator baldwin and me in supporting the women's suffrage national monument location act. i yield the floor and note the absence of aquorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: snool -- quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

quorum call:

won is one of the most significant events in human history. in those early morning hours more than 24,000 soldiers and 1200 aircraft conducted a massive and daring arne assault behind enemy lines. this was done to isolate the coast and prevent the enemy fromin it's defenses. then at don the largest amphibious assault ever conducted, 160,000 u.s. british and canadian troops toward poured out at 6900 ships and vessels to storm the beaches

against a crushing enemy omaha, utah, juneau, the beaches names are still famous today. the first days were not promising for the allies. slowly over the next several weeks the allies extended their foothold and amassed more and moually numbering 2 million on these beaches of normandy. after a german countta to break out would begin. paris would be liberated just weeks later on august the 25th in five days later the enemy would withdraw back against the scene into germany, the end of operation overlord. losses were

june the sixth d-day alone the allies suffered more than 10,000 casualties. at the operations and that number would swell to nearly a quarter million including more than 1 wounded and 72,000 killed or missing. more than was killed in the entire war in vietnam. most of the days participants were young men in their teens and early 20s. men with little or no combat experience in their whole lives in front of them landed on those beaches. men like my father a farmer from arkansas who was not yet 19. he was 18 years old when he edlaach on that very day of june 6. i can't imagine what it must

have been like to carry such an incredible burden at such a young age. leaving your family and loved ones knowing you might not make itin back. join my colleagues and the presiding officer whom i thank for his leadership in voicing my support for the right to contraception act. truth be told we shouldn't be here debating this issue. we shouldn't haveo vote for legislation on it. just two years ago it would have been unimaginable that we would be turning the clock not to the early 1970's when roe was decided but to the 1960's when the united states supreme decided a case called griswold

v. connecticut. yes, griswold v. connecticut, striking down the prohibition against t use of contraception. that decision had a profound impact on women and american families and it was all to the good. it in effect struck down a prohibition that was disregarded widely but still followed with consequences that were both tragic and detrimental to women's health. now we are in an era that regards the unthinkable as perfectly realistic wheny republican colleagues here and across the country are working

to ban or restrict access to abortion care the ability of families to have children through ivf. no one could have thought that was possible just a but in the post-dobbs era, it's not possible it is common. concongress is still the law of the land but it has been undercut deeply by dobbs. and it has undermined the ability of families to decide when and whether to have children. we're talking here not about abortion but about contraceptive care by gives women the chance to choose their own path in life and select their own timeline to pursue or continue an education or trade, advance further in the

workforce, gives them the freedom they deserve as to when to have children, as well as whether. this decision is deeply personal. i shouldn't have to say it. it should be assumption. but politic building and in state capitals around the country take on the right to make that decision for everyone else not just themselves s now if -- not just now, if my republican colleagues really care about families and children i would suggest they turn their attention to improving their lives in this world and support families rather than forcing people to have children that maybe they are not prepared to care for. and if they really care about

women, how about maternal health i am struck by the fact -- asian american i am struck by the fact in fact i am haunted by it that maternal mortality rates in the united states of america have been rising over recent years. yes, we have cut infant mortality rates,en still face heart disease hemorrhage, infection, other kinds of complications either before they give birth or within the year afterward. and of course the mental health issues that can arise. so to my republican colleagues if you care about women, let's support the moms who decide to have children but leave to them the decision about whether and when. to determining their

own futures access to contraception is also access to critical health care. since the landmark decision in griswold millions of women have safely ud contraception to improve health outcomes for themselves and their familie is also crucial to anyone who has a life-threatening condition t prevents them from having a healthy access to birth control puts people in danger preventable danger. nearly 90% of women of reproductive age have used some form of birth control, and an overwhelming percentage of voters believe that access to contraception is a basic right. it is a basic right. overturning roe represented a significant regression in our law, in morality in practical

health outcomes. in the blink of an eye, younger generations were set back before their moms in their basicprotection their access to health care. we have a responsibility in this body at the pinnacle of our federal system to make sure that there is federal protection against the attacks on reproductive care and ensure that gener americans don't have fewer rights than their parents. this bill is urgent in light of the continuing attack in state women's access to health care and reproductive rights. i wish we weren't here but we are, and we need to do the right thing. my colleagues have a choice -- they can either support a woman's right to access

contraception or they can oppose thil i think there really is no question about how that choice should be made, and i they'll make it tomorrow when we vote on this measure. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.

mr. blumenthal: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned til 0 dnesday, june 5. that following the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed. following the conclusion of morning business, the senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the pipe nomination, postcloture. thpresal: if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. a

ó@pt

6u

mr. blumenthal: mr. president.cer: the senator from connecticut. mr. blumenthal: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to legislative session and be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each.t objection. mr. blumenthal: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the appointment at the desk appear separately in the record as if made by the chair. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. blumenthal: i have seven requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. blumenthal: i understand there is a bl at the desk and i ask for its first reading. the presiding the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title of the bill for the first time.

the clerk: s. 4447 a allow women greater access to safe and effective oral contraceptive drugs and so forth. mr. blumenthal: i now ask for a a second reading and in order to place the bill on the object to my own q request. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. blumen the presiding officer: the bill will be read for the second time on the next legislative day. mr. blumenthal: thank you. that the senate proceed to the following senate resolutions -- senate resolution 719 senate resolution 720 senate resolution 721, senate resolution 722, senate resolution 723, senate resoluti the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measures en bloc? without objection.

the senate will proceed to the consideration of the measures en bloc. mr. blumenthal: i ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to the preambles be agreed to and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table all en bloc. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. blumenthal: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the consideration of calendar number 378, senate resolution 385. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: 378, s. res. 385 resolution calling for the immediate release of evan gershkovich, united states citizen and journalist and so forth. the presiding officer: proceeding to the measure? without objection. the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. blumenthal: i ask unanimous

consent that the resolution be agreed to the preamble be agreed to and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. blumenthal: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 380, senate congressional resolution 18. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 380, s. con res. resolution calling for the immediate release of marc fogel, united states citizen and teacher and so forth. the presid proceed to the measure. mr. blumenthal: i further ask that the committee-reported substitute amendment to the concurrent resolution be agreed to the concurrent resolution as amended be agreed to the preamble be agreed to and the

motion to reconsiders be laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. blumenthal: i ask unanimous consent that the committee be discharged from further consideration of s. and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. the presiding officer:k: s. 3237 a bill to amend the camp lejeune justice act of2032 and so forth. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. blumenthal: i ask unanimous consent that the tillis amendment at the desk be consernd to the bill as amended be time and passed and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there

objection? without objection. mr. blumenthal: i ask unanimous consent thatn letes its business today it stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. on wednesday, june 5. wednesday, june 5. that following the prayer ans be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed. following thncon of morning business, the senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the pipe nomination, postcloture. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. blumenthal: if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned.officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. all opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it.ve it. the motion is agreed to.

the senate stands adjourned today an unprecedented armada landed on the shores of normandy. >> these are the boys. took the

cliffs. these are the champions who helped free a con. these are heroes who helped end the war. >> 2 million suns from 15 countries jumped into flak filled skies and a bloodsoaked surf and met death on an even plane. >> theovised and mounted the these beaches. the forces of freedom turned the tide of the 20th century. >> that rotate d-day was hard and they traveled by weary and valued men. and history will always record where that road began. he began here with the first footprints the beaches of normandy. >> more than 150,000 off towards this tiny sliver of sand upon which

marriage -- more than the fate of the war. rather the course of human history. >> today we remember those who fell in the honor all who fought right here in normandy.