president and a far-right organization, both dedicated to overturning and undermining roe v. wade, and he did not a thing to refute the presumption that he would want to overturn it, too. judge kavanaugh doesn't belong on the bench because he was chosen by far-right organizations that are bent on repealing health care protections for americans with preexisting conditions, and he did nothing to refute the presumption that he would, too. judge kavanaugh doesn't belong on the bench because he believes that presidents should not be subject to investigations of any kind while in office, a distortion of our founding principle, that no person is above the law. judge kavanaugh does not belong on the bench because his jurisprudence is deeply skeptical of environmental

protections, consumer protections, workers' rights, civil rights, lgbt rights, and rights of treaties with native americans and a host of other hard-earned rights. judge kavanaugh doesn't belong on the bench because he has repeatedly misled the senate, putting into serious doubt his credibility and a judge must be credible, believable, and honest, above all. judge kavanaugh doesn't belong on the bench because he is an extreme partisan, something we have seen from his earliest days in his career and reconfirmed when he gave one of the bitterest, most partisan testimonies ever presented by a nominee. judge kavanaugh doesn't belong on the bench because of his injudicious demeanor, his partisan screed will go down

ignominiously in history, and made it clear it would be virtually impossible for him to rule impartially on the supreme court. judges must be temperate, judicious, evenhanded. judge kavanaugh is anything but. republican leaders knew before he was nominated that judge kavanaugh was a very flawed choice, but once president trump selected him, republicans decided they had to rush him through. they became a steam roller over truth, fairness, and our traditions of bipartisan cooperation. any means necessary to reach their desired end. they blamed dr. ford and democrats for judge kavanaugh's flaws. they were intent on shrouding

the truth because they knew that if the truth came to light, judge kavanaugh would be exposed as a truly flawed nominee. so, my colleagues, my fellow americans, what is the appropriate response? our country needs to have a reckoning on these issues, and there is only one remedy. change must come from where change in america always begins the ballot box. so to americans, to so many millions who are outraged by what happened here, there's one answer: vote. if you believe dr. ford and other brave women who came forward and you want to vindicate their sacrifice, vote. if you believe the supreme court should uphold women's rights, vote. if you believe the supreme court

must protect health care and our preexisting conditions that are protected now, vote. if you believe the supreme court should defend workers, consumers, the environment, civil rights, native populations, vote. if you believe the supreme court should be a check on an overreaching president, vote. if you believe the process here in the senate was a sham and you believe americans deserve better, vote. if you believe that supreme court justices should conform to the highest standards of character, impartiality, temperament, and above all, honesty and credibility, vote. i understand, i share the deep

anguish that millions of americans are experiencing today, but i say to you, my fellow americans, there is one answer: vote. i yield the floor. mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: the constitution of the united states was made not merely for the generation that then existed, but for posterity. those are the words of henry

clay. mr. president, kentucky's on. they underscore that the decision united states senators will make today will echo in the history of our nation. the very survival of our constitutional form of government requires an expert and independent judiciary. without fair and impartial courts of justice, as alexander hamilton put it in the "federalist papers," all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing. the courts guard our rights, and the senate guards our courts that, mr. president, is why today is such an important day.

that is why the vote we take this afternoon, a vote to confirm a new associate justice of the supreme court of the united states, represents one of the most consequential decisions a senator ever makes. the members of this body are duty bound to make sure we confirm justices of the supreme court who are men and women of the highest character and the most superlative qualifications. so fortunately that is just the sort of nominee who stands before us today. 12 weeks ago the president nominated the jurist who's been described by legal peers of all political stripes as a super star, a serious scholar, and who is legendary for his

preparation and possesses the temperament and judicial philosophy to be an excellent associate justice. the president nominated a brilliant student of the law. those who taught and knew the nominee at yale say, quote, it is hard to name anyone with judicial credentials as strong as judge kavanaugh. they describe a true intellectual, a leading thinker, and a wonderful mentor and teacher. and those he's mentored, a diverse group of bright young lawyers who clerked with judge kavanaugh, talk about his work ethic, his unflinching honest advice and his fundamental humility. for 12 weeks the senate has seen that this is not empty praise. we've seen the legendary preparation of a tireless judge.

we've seen the patience of a committed mentor and teacher. we've seen the humility of a true intellectual who let his record speak for itself. each of us have seen this for ourselves. every senator who came into this process with an open mind has seen that very same brett kavanaugh firsthand. we've seen his brilliance, his painstaking thoroughness on display in the 3 hundred-plus opinions he issued on the d.c. circuit. for 12 years judge kavanaugh excelled on the bench that many experts see as the second most important court in our nation. we've seen his genialty and kindness firsthand in our private meetings with the nominee, precisely the collegial approach that is so necessary on the court. we've seen his professional excellence as we reviewed more pages of documents pertaining to judge kavanaugh's career than for any other supreme court

nomination in our history. pages that depict a meticulous and dedicated public servant. and, yes, we have now studied the results of seven, seven f.b.i. background investigations, inquiries that have produced no evidence whatsoever to corroborate any prior misconduct. but rather are consistent with all we know about this nominee's sterling character. this historically tall mountain of evidence adds up to one clear message. judge brett kavanaugh is among the very best our nation has to offer. he will make the senate and the country proud. he will serve with the distinction on our highest court. he unquestionably deserves confirmation, and the country deserves such a supreme court

justice. now, mr. president, as i've explained, the stakes are always high, always high where a supreme court confirmation is concerned. , but this time, this time stakes are higher, a lot higher than they have been in the past. i can't sum this up better than our friend and distinguished colleague, the senior senator from maine, put it in her historic, historic remarks yesterday. this is what the senior senator from maine said: it is when passions are most inflamed that natureness -- that fairness is most in jeopardy. she said when passions are most inflamed is when fairness is most in jeopardy.

we all know the events of recent weeks have stained, strained the country's comity and fanned the flames of partisan discord. but even more critically, our very commitment to the basic principles of fairness and justice is also being tested. basic principles of fairness and justice being tested right here. a vote to confirm judge kavanaugh today is also a vote to send a clear message about what the senate is. this is an institution where the evidence and the facts matter. this is an institution where the evidence and the facts matter. this is a chamber in which the politics of intimidation and personal destruction do not win the day.

this is the body whose members themselves uphold the same commitment to american justice that we see in the judges we examine. a vote to confirm judge kavanaugh today is a vote to end this brief dark chapter in the senate's history and turn the page toward a brighter tomorrow. the chamber we are privileged to occupy is often called the world's greatest deliberative body for good reason. we're called the world's greatest deliberative body for a good reason. when the rubber meets the road, when the hour's critical, when an historic precedent needs to be set, the united states senate most often finds its way to doing what is right. today we can honor that history.

we can vote to turn away from the darkness. we can vote to set a precedent about fairness and judgment that will define this body for the better. we can vote to confirm an excellent supreme court justice who will make the senate and the american people proud. i yield the floor. the vice president: as a reminder to our guests in the galleries, expressions of approval or disapproval are not permitted in the senate galleries. under the previous question, all postcloture time has expired. the question is on the nomination. is there a sufficient second?

the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery. the vice president: is there a sufficient second? there is a sufficient second. the clerk will call the roll. the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery. vote: the vice president: the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery.

the vice president: the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery. the vice president: the sergeant at arms has restored order in the gallery. the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery. the clerk may continue. vote:

the vice president: the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery. the clerk may continue. vote:

the vice president: the senator will suspend. the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery. the vice president: the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery. the clerk will resume. vote:

the vice president: the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery. continue. vote:

the vice president: the clerk will suspend. the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery. the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery. the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery. the clerk may continue. vote: ms. murkowski: my friend,

the senator from montana, senator daines who is walking his daughter down the aisle this afternoon. if if he were present and voting, he would have voted aye. i have voted no. the pair will not change the outcome of the vote. i therefore withdraw my vote. the vice president: the senator has that right. vote:

the vice president: expressions of approval or disapproval are not permitted in the senate gallery. are there any senators in the chamber who wish to vote or change a vote? if not, on this vote the ayes are 50. the nays are 48.

the nomination of brett m. kavanaugh of maryland to be an associate justice of the supreme court of the united states is confirmed. majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the vice president: the sergeant at arms will restore order in the gallery. the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. alled opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i understand that the senate has received a message from the house to accompany s. 30231. the presiding officer: the senator is correct. mr. mcconnell: i move that the senate place before the senate

s. 3021. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. all opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the message. the clerk: resolved that the bill from the senate s. 3021, act of an act to dedicate the united states courthouse in minnesota appear lis, minnesota, as the diana e. murphy courthouse do pass with amendments. mr. mcconnell: i move to concur on the house amendments. the presiding officer: the motion is pending. mr. mcconnell: i send a cloture motion to the desk on the motion to concur. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion. we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22, do hereby bring to a close debate on the motion to concur in the house amendments to s. 3021, an act to designate the united states courthouse located at 300 south fourth

street in minneapolis, minnesota, and so forltsdz. mr. mcconnell: -- so forth. i ask the reading of the names be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i move to concur on the house amendment with a further amendment. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from kentucky, mr. mcconnell, moves to concur in the house amendment s. 3021 with an amendment numbered 4048. mr. mcconnell: i ask the reading be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask for the yeas and nays on my amendment. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the yeas and nays are ordered. mr. mcconnell: i have a second-degree amendment at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the amendment. the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky, mr. mcconnell, proposes an amendment numbered 4049 to amendment 4048. mr. mcconnell: i ask the reading be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i move to refer the house message to s. 2031 to

report back forthwith with instructions. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: the senator from kentucky, mr. mcconnell, moves to refer the house message to accompany s. 3021 to the committee on environment and public works with instructions to report back forthwith an amendment numbered 4050. mr. mcconnell: i ask for the yeas and nays on my motion. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the yeas and nays are ordered. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: the senator from kentucky, mr. mcconnell, proposes amendment 4051 to the instructions to infer. mr. mcconnell: i ask for the yeas and nays on my amendment. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the yeas and nays are ordered. mr. mcconnell: i have a second-degree amendment at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from kentucky, mr. mcconnell,

proposes amendment 4052 to amendment 4051. mr. mcconnell: i ask the reading be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask the mandatory quorum call be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i move to consider calendar 640. the presiding officer: the question is on the amendment. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, department of justice, jeffrey bossert clark of virginia to be an assistant attorney. mr. mcconnell: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: cloture motion. we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22, do hereby bring to a close debate on the nomination of jeffrey bossert clark, of virginia, to be an assistant attorney general, signed by 17 senators. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without

objection. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. all opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar 641. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. all opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. colombia nomination, department of justice, eric s. dreiband of maryland to be assistant attorney general. mr. mcconnell: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: cloture motion. we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22, do hereby bring to a close debate on the nomination

of eric s. dreiband, of maryland, to be u.s. assistant attorney general. mr. mcconnell: i ask that the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar 866. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. all those opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, department of defense, james m. stewart of north carolina to be assistant secretary. mr. mcconnell: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: cloture motion, 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 james m. stewart of north carolina to be an assistant secretary of defense. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the mandatory quorum calls be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business it adjourn until tuesday, 3:00 p.m. i ask that the time for the two leaders be reserved for use later in the day and morning business be closed. finally following leader remarks the senate resume consideration of the house message to accompany s. 3021 and that notwithstanding rule 22 the senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to occur at 5:30 p.m. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: if there is no further business to come before the senate i ask it stand adjourned under the previous order following the remarks of senator coons. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. coons: mr. president,. the presiding officer: the senator from democratic. mr. coons: thank you, mr. president. i come to the floor today to express my opposition to the nomination of judge kavanaugh to serve as associate justice of the united states supreme court. i come here today with a profound regret. i come here today with profound regret that this body has transformed from one that historically confirmed supreme court justices with broad and bipartisan support to one in which rules, norms and courtesies fall away to serve the objectives of the majority and one in which justices are

confirmed by the absolute narrowest of margins. and i know i am not the only one to feel this way. we can simply wish for the bygone era of consensus to return. we can give speeches about bipartisanship with no hope of making progress, but to wish for it without doing the work of reaching across the aisle is empty talk without action. and as one who tried, tried to inject some spirit of bipartisanship in what has been the most bitter, most divisive and most partisan fight i've seen in my eight years here, i wanted to reflect for a moment before we close today on my views on the nomination of judge kavanaugh, the process that got us here, and where we go now. first, in this process, in this nomination, i saw barrier after barrier placed in front of consensus, bipartisanship and the proper functioning of the

senate judiciary committee on which i serve. these barriers prevented us from fully and effectively performing the advice and consent function to which we are called by the constitution. we have to do better. there needs fob a reckon -- there needs to be a reckoning with all that went wrong here. and i'm sure that colleagues from other the other side of the aisle may well have differing views, exactly which steps or developments lead to the sharply divided vote today and the heated and sharply divided hearing and proceedings of last week. i welcome their input. but i thought today i should for me recount the course of this nomination. it was fraught from the beginning because the senate judiciary committee majority used an unprecedented and partisan process to rush this nomination while blocking access to millions of pages of documents of judge kavanaugh's

service in the white house, potentially relevant to our deliberations. for the first time since watergate the nonpartisan national archives were cut out of the process for reviewing and producing the nominee's records, and judge kavanaugh's own former deputy who made his career representing republican and partisan causes was in charge of designating which documents this committee and the american people got to see. nonetheless, the committee pressed forward despite objections from the minority to judge kavanaugh's hearing. during that hearing i was, frankly, disappointed. judge kavanaugh was not fully forthcoming when discussing his interpretation of the constitution and responding to timely and important questions about his record. i asked judge kavanaugh why he repeatedly criticized morrison v. olson, a 30-year-old precedent, about a now extinct

statute, about a 30-year-old supreme court precedent holding congress can create an independent counsel with the authority to investigate the president and whom the president cannot just fire on a whim. i asked whether he still believes what he said in 1998 that a president can fire at will a prosecutor criminally investigating him. on these and other critical questions of presidential power, judge kavanaugh would not respond. he would not tell me whether he believes all executive branch officials must be removable at will by the president, according to his view of executive power. i asked whether critical rights like rights of access to contraception, to abortion, the right to marry the person you love would be protected under the test to evaluate substantive due process that he has championed. judge kavanaugh has repeatedly cited a test for substantive due process that would limit the

protection of liberty interest to rights, quote, deeply rooted in our nation's history and tradition, but he would not confront the consequences of applying this test going forward. judge kavanaugh would also not condemn president trump's attacks on the federal judiciary and the president's suggestions that the justice department should consider politics when making prosecutorial decisions. i asked judge kavanaugh about a comment he made on a panel at georgetown when he said, quote, if the president were the sole subject of a criminal investigation, i would say no one should be investigating that. in fact, judge kavanaugh testified he didn't say that. but i've reviewed the record. i followed up with a series of questions for the record to get additional information i think the american people should know and to give judge kavanaugh a chance outside of our brief exchanges in the confirmation process to explain his suggestions that perhaps i had

misquoted him, and, unfortunately, instead i received pages of nonanswers. when i asked judge kavanaugh specific questions about his criticism of morrison v. olson, he referred to his prior testimony and said he had nothing further to add. he would not explain how his proffered tests for substantive due process is consistent with the court's landmark marriage equality decision by justice kennedy. after the hearing was over, i learned of dr. ford's allegations that judge kavanaugh had assaulted her in high school. dr. ford courageously presented her account to the city and the country. she gave compelling testimony about a terrifying sexual assault she experienced at age 15. she recounted mark judge and brett kavanaugh stumbling drunk, pushing into her bedroom, locking the door, laughing and turning up the music to mufl

her -- muffle her screams. dr. ford testified with 100% certainty that the person we are considering -- she had borne the pain of this attack alone for decades. but over time she told several people she trusted. she told her now husband in 2002, she told therapists in 2012 and 2013, told friends in 2016, 2017, and 2018, and proffered their names in a subsequent f.b.i. investigation, but they wre never questioned. -- were never questioned. un -- dr. ford wasn't the only person to come forward. her testimony gave courage to others to share their pain so all of us can understand. as i just shared in a bipartisan

conversation with colleagues at the end of this divisive vote, we have all had the experience of friends, colleagues, classmates, and neighbors coming forward with stories long concealed, whether out of shame or fear, whether out of a certainty they would not be believed, whether out of pressures real, recent, or long gone, and we all have work to do together. inspired by these survivors i, i will never forget the experiences they have shared and i will not stop in efforts to make certain this body, this senate acts in ways that respect them and their suffering and their experiences. when dr. ford came forward to speak to all of us and the american people, i'll remind you she had nothing to gain and a lot to lose. she came forward to testify about her assault, and i'm going to use her own words to explain why, quote, as she said to us i

am here today not because i want to be. i'm terrified. i'm here because i believe it's my civic duty to tell you what happened to me while brett kavanaugh and i were in high school. civic duty to tell the truth. what always struck me was how doctor ford came forward to voice concerns before judge kavanaugh was nominated by the president. she reached out to her congresswoman and anonymously to "the washington post" when he was on the short list. later, last thursday, after dr. ford's testimony, judge kavanaugh came forward to give an aggressive denunciation of her accusations. even recognizing the understanlable passion of one who -- understandable passion to

believe his honor against unjust accusations. as a sitting circuit court judge, he refused to answer fair and relevant questions, instead throwing them back in the faces of two of my colleagues. he was not candid with the committee about his own history of drinking and aggressive behavior. to quote an editorial recently published by three college classmates, telling the truth, no how difficult, is a moral obligation for our nation's leaders. no one should be able to lie their way on to the supreme court. honesty is the dpliew that holds together a society of -- is the glue that holds together a society. they stated that brett lied under oath while seeking to become a supreme court justice. most concerning of all to me, judge kavanaugh broke his own stated rule of staying three zip codes away from politics. in his sharply worded and

partisan exchange with senators, he accused democrats of replacing advice and consent with search and destroy, of borking him, of engaging in some sort of revenge plot on behalf of clintons. he looked us in the eye and told us that what comes around goes around. retired justice john paul stevens explained he changed his mind about judge kavanaugh's fitness to serve because his hearing performance demonstrated a potential bias, and i share my colleague, senator murkowski's concern that after last thursday, the appearance of impropriety, and i quote, has become unavoidable. following the intense and emotional testimony of last thursday, i am grateful that we took a week pause so the f.b.i. could conduct an investigation into credible allegation of sexual assault, and i remain

thankful. to my colleague senator flake for supporting mile call for an f.b.i. investigation. it showed courage on his part. unfortunately, regretlyiably, the investigation that ensured had a scope so narrow and incomplete it did not remove the cloud hanging over judge kavanaugh's nomination. dozens of witnesses who could have corroborated dr. ford's and ms. ramirez's accounts were not contacted and questioned despite their contacts and names being handed to f.b.i. agents and despite the efforts of many offices in the senate to forward their information. i fear that with the confirms of judge kavanaugh to the -- confirmation of judge kavanaugh to the supreme court today, we when look back on this moment not only as a moment of raucous turmoil for the senate, but as a

moment where the norms and traditions of blind justice and a justice blind to partisanship will have slipped away. the court is critical to the rule of law in our country and i'm deeply concerned that its legitimacy is harmed with the addition of an explicitly partisan justice. the supreme court plays a pivotal role in defining the scope of the president's power and determining whether the president is above the law. the supreme court impacts essential rights enshrined in our constitution, the rights to privacy, intimacy, marriage, contraception, abortion, freedom to worship as we choose, the ability to participate in our democracy as full and equal citizens, the promise of equal protection of the laws. there are so many more i could list. these issues are not academic. and they are under assault. there are cases proceeding to the supreme court now that are

relevant to so many of these concerns. there are cases challenging the constitutionality of the ongoing special counsel investigation now. a lawsuit aimed at striking down the affordable care act is proceeding in texas now. the trump administration is refusing to defend protections for people with preexisting conditions. a challenge to restrictive regulations for abortion clinics, regulations aimed at putting clinics out of business is headed to the supreme court now. and right now, there are lawsuits across the country where lgbt americans are challenging discrimination they faced in employment, in schools, in government service. our supreme court should be a bulwark against violations of law, deprivations of freedom, and abuses of power. but we may, we may now enter a perilous time when the court is in fact shifting far right and

ends uppishing decision after decision -- ends up issuing decision after decision, clearly more conservative than a majority of americans, at a time when a president elected by a minority of americans will have appointed the justice with the deciding vote after his confirmation by the narrowest of margins. that justice who has been confirmed today is one who in his conduct will lead some to fairly doubt his impartiality. he will likely play a central role in charting a course for interpreting our laws and rights and freedoms for decades. i hope and pray that i am wrong, that my interpretation of his writings, his speeches, his opinions is flawed, that the apology and retraction he offered in an opinion published yesterday about his partisan

screed at his confirmation hearing is genuine and that his behavior as a justice will put to rest all the concerns that i have raised and that he will be a model of moderation and balance. but i have profound doubts and grave concerns about judge kavanaugh's ability to serve on the supreme court in an evenhanded and nonpartisan way. and as i conclude, let me make a personal plea to those listening and those who may watch that we in the senate going forward must address the flaws and weaknesses of the process that got us to today and we must do better. simply retreating to our partisan cloakrooms when faced with our nation's challenges will not solve them. if we do not work to repair this institution, there will be nothing left worth saving. if this senate does not work, our congress does not work.

if our congress does not work, our nation does not work. if our nation does not work, we teach the world that democracy is not the model to follow. if we simply reflect the bitter partisanship that is growing and festering across our nation fueled by some here in washington, we will fail. we in the senate must instead follow the founders' vision for us and in fact lead the country to common ground, to consensus, and to a better future. we should therefore work together to get back to a place where it is possible for supreme court justices to be confirmed with broad and bipartisan majorities, where it is possible to legislate together on the issues compelling to our time and it is possible to hear each other and to hear the concerns of all our people. i hope my colleagues will hear

my remarks today as an invitation to work together to face this challenge. we owe nothing less to the court, to our country, and our people. thank you, and with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. coons: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to legislative session for a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. under the previous order, the senate stands adjourned until senate stands adjourned until >> the senate has adjourned for the day about an hour or more after voting judge brett kavanaugh to the supreme court in a vote of 50 to 48. lisa murkowski the only

republican to vote no voted present as a favor to senator steve daines who is in his home state for daughter's wedding. final vote 50 to 48 and the president tweeting out after that vote, i aclaude and congratulate the u.s. senate for confirming jom knee brett kavanaugh to supreme court. later today i will sign his commission of appointment and he will be officially sworn in very exciting said the president and that commission is a formal legal document making the justice's appointment official, he will be signing that on the road because the president is on his way to kansas to campaign for candidates there this evening, the supreme court putting out this statement that the honorable brett kavanaugh will be sworn at 102nd associate justice on october 6th, later today. chief justice john roberts will administer constitutional o