those days when americans could be denied coverage or charged exorbitant amounts. that's what is at stake for many of us for america with this nomination, and that's why the questions we will ask and the views hopefully that you will share with us are so important. days from thet 22 election, mr. chairman. states.s underway in 40 senate republicans are pressing forward, full speed ahead, to consolidate the court that will carry their policies forward with, i hope, some review for the will of the american people. president trump said last week that he had "instructed my representatives to stop negotiation over a covid-19 leave package until after the election." and to focus full-time on

arrett to thedge b supreme court. died, senatescalia republicans refused to consider a replacement for his seat until after the election. at the time, senator mcconnell said the american people should have a voice in the selection of their next supreme court justice . 2018 ifed in october republicans intended to honor their own rule if an opening were to come up in 2020, chairman graham promised "if an opening comes in the last year of president trump's term in the primary process is started, would wait after the next election." republicans should honor this word for their promise and let the american people be heard. simply put, i believe we should

not be moving forward on this nomination, not until the election has ended and the nex sen. harris: to protect the senators and staff. this hearing should have been postponed. the decision to hold this hearing now is reckless and

police- inputs staff and at risk. not to mention, tens of millions of americans are struggling to pay their bills, the senate should be prioritizing coronavirus relief and providing financial support to those families. the american people need to have help to make rent or their mortgage payments. we should provide financial assistance to those who have lost their jobs and help parents put food on the table. small businesses need help as do the cities, towns, and hospitals that this crisis has pushed to the brink. the house bill would help families and small businesses get through this crisis, but senate republicans have not lifted a finger for 150 days. that is how long the bill has been in the senate. the committee is determined to

push a confirmation hearing through in 16 days. senate republicans have made it clear that rushing a supreme court nomination is more important than helping or supporting the american people suffering from a deadly pandemic and a devastating economic crisis. their priorities are not the american people's. for the moment, sinner republicans hold a majority and determine -- for the moment, senate republicans hold a majority and determine the schedule. the constitution and the senate nominations tof the supreme court, but the senate is rushing this process while people are actually voting just 22 days before the end of the election. more than 9 million americans have already voted and millions

more will vote while this illegitimate committee process is underway. a clear majority of americans want whoever wins this election to fill this seat, and my republican colleagues know that. yes, they are deliberately defying the will of the people in their attempt to roll back the protections provided by the affordable care act. let's remember, in 2017, president trump and congressional republicans repeatedly tried to get rid of the affordable care act, but remember, people from all walks of life spoke out and demand ed republicans stop trying to take away the american people's health care. republicans realized that the affordable care act to repeal, but now they are trying -- that the affordable care act is too

popular to repeal, but now they are trying to get the supreme court to do their dirty work. that is why president trump has been nominating judges who will get rid of the affordable care act. this administration, with the support of senate republicans, will be in front of the supreme court on november 10 to argue that the entire affordable care act should be struck down. that is an 29 days. senate a big reason why republicans are rushing to process -- the process. they are trying to get a justice on the court to ensure they can strip away the protections of the affordable care act. if they succeed, it will result in millions of people losing access to health care at the worst possible time, in the middle of a pandemic. 23 million americans could lose their health insurance altogether. if they succeed, they will eliminate protections for 135 million americans with

pre-existing conditions like diabetes and asthma or cancer. now includewill over 7 million americans who have contracted covid-19. insurance could deny you coverage, or sell you a plan that will not pay a dime toward treating anything related to your pre-existing condition. if the affordable care struct in you will have to once again -- struck down, you will have to once again pay for things like mammograms. people will pay more for prescription drugs and young adults will be kicked off their parents plans. these are not abstract issues. we need to be clear about how overturning the affordable care act will impact the people we all represent. for example, micah, who is 11 years old and lives in southern california. scoutenjoys being a girl and ice-skating and reading and

eating pasta and baking. her mother says the only way micah is able to live her life the way she does now is because the aca guarantees her health insurance cannot deny her coverage or limit care because it is too expensive. micah has a congenital heart defect. she goes to multiple specialists throughout the at just 11-months-old, micah's family had already hit $50,000 in medical expenses, and her bi-annual mri costs were $15,000 a session. and -- correction, by 11-months-old, her family had hit $500,000 in medical expenses. if republicans succeed in striking down the affordable care act, insurance companies will be able to deny coverage for children with serious conditions. children like micah.

and parents? well, they'll be on their own. no one should face financial ruin to get their child, or their spouse, or their parent, the care they need. and no family should be kept from seeing a doctor or getting treatment because an insurance company says that the treatment is too expensive. in america, access to healthcare should not be determined based on how much money you have. healthcare and access to healthcare should be a right. micah and millions of others who are protected by the affordable care act know this is fundamentally what is at stake with this supreme court nomination. of course, there's more at stake. throughout our history, americans have brought cases to the united states supreme court in our ongoing fight for civil rights, human rights, and equal justice. decisions like brown v. board of education, which opened up educational opportunities for black boys and girls. roe v. wade, which recognized a

woman's right to control her own body. loving v. virginia and obergefell v. hodges, which recognized that love is love, and that marriage equality is the law of the land. the united states supreme court is often the last refuge for equal justice when our constitutional rights are being violated. justice ruth bader ginsburg devoted her life to fight for equal justice, and she defended the constitution. she advocated for human rights and equality. she stood up for the rights of women. she protected workers. she fought for the rights of consumers against big corporations. she supported lgbtq rights. and she did so much more. but now, her legacy and the rights she fought so hard to protect are in jeopardy. by replacing justice ruth bader ginsburg with someone who will

undo her legacy, president trump is attempting to roll back american's rights for decades to come. every american must understand that, with this nomination, equal justice under law is at stake. our voting rights are at stake. workers' rights are at stake. consumer rights are at stake. the right to a safe and legal abortion is at stake. and holding corporations accountable is at stake. and again, there's so much more. and so, mr. chairman, i do believe this hearing is a clear attempt to jam through a supreme court nominee who will take healthcare away from millions of people during a deadly pandemic that has already killed more than 214,000 americans. i believe we must listen to our constituents and protect their

access to healthcare and wait to confirm a new supreme court justice until after americans decide who they want in the white house. thank you. chairman graham: thank you, senator harris. senator kennedy. sen. kennedy: you have a beautiful family, judge. we claim you, in louisiana. we're proud of the fact, in louisiana, that you were born in metairie, a suburb of new orleans. we're proud of the fact that you got a solid education at st. mary's dominican high school. come back and visit us. i know your mom and dad still live there, and we're very proud of you and your career.

this is a solemn occasion, as it should be. i can't think of another position, at least not a position that is for life, not a position in which the occupant is not elected by the people, that is more powerful, at least not in the western world, than an associate justice of the supreme court. and this process is not supposed to be the big rock candy mountain. our job is to advise and consent. that's one way of saying that we're supposed to make sure that whatever president makes the nomination hasn't made a

mistake. and we all, as you can see, take that job seriously, as you can see, and we know you respect that. that's why i think over the next several days, it's appropriate for us to talk about your intellect -- which is obvious, by the way -- and your temperament, your character, and your judicial philosophy. and i hope we can talk about something else. and that's the role of the federal judiciary in american life. now, look, judge, i'm not naive. i understand this thing can turn sour real fast. we all watched the hearings for justice kavanaugh. it was a freak show.

it looked like the cantina bar scene out of "star wars." i know, for someone unaccustomed to it, that it hurts to be called a racist. i think it's one of the worst things you can call an american. i know that it hurts to be called a white colonialist. and i know it must hurt for someone of deep christian faith, like yourself, to be called a religious bigot, and to have it implied that, because you are a devout christian, that you're somehow unfit for public service. before it's over with, they may call you rosemary's baby for all i know. i hope not. and i know, as we've seen this

morning, i know you think it's unfair -- it is unfair -- for my colleagues to suggest, some overtly, some more indirectly, that, if you're put on the united states supreme court, you will be on a mission from god to deny healthcare coverage for pre-existing conditions for every american. i know that seems preposterous to you, and it seems that way because it is. take comfort in the fact that the american people -- some of my colleagues disagree with this statement -- they believe in government. i believe in people. the american people are not morons. they can see drivel when they see it, and they can appreciate it when they see it for being what it is. now, let me turn to what i hope,

quickly, we can talk about today. americans love democracy. we'll even fight for it, and we have, and that's a wonderful thing. it's an important thing in today's world, as this world becomes more authoritarian. and our founders -- but we don't have a pure democracy. as a columnist i read this morning said, "when we have to decide a complex issue dealing with social norms or economic issues, we don't all put on a toga and go down to the forum and vote. we have elected representatives." those are members of congress. and it is our elected representatives' job to decide social and economic policy. and if we don't like what they do, they're accountable, we vote them out.

but in the last 50 years, certainly in the last 25, the united states congress, either voluntarily or involuntarily, has ceded a lot of its power to the executive branch and to the federal judiciary. when i say the executive branch, i'm not necessarily talking about the president, i'm talking about the administrative state. the bureaucracy, as some call it. it's this giant rogue beast that enjoys power now that only kings once enjoyed. members of the administrative state write their own laws, they interpret their own laws, they litigate their own laws in their own courts before judges that they appoint. and congress has allowed that to happen. i think congress has also abdicated a lot of power to the federal judiciary. i do. and i'm not sure saying that

federal judges don't make law -- of course, they make law. they make law in the context of a specific case. it's called judicial precedent. but our founders intended federal judges to exercise judicial restraint and to understand the special role, scope and mission of the federal judiciary vis-a-vis the united states congress. i don't think our founders intended judges to be politicians in robes. i think our founders intended federal judges to tell us what the law is, not what the law ought to be. i think our founders intended -- as the chief justice put it -- i think our founders intended federal judges to call balls and strikes. i don't think our founders

intended for federal judges to be able to redraw the strike zone. i don't i think our founders intended for judges to be politicians in robes. politicians -- you don't want the united states supreme court to turn into this. trust me. politicians get to vote their preferences under our democracy. judges do not. judges do not. and finally, unlike some of my colleagues, i don't think our founders intended the united states supreme court to become a mini congress. i don't think our founders intended members of the united states supreme court to try to rewrite our statutes, or the united states constitution, every other thursday to prosecute a social or an

economic agenda that they can't get by the voters. and that goes on in america every day. we've reached the point where one single, solitary federal judge, in a limited venue, can enjoin a federal statute or an executive order of the president of united states for the entire country. and our founders never intended that. i want to close with two very short quotations, the first stated much more eloquently than i can, is justice curtis in 1857. you've probably read it. he was dissenting in the dred scott case. this is what judge curtis said. "when a strict interpretation of the constitution, according to the fixed rules which govern the interpretation of laws, is