to be convinced by the arguments presented in each case, to exchange thoughts with their colleagues, to learn new things and rule as the law requires. and i am convinced that judge barrett will do just that. so while i oppose the process that has led us to this point, i do not hold it against her as an individual who has navigated the gauntlet with grace, skill, and humility. i will vote no on the procedural votes ahead of us, but yes to confirm judge barrett when the question before us is her qualification to be an associate justice on the supreme court. with that, mr. president, i yield the mr. grassley: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: the senate will soon vote on the confirmation of judge barrett to become

associate justice of the united states supreme court. i will be voting in favor of her nomination, and i urge my colleagues to do just the same. as was made clear to millions of americans who watched her hearing, judge barrett has the temperament, the modesty, and the humility that we should all expect in a judge. she approaches cases without bias or personal agenda. she made that very clear to almost every question asked to her by every member of the judiciary committee. most importantly, judge barrett understands the proper role of members of the judiciary and our constitutional system of separated powers. that is, a judge should

interpret, not make the law. making law is under the constitution the responsibility of the congress. not the supreme court. she also made that very clear in almost every question that she was asked by members of the judiciary committee. judge barrett has an impressive command and of course a respect for the law and the constitution. clearly from her testimony she respected precedent, and she practices judicial restraint. in her words, quote, a judge who approaches a case has an opportunity for an exercise of will has betrayed her judicial duty, end of quote. she went on to explain to the committee her legal method, how

she considers statutes and the constitution and how she interprets and applies the statutes and the constitution. her judicial method is rigorous and exacting but fair. she testified that she would listen to both sides in every case. she said, quote, we want judges to approach cases thoughtfully and with an open mind, end quote. when pressed on how she might rule in a particular case, judge barrett properly applied what we all know as the ginsburg rule, and she did it just like every other recent nominee to the supreme court for the last 30

years, when ginsburg first told the judiciary committee that there would be no hints, no previews, or forecasts, and judge barrett demonstrated her independence by often repeating justice ginsburg's rule. ill specifically asked judge barrett -- i specifically asked judge barrett if she made any promises or guarantees to anyone about how she might rule in a case. she responded this way to my question. the eabs is -- the answer is no. no one ever talked about any case with me. i can't make any precommitments to this body either. it would be inconsistent with judicial independence. end of quote. end of -- and to quote further.

i'm not willing to make a deal, not with the committee nor with the president nor with anyone. i am independent, end quote. that quote, or similar words were spoken by judge barrett to almost suspicious judiciary member that she might have made some deal ahead of time to get on the supreme court. contrary to critics and their claims about being biased, judge barrett is evenhanded. and has ruled for both plaintiffs and defendants in all kinds of cases. she believes in justice for all and accordance with the law and the constitution just like we

would expect everybody that's a lifetime appointee to the judiciary to say those same things of we don't see all of them following that practice. she went on to tell the committee, quote, i am fully committed to equal justice under the law for all persons, end quote. when asked if she will follow the rule of the law wherever it leads, she said yes, and then, quote, i have deny -- i have an agenda to stick to the rule of law and decide cases as they come. end of quote. but that wasn't good enough for our democratic colleagues and their leftist allies. however, throughout the hearings democrats, and many in the media deliberately misrepresented judge barrett's views on the

affordable care act. they claimed her critique of chief justice roberts' reasoning in the 2012 a.c.a. case dictates how she would vote in some upcoming case. so they obviously didn't listen to her when she had no preconceived notions about any case and made no promises to anybody. so the democrats even pushed the storyline that judge barrett signaled to president trump that she'd support invalidating the a.c.a. if she were confirmed to the supreme court. that is nonsense. judge barrett made clear that she doesn't have an agenda. she testified, quote, i have no who's tilt to the -- hostility to the a.c.a.

legal scholars critique court decisions all the time and even when they don't disagree with the outcome. for instance, ruth bader ginsburg criticized the court's reasoning in roe v. wade, but no one claims that ginsburg didn't support the outcome of roe v. wade. judge barrett's critique then of roberts' reasoning was shared by many legal commentators across the political spectrum, including ones on the other side of the aisle. even president obama rejected the notion that the affordable care act was a tax instead of a penalty because that question of a tax or a penalty and the constitutionality or the unconstitutionality of the a.c.a. was what they were

critiquing based on roberts decision upholding the constitutionality of the a.c.a. because it could be keenl under the -- constitutional under the taxing powers of the congress. so even roberts didn't pay any attention to the facts that we even had democrats saying that that penalty for the individual mandate was a penalty, it wasn't a tax. now, moreover, judge barrett's critique of justice roberts' reasoning dealt with his interpretation of a provision that is no longer into effect because we did away with the individual mandate. the question before the supreme court this fall then is entirely separate so it's pointless to speculate. but democrats wasted much time on that type of speculation question after question, democrat after democrat on that side when they were questioning

her. senate democrats want to portray judge barrett as a threat to health care. they want to distract from the fact that they recently filibustered a covid relief bill that would have protected preexisting conditions. this all then is just a democrat election year scare tactic and they are using it almost totally as a reason to vote against judge barrett. it happens, though, that the voters aren't buying it. the public is not buying it. a recent political poll shows a majority of americans want the senate to confirm judge barrett. and a recent huffington post

poll says, quote, voters favor the superior of the supreme court nominee amy coney barrett by a nine-point margin, end of quote. she will be confirmed. that's what we're going to do in just -- sunday into monday. maybe our democratic colleagues will finally show up for work, do their job, and give judge barrett an up-or-down vote on the merits because i think the public, if they were listening in as the judiciary committee was voting her out of office, the public knows now that the democrats boycotted the committee's deliberation. let's not forget the same senate democrats just four years ago declared, quote, unquote, the court needs nine to function

properly. judge barrett is that nine. only four years later they don't seem to think so. judge barrett is a jurist of honor, of integrity, and of great principle. the judiciary committee received a number of letters in support of her nomination. they all praised her intellect, her judgment, her collegiality and her kindness. and we all saw that kindness as she testified over a three-day period of time. mr. president, judge barrett won't be a politician on the bench. she'll make decisions as they should be decided in an impartial manner and in accordance with the law and the constitution. i'm pleased to vote in favor of

judge barrett's confirmation to be an associate judge of the supreme court and i urge my colleagues to support her as well. >> today, the senate continues confirmation to judge amy coney barrett to the supreme court. a vote on the motion except -- expected this afternoon. if passed, the final vote on the amy coney barrett confirmation would take place monday evening. the senate reconvenes at noon eastern. wassermanup, david discusses campaign 2020 and