mr. murray. mr. murray: mr. chiefusce, we are here becau t first time since they were 1812, our nation' capital came under violent assault. the attack was incited by sitting president of the united states to disrupt the transfer of presidential power. engaging in insurrection against the constitution, president um disqualified himself from public office. as we heard, president trump's main argument is this court should create a special exception to section three that one apply to him and him alone. he said section three disqualifies all both baki -- both breaking insurrectionists accepted former president who never before upheld -- held federal state or office. there is no tiale for an exemioand the court should reject the claim that the ams made an extra ordinary mistake. section three uses deliberately broad language to cover all positions of federal power requiring an oath to the constitution. they claim difference between an office under and an office of the united states but this does not come down to mere

mrs. murray: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i'm really grad we have clear consensus that no one wants to see a government shutdown and preventing one now will require a very short c.r. so we can continue making good progress on our full-year funding bills. i've been at the table for a long time now, pushing to make progress every single day, and we are genuinely close. if bipartisan cooperation prevails, i am very confident we can at long last, at long last wrap up our fy-24 bills. as my colleagues are aware, we plan to release the first six bills in the coming days to give everyone time to review them before a vote next week, while we continue to lock up the last six bills. i'm confident we can get all of our funding bills done in the next few weeks, so long as partisan poison pills are taken off the table. we are working in a divided government. that means to get anything done, we have to work together, in good faith, to reach reasonable outcomes. that has been true from day one of these negotiations, and we will o

mrs. murray: mr. president.fficer: the senator from washington, president pro tem of the united states senate. mrs. murray: thank you, mr. president. you know, i have been fighting for over a decade to establish a new summer nutrition program to help end child hunger. and i come to the floor today to celebrate the tremendous progress we've made in that ■d effort, because this year legislation i fought to pass in 2022, based on my stop child hunger act, will go into effect, establishing a permanent summer nutrition benefit for struggling families. summer ebt, electronic benefit transfer. basically that means millions of parents who rely on free or reduced price meals to feed their kid during the school year will get help feeding their kid over the summer too. this has been a long time coming, and it is a huge deal that now this program is becoming permanent. child hunger isn't just something i've heard about from parents across my home state of washington. it's personal to me. i remember what it was like when my

mr. murray talked about. you could give deference where you have a full-blown proceeding like here that had all the protections of rules of evidence and cross examination and things like that. >> you think we should give deference in reviewing the factual record, the legal conclusions? in other words -- >> i don't think it should did he de novo. i'm amenable to the suggestion that the court would do independent review that might provide greater certainty to states around the country as to what the court's position is on the factual record in this case. >> we could reach disperate results? >> i think that's possible. >> i take it your position is that this disqualification is really the same as any other disqualification? age or residence or what have you? >> that's correct. >> what if i were to push back on that and say, well, this disqualification, number one, it's in the 14th amendment and the point of the 14th amendment was to take away certain powers from the states, number two, section 3 itself gives con

the clerk: mrs. murray, aye. the clerk: ms. ernst, no. mr. kaine, aye. mr. braun, no. the clerk: ms. hirono, ay rdrd. vote: the clerk: mr. van hollen, aye. the clerk: ms. murkowski, aye. the clerk: mr. johnson, no. the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye. mr. blumenthal, aye. the clerk: mr. mullin, no. the clerk: mr. thune, no. the clerk: ms. warren, aye. mr. mcconnell, no. the clerk: mr. sanders, aye. the clerk: ms. lummis, no. the clerk: mr. mendendez, aye. mr. wicker, no. the clerk: ms. sinema, aye. the clerk: mr. cramer, no. mr. tillis, no. the clerk: mr. budd, no. mr. markey, aye. the clerk: mr. schumer, aye. mr. warnock, aye. mr. hawley, no. vote: . vote: the clerk: mr. padilla, aye. the presiding officer: have all senators vowed? -- voted? does any senator wish to change his or her vote? if not, the ayes are 54, the nays are 44, and the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is are considered made and laid upon the table and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's actions. the clerk will report the motion to invoke

mrs. murray: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, we have the means and just enough time this week to avoid a shutdown and to make serious headway on our annual appropriations. but as always, the task at hand will require that everyone rose in the same direction towards clean appropriations and away from poison pills. mr. president, those are not my words. the republican leader said that yesterday, and he is absolutely right. and i just heard the speaker said he doesn't want to shut down after meeting with the president. that's good. but leads be clear. a shutdown that hits air traffic controllers and food inspectors and so much more would be incredibly damaging, and it would make getting all of our funding bills done that much more chaotic and challenging. there is no reason for a shutdown, not if both sides in both chambers cooperate in a bipartisan way. so i am working around the clock to wrap up several spending bills by friday. and if we need to pass this very short-term c.r. along

mrs. murray, aye. the clerk: mr. cornyn, no. the clerk: mr. kennedy, no. the clerk: mr. van hollen, aye. the clerk: ms. rosen, aye. the clerk: mr. schumer, aye. mr. booker, aye. the clerk: mr. young, no. the clerk: mr. wyden, aye. mr. markey, aye. the clerk: mr. scott of florida, aye. the clerk: mr. marshall, no. the clerk: mr. cramer, no. mr. heinrich, aye. the clerk: mr. casey, aye. mr. peters, aye. the clerk: mr. wicker, no. the clerk: ms. ernst, no. the clerk: mr. king, aye. the clerk: ms. collins, aye. . the clerk: mr. vance, no. the clerk: mr. daines, no. the clerk: mr. grassley, no. ms. klobuchar, aye. the clerk: ms. smith, aye. the clerk: mr. romney, no. the clerk: mr. whitehouse, aye. the clerk: mr. carper, aye. the clerk: mr. moran, no. the clerk: mr. ossoff, aye. the clerk: mr. hagerty, no. ms. cortez masto, aye. the clerk: mrs. hyde-smith, no. the clerk: mr. paul, no. the clerk: mr. brown, aye. mr. rubio, aye. ms. cantwell, aye. cleric cleric mr. hoeven -- the clerk: mr. hoeven, no. the clerk: mr. durbin, aye. vote: the clerk: mrs. britt, no. ms. warren, aye.

mrs. murray: mr. president. the presiding officer: the president pro tempore. mrs. murray: mr. president, i have spoken quite a bit about how the votes we cast as united states senators for this funding have tremendous consequences. i've talked about whether or not we deliver this aid, especially to ukraine, is a question of whether or not america will stand by its world, by the world and stand by its allies. how we all decide to vote on this bill could not be more important. it was just last night we heard the presumptive republican nominee for president openly encourage russia to attack our nato allies. all of us in this chamber, all of us understand those words have consequences. our friends and adversaries alike listen to what major political leaders here in america have to say about issues of global concern. but as my colleagues know, our votes matter tremendously as well. action, legislation that actually gets signed into law, $60 billion to support our ukranian allies, that sends a lot more than a message to putin. it sends badly needed ammunition and weapons to ukraine

mr. murray. >> mr. chief justice and may it please the court, we are here because for the first time since the war of 1812, our nation's capitol came under violent assault. for the first time in history, the attack was incited by a sitting president of the united states to disrupt the peaceful transfer of presidential power. by engaging in insurrection against the constitution, president trump disqualified himself from public office. as we heard earlier, president trump's main argument is that this court should create a special exemption to section 3 that would apply to him and to him alone. he says section 3 disqualifies all oath breaking insurrectionists, except a former president who never before held other state or federal office. there is no possible rational for such an exemption, and the court should reject the claim that the framers made an extraordinary mistake. section 3 uses deliberately broad language to cover all positions of federal power requiring an oath to the constitution. my friend re

mr. murray: because article ii vethem the power to -- to appoint their own electors as they see fit. but if they are going to use a federal constuonal qualification as a ballot access determinant, then it is creating a federal constitutional question that then this court decides and other courts, otr states -- if this court affirms the decision below, determining that president trump is ineligible to be president, other states would sllave to determine what effect that would have on their own state's law . host: the supreme court today hearing the case, trump v anderson, about whether or not the colorado primary ballot should have the former president 's name on it, and the case sundering about 14 amendment section iii, the insurrection because of the institution. we are getting your reactions this evening and we will re-air it in its entirety, coming up here on c-span. vicki from west virginia, whether you think? + i think it should be left on the ballot. if they are allowed to do that in texas, florida, republican states, they say, biden should able to run, that is a bigger insurre

mr. murray talked about or give deference where you have a full blown proceeding like the one here that had all the protections of rules of evidence and cross-examination and things like that. >> i'm sorry, you think we should give deference in reviewing the factual record, the legal conclusions? in other words, we shouldn't undertake a de novo review whether a the court's position is on the factual record in this case. >> of course, if it were not a novo review, we could reach dispirit results even on the same record, right? >> i think that's possible. >> justice kagan: i take it your position this disqualification is the same as any other disqualification, age, or residence or what have you? >> that's correct. >> justice sotomayor: what if i were to push back on that and say this disqualification, number one, it's in the 1st amendment and the point of the 1st amendment was to take away certain powers from the states. number two, section 3 itself gives congress a very definite role, which mr. mitchell says is interfered with by the ability of states to take somebody off the ballot? and may

mrs. murray, aye. the clerk: mr. tuberville, no. the clerk: mr. sullivan, aye. the clerk: mrs. hyde-smith, aye. vote: the clerk: mr. hoeven, aye. the clerk: mr. hagerty, aye. the clerk: mr. moran, aye. the clerk: mr. vance, no. the clerk: mr. hawley, no. the clerk: mr. schumer, aye. mr. murphy, aye. mrs. shaheen, aye. the presiding officer: the nays are 5. the nomination is agreed to. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. 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 executive calendar number 473, amy m. badge crow of oregon to -- beganon -- baggio of oregon to be united states district judge of the -- for the district of oregon. the presiding officer: the question is, is it the sense of the senate that amy m. baggio of oregon to be united states dis

mrs. murray, aye. the clerk: mr. hagerty, no. the clerk: mr. merkley, aye. the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye. mr. johnson, no. the clerk: mr. carper, aye. the clerk: ms. cantwell, aye. mr. young, no. mr. tuberville, no. ms. hassan, aye. ms. duckworth, aye. ms. warren, aye. the clerk: mr. schumer, aye. the clerk: ms. smith, aye. mr. king, aye. mr. warnock, aye. mr. lankford, no. the clerk: mr. fetterman, aye. mr. manchin, aye. mr. kennedy, no. vote: the clerk: mr. braun, no. mr. cardin, aye. mr. padilla, aye. ms. butler, aye. the clerk: mr. whitehouse, aye. mr. plumen that will -- mr. blumenthal, aye. the clerk: mr. markey, aye. the clerk: mr. marshall, no. the clerk: mr. kaine, aye. the clerk: mr. scott of florida, no. the clerk: ms. cortez masto, aye. the clerk: mr. coons, aye u. the clerk: mr. heinrich, aye. the clerk: mr. ricketts, no. the clerk: mr. casey, aye. mr. bennet, aye. the clerk: mr. cruz, no. the . the clerk: mr. rounds, aye. the clerk: mr. cramer, no. mr. sullivan, no. the clerk: mr. scott of south carolina, no. mr. grassley, no. the clerk: mr. brown, aye. vote

mr. murray also invoked the nsuences that would follow that rejects the nationality and it agrees with section three as an officer of the u.s. officers that are appointed made decisions that were invalid. this court did not useny variant to salvage the decisions that we made by the officers. theris no way to escape the colusion that if they reject the case and also agreesith section three that every executive action taken by the trump administration during his last two weeks iofce is vulnerable to attack. if he iseected and sworn in, any executive action he takes in federalou by anyone who continues to believe that president trump is barred from fi under section three. i'm happy to answer any other questions that the court might have. >> thank you, counsel, the case is submitted. >> the honorable court is now adjourned to be on the republican primary ballot. the primary in colorado is marc. i think we are going to do very well. maybe more than the 90's. we certainly did well in primary that did not matter. we have tremendous support from the people of our country. they hate what is happening a

mr. jason murray. mr. murray, congratulations on your appearance of the court. >> thank you so much.e on. >> i know that this was not your first time in that courtroom, and you are very familiar with supreme court procedure, and you seen a lot of lawyers step up to the podium today. how was it for you to do it for the first time? >> certainly a source of pride for me to get to argue in the supreme court for the first time and also to be able to appear before my former bosses. >> in terms of how things went today, i don't think it's going to come as a surprise to you for me to tell you that most observers think that the case is not going your way. most observers think that president trump will be allowed on the ballot, that colorado's decision to take him off the ballot will effectively be overturned by this court. i have to ask if you share that common wisdom, if you feel like you have a sense of where the justices are going after what he went through in court today. >> i won't sugarcoat it. it seemed like the justices were asking difficult questions, mostly procedural questions, abo

mrs. murray: thank you, mr. president. we recently released the text of the supplemental, and this bill is about our national security, it's about our national credibility, and it's about our future. that's why democrats have been glued to the table negotiating in good faith every step of the way, because the stakes could not be higher. on sunday, we rolled out a bipartisan compromise package with $60 billion in aid for ukraine, $14.1 billion in security assistance for israel, 4.8 billion to support our allies in the indo-pacific, $10 billion for humanitarian assistance, $20 billion for operational needs at the border, and more. now, i want to be clear, this is not the bill i would have written on my own. it is compromise legislation that came out of negotiations between senate democrats and senate republicans. as i've said before, i never believed that we should have conditioned emergency aid for our allies on unrelated partisan priorities, but republicans demanded that. they insisted we needed not just executive action a

mr. murray. >> mr. chief justice and may it please the court. we are here because for the first time since the war of 1812, our nation's capitol came under violent assault. for the first time in history, the attack was incited by a sitting president of the united states to disrupt the peaceful transfer of presidential power by engaging in insurrection against the constitution, president trump disqualified himself from public office. as we heard earlier, president trump's main argument is that this court should create a special exemption to section three that would apply to him and him alone. he says section three disqualifies all oath breaking insurrectionists except a former president who never before held other state or federal office. there is no possible rationale for such an exemption and the court should reject the claim the framers made a mistake. it uses broad language to cover all positions of federal power requiring an oath to the constitution. my friend relies on a claimed difference between an office under and an officer of the unite

mrs. murray: madam president, i come to speak before the vote today, but i do hope that all of my colleagues heard the senator from oklahoma, heard his powerful words, especially the last several minutes, and pause and think about it. they were critically important for each of us to think about, and i thank the senator for all of his work on this and for his powerful statement just now. but, madam president, if you want to understand why people can't stand politics, watch how many republicans vote against this bill. some of my colleagues do not seem to understand this is not a game. there is a war happening right now in ukraine where our allies are being gunned down, and putin is rolling his tanks into their homeland. there is a war happening right now between israel and hamas. there are civilians at this very moment caught in the crossfire. there are partners in the indo-pacific wondering if they can count on us. and let's not forget, there is the border, the site of countless republican photo o

mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. 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. 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 -- butler, cortez masto, duckworth, durbin,ernst, grassley, hassan, heinrich, hickenlooper, kaine, mendendez, murphy, murray, padilla, peters, rounds, schatz, schumer, sinema, smith, stabenow, tester, warnock, whitehouse. ms. baldwin, aye. mr. cardin, aye. senators voting in the negative -- barrasso, cotton, daines, fischer, lee, mullin, scott of south carolina. the clerk: mr. warner, aye. mr. ricketts, no. ms. warren, aye. the clerk: mr. thune, aye. the clerk: mr. sanders, no. ms. murkowski, aye. vote: the clerk: ms. rosen, aye. mrs. hyde-smith, no. ms. collins

mrs. murray: madam president. the presiding officer: the president pro tempore. mrs. murray: thank you, madam president. we all understand we cannot leave our job here unfinished. the clock is ticking right now, and there is so much at stake. we have a strong bipartisan package to support our allies in ukraine, israel, and the indo-pacific and provide humanitarian aid to civilians who are caught in conflict. by passing this bill, we will show our allies we stand by our word and we will help them in the time of need. we will show dictators that their fragrant attacks will not go unchecked, and they cannot steamroll our allies. and we will show the world that american leadership is still alive and well, and that we are still a strong protector of democracy and provider of humanitarian aid. given all the stakes at this moment, now, right now is a critical time to send that message, which is why i'm glad we're here on the cusp of passing this bill in the senate and to my colleagues who have been holding this up and dragging the process out, we can disagree. you can vote ag

mr. murray. >> mr.ef justice and may it please the court, we are here because for the first time since the war of 1812, our nation's capitol came under assault and for the first time, it was incited by the sitting president of the united states to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power. by engaging in the disruption of presidential power, by this court, you should create a special exemption to section iii to apply to him and him alone, and he says it applies to all insurrectionists, except for others who never held a formal office, and there is no rationale for this, and the court should reject the claim that the framer made an extraordinary mistake. section iii uses deliberately broad language to cover all powers covering the oath of the constitution. my frame has an acclaimed difference of an office under and the officer of the united states, but this case does not come down to mere preposition. the two phrases or two sides of the same coin referring to any federal office or to anyone who holds one. p

the clerk: mrs. murray, aye. mr. padilla, aye. the clerk: ms. smith, aye. ms. hassan, aye. mr. markey, aye. vote: the clerk: mr. lujan, aye. mr. casey, aye. mr. welch, aye. the clerk: mr. carper, aye. mr. scott of south carolina, aye. mr. paul, aye. the clerk: mr. crapo, aye. the clerk: ms. cortez masto, aye. the clerk: ms. stabenow, aye. the clerk: mr. reed, aye. the clerk: mr. graham, aye. the clerk: mr. schumer, aye. the clerk: mr. booker, aye. mr. ossoff, aye. mr. boozman, aye. the clerk: mr. scott of florida, aye. mr. kennedy, aye. mr. warnock, aye. mr. marshall, aye. the clerk: mr. tuberville, aye. ms. sinema, aye. the clerk: mrs. hyde-smith, aye. ms. collins, aye. the clerk: mr. mullin, aye. the clerk: mr. lee, aye. the clerk: mr. schmitt, aye. mr. johnson, aye. mr. hoeven, aye. the clerk: mr. heinrich, aye. mr. rounds, aye. mr. king, aye. vote: the clerk: mr. mcconnell, aye. ms. hirono, aye. mr. warner, aye. the clerk: mr. murphy, aye. ms. klobuchar, aye. mr. young, aye. the clerk: mr. vance, no. the clerk: ms. murkowski, aye. the clerk: mrs. shaheen, aye. the clerk: mr

mrs. murray: madam president. the presiding officer: the president pro tempore. mrs. murray: thank you, madam president. we all understand we cannot leave our job here unfinished. the clock is ticking right now, and there is so much at stake. we have a strong bipartisan package to support our allies in ukraine, israel, and the indo-pacific and provide humanitarian aid to civilians who are caught in conflict. by passing this bill, we will show our allies we stand by our word and we will help them in the time of need. we will show dictators that their fragrant attacks will not go unchecked, and they cannot steamroll our allies. and we will show the world that american leadership is still alive and well, and that we are still a strong protector of democracy and provider of humanitarian aid. given all the stakes at this moment, now, right now is a critical time to send that message, which is why i'm glad we're here on the cusp of passing this bill in the senate and to my colleagues who have been holding this up and dragging the process out, we can disagree. you can vote ag

mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. 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. 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, bennet, brown, butler, cardin, carper, cortez masto, duckworth, fetterman, hickenlooper, hirono, cain, kelly, king, lujan, menendez, murphy, murray, ossoff, reid, romney, rosen, schatz, sinema, tillis, warner, whitehouse, and wyden. senators voting in the negative -- braun, brit, budd, capito, cornyn, daines, graham, grassley, hagerty, hawley, hyde-smith, johnson, kennedy, lankford, mcconnell, mullin, murkowski, paul, ricketts, risch, rubio, scott of florida, sullivan, and thune. mr. young, no. mr. cotton, no. the clerk: mr. cassidy, no. mr. barrasso

schumer for mrs. murray proposes an amendment numbered 1388. mr. schumer: i ask to deception with further read -- dispense with further reading of the amendment. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. schumer schumer i consider not -- mr. schumer: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the yeas and nays are ordered. mr. schumer: i a i have a cloture motion for the substitute amendment at the desk. the presiding officer: complorment. 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 murray substitute, amendment number 1388, to calendar number 30, h.r. 815, an act to amendment title 38, united states code, and so forth and for other purposes. signed by 18 senators as follows -- mr. schumer: i ask further reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. schumer: i have an amendment at the-esque did

mr. murray do you think the , provision is ambiguous? >> we do not think the provision is ambiguous, your honor. the constitution tells us over and over that the presidency is an office and that the person who holds it swears an oath of office before assuming the execution of his office. and the plain meaning of an officer is just one who holds an office. so we think the text here is very clear that the history supports it. and certainly that the core purpose of the provision supports that reading as well. president trump relies on what we see as strained inferences from drafting history and canons of construction on the issue of whether the presidency is an office under the united states , and you don't resort to those tools when the constitution already tells you what the answer is. section three applies to any office, and any means any, and the presidency is an office. but in addition, the history here could not be more clear. >> before you get to history i'm , going to stick with you on the text. it says any office under the united s

mr. murray said in response to that is it wouldn't be colorado.ecision. that didn't really satisfy the justices because, indeed, it's a case that was brought under state ballot access laws, laws that are all about, you know, who can be on the ballot and what the secretary of state has to do in terms of determining qualifications, and into colorado what the procedure is when you think that someone isn't qualified and you can seek review in the court of that. that's what happened here. and one of the interesting responses that also mr. murray mentioned and, in fact, the counsel for the secretary of state of colorado who got a short amount of argument time made this argument, as well, is that actually this is not new to the way that states administer elections. states do have the power under article 2, the electors clause, to decide how they're going to allocate their presidential electors. every state does that by winner take all. every state comment two. and the -- except two. and the way you decide how to allocate electors has to do with who you'r

the clerk: mrs. murray, aye. the clerk: mr. tuberville, no. mr. johnson, no. ms. stabenow, aye. vote: the clerk: mr. braun, no. enclose ms. ernst, no. the clerk: ms. ernst, no. mrs. blackburn, no. the clerk: mr. reed, aye. mrs. britt, no. the clerk: mr. rounds, no. the clerk: ms. cantwell, aye. ms. collins, aye. mr. daines, no. mr. young, no. mr. padilla, aye. the clerk: mr. tester, aye. mr. booker, aye. the clerk: ms. hirono, aye. the clerk: mr. barrasso, no. the clerk: mr. rubio, aye. ms. lummis, no. mr. lankford, no. mr. schumer, aye. mr. coons, aye. mr. marshall, no. the clerk: mr. durbin, aye. mr. sanders, aye. mr. brown, aye. mr. ossoff, aye. mr. graham, aye. mrs. capito, no. mr. manchin, aye. mr. kelly, aye. mr. wyden, aye. mr. kaine, aye. the clerk: mr. welch, aye. mr. hagerty, no. the clerk: mr. bennet, aye. the clerk: mr. crapo, no. mr. lee, no. the clerk: mr. van hollen, aye, mr. king, aye. mr. hawley, no. the clerk: mr. cruz, no. the clerk: mr. sullivan, no. the clerk: mr. markey, aye. mrs. gillibrand, aye. mr. blumenthal, aye. mr. vance, no. mr. boozman, no. the cle

mr. murray. i think he was having a very tough time. elizabeth: yeah and by the way section 5, francey, you and i talked about it says congress has the power to enact legislation to ban anybody from a state ballot if they go that far. francey, get your reaction to the supreme court justice today. court watchers don't expect a fast ruling on this and exact timing is unclear. take a listen, watch. >> i think that the question that you have to confront is why a single state should decide who wants to be president of the united states and in other words this question of former insurrection and going to be the statement the state has the ability to make this determination and not only for their own citizens and for the rest of the nation. what do you do with what would seem to be playing consequences of your position? >> if colorado proceeding on the other side and some will succeed. i would expect that a good number of state wills say whoever the democratic candidate is, you're off the ballot and others for the republican candidate, you're

mrs. murray: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: mr. president, it should never have taken us this long to move forward on this aid that so many of us are saying is necessary, but i am so glad that we are finally here making progress on this crucial package. we have more work ahead to get this passed in the senate and house, and ultimately signed into law, and we frankly do not have a minute to waste. so i hope this vote is the start of moving this package now in earnest, because this is serious. as the senior senator from maine just outlined, our allies are at war, civilians are in harm's way, dictators are watching closely to see what we are going to do about it. so, really, the stakes could not be higher. how we answer this moment will define america's future on the global stage and could well redefine the balance of power in the world. so, i hope today is truly a breakthrough for bipartisanship, that cooler heads will prevail from here on out, and that we can move this forward in a reasonable, bipartisan way. we will be doing everth

mr. murray took the podium that that was going to be the outcome of the case. >> on january 6th, you had just written a paper about section 3 of the constitution, which here to fore had gotten very little attention, and suddenly you're the legal scholar of the moment. i wonder on that day, what your initial thoughts were, and today, did anything change your mind? any of these arguments? >> no, i think the arguments have been gone over for years now, and so there's really nothing new in them. my thoughts on that day were sadness about what was happening, and then as soon as members of congress, senator mcconnell, for example, described what had happened as an insurrection, i knew this issue was going to come to the court behind me. how that was going to come out or things were going to play out in the intervening three years, who knew. here we are. the question really is what's going to come next after the court's rule something. >> what is going to come next, do you think? >> well, what's going to come next is that they're not going to say in their opinion that donald trump is innocent,

the clerk: mrs. murray, aye. ms. stabenow, aye. the clerk: ms. cortez masto, aye. vote: the clerk: mr. van hollen, aye. the clerk: mr. lee, no. ms. ernst, no. mrs. capito, no. the clerk: mr. cornyn, no. the clerk: mr. rounds, aye. ms. lummis, no. mr. hickenlooper, aye. ms. baldwin, aye. the clerk: mr. cotton, no. the clerk: mr. barrasso, no. mrs. partfischer, no -- mrs. fischer, no. mr. booker, aye. ms. warren, aye. ms. klobuchar, aye. the clerk: mr. budd, no. mr. young, no. the clerk: mr. mcconnell, no. the clerk: mr. ossoff, aye. the clerk: mr. daines, no. ms. duckworth, aye. mr. thune, no. mrs. britt, no. the clerk: mr. cruz, no. the clerk: mr. schumer, aye. the clerk: mr. wicker, no. mr. bennet, aye. the clerk: mr. blumenthal, aye. vote: the clerk: mr. graham, aye. the clerk: mr. kelly, aye. the clerk: mr. sullivan, no. the clerk: mr. markey, aye. the clerk: mr. braun, no. the clerk: mr. hawley, no. ms. murkowski, aye. the clerk: mr. hoeven, no. vote: vote: vote: vote: the clerk: ms. collins, aye. the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 56, the nays ar

welcome, first, mr murray.e war in ukraine that sent shock waves through oil and gas prices, and having clean energy, being energy independent is so important and that's why having this mission is a driving force behind keir starmer and rachel reeves' plan to get the economy going. reeves' plan to get the economy anoin. �* reeves' plan to get the economy aoian. �* , reeves' plan to get the economy aoain. �* , ,.., reeves' plan to get the economy aoain. �* , ., reeves' plan to get the economy aaoin. �* , ., .,y going. but he is scared of tory attacks, going. but he is scared of tory attacks. isn't _ going. but he is scared of tory attacks, isn't he? _ going. but he is scared of tory attacks, isn't he? not- going. but he is scared of tory attacks, isn't he? not at - going. but he is scared of tory attacks, isn't he? not at all. l going. but he is scared of toryj attacks, isn't he? not at all. it looks like _ attacks, isn't he? not at all. it looks like it, — attacks, isn't he? not at all. it looks like it, consid

mr. murray who was representingaw t colorado voters. i would say we've all heard a lot of oral arguments. i don't know this was the most confident oral argument we've ever coheard, and it felt there wered times when all the justis including sanchez and kagen who he has clerked for were almost frustrated they weren't able to getle straight answers out of h, he at several points declined to answer the question that had been asked, wanting instead to answer something else. even in that exchange with jackson it was hard to tell whether or not that was something she truly believed or she felt this was not a great argument mades by the trump lawyers. if you listen to the argument with the trump lawyer, with mr. mitchell, it was clear amy coney barrett and others were saying this is a ridiculous argument, of course the president is an officer under the constitution. it's almost -- so you could also interpret it to mean she was just trying to get out of him a cogent argument, shoot down this thing we were just skeptical of. you just heard many,

mr. murray, they did not stick to the actual verbiage specifically keep going back to that point.tail made that point very clearly and i thought we would have had a much better chance if we could have to the actual verbiage of how the 14th amendment was constructed on section three. host: what specific verbiage are you referencing? caller: i don't have that in front of me right now. but i know they didn't stay on that specific point as it was written. i think if we could've made a stronger case for states rights and i think that is what is going to come down to. as the founding fathers wrote this language. we would've had a better chance. it seems like everybody thinks it will be a 9-0 decision. guest: i think some critics are disappointed there wasn't more language about insurrection and that wasn't really explored during oral arguments. that was something that was not really explored. host: what about this idea of states rights they came up quite a bit in the discussion around the abortion debate in one of our callers support the rights to make decisions about abortion but here

mr. murray, they did not stick to the actual verbiage specifically keep going back to that point.tail made that point very clearly and i thought we would have had a much better chance if we could have to the actual verbiage of how the 14th amendment was constructed on section three. host: what specific verbiage are you referencing? caller: i don't have that in front of me right now. but i know they didn't stay on that specific point as it was written. i think if we could've made a stronger case for states rights and i think that is what is going to come down to. as the founding fathers wrote this language. we would've had a better chance. it seems like everybody thinks it will be a 9-0 decision. guest: i think some critics are disappointed there wasn't more language about insurrection and that wasn't really explored during oral arguments. that was something that was not really explored. host: what about this idea of states rights they came up quite a bit in the discussion around the abortion debate in one of our callers support the rights to make decisions about abortion but here

mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. risch. mr. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. rubio. mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. 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 presiding officer: a quorum is present. ms. collins: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from maine. ms. collins: madam president -- mr. schumer: madam president, could we have order, please. the presiding officer: order in the chamber, please. ms. collins: thank you, mr. president. thank you, madam president. madam president, for the information of our colleagues, i want to bring everyone up to date on where we are. for the past few days, the leadership on both sides of the aisle, as well as the bill managers on both sides of the aisle, have been working diligently night and day to try to get agreement to co

mrs. bray ahead of him, but doesn't call. 1:30 p.m.. the cabbies in front of the murray hotel are aroused. when they see the suspect -- confronting confused mr. green green ducks appear to recognize his accost. he doesn't know when he has an alliance as it has little patience for this strange man. the policeman turns back towards number 91 when he hears shout ding and five shots above the noise. the city. this is spray these loosely runs from the home to her uncle. mr. andrew has brain lies dead on the stone pavement, which refuses to absorb his blood and the world freezes for but a small. 3 p.m. hannah alive wonders why central park flags being lowered to half mast as her carriage near his home. 300 policemen would be assigned to control the anticipated crowds at green's funeral parade in manhattan. although the streets were full with onlookers all peaceful, sad and. the new york brick presbyterian church was filled to capacity as was the congregational church in worcester. andrew has well, green was buried days after his death in rural cemetery worcester. cornelius wil

mr. chairman. >> thank you senator. senator murray. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman and thank you all for being here, we really appreciate it. i think you know we hear from our constituents constantly and frighteningly about the cost of some of the drugs that they take, so this is really an important hearing and i continue to hear, as many have said that sky high drug costs are forcing many people, including in my home state of washington to choose between filling their prescription and paying for other things they need, essentials like groceries or rent and i often talk to people who are skipping their prescription altogether because they can't afford it, and it puts their life at risk. so i really believe that congress does need to do more here, i have for a long time and i also think that pharmaceutical companies need to do much more to put patients first and that doesn't mean that private companies can't make a profit and i think we all have a really sincere appreciation for the cutting edge research that happens at each of your companies. but when you s

mr. chair. >> thank you senator. senator murray. >> thank you very much mr. chairman thank you all for being here. we really appreciate it. we hear from our constituents constantly and frighteningly about the cost of the drugs we take. this is an important hearing and i hear aboutan the sky-high drug costs forcing many people including my home state of pushing to choose between filling a prescription and paying for other things they need like groceries and rent. i often talk to people who are skipping their prescriptions altogether as they can afford it. i believe congress does need to do more here. i have for a long time and i think pharmaceutical companies need to do much more to put the patients first. that doesn't mean private companies can't make progress and i thinkfi we all have a sincere appreciation for cutting-edge research that happens at each of your companies but whenen you say you are in the business of saving lives and curing disease you how to think about putting patients over profits. mr. duato your dead company makes a product to treat arthr