{"database": "press", "table": "releases", "rows": [["https://www.durbin.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/durbin-questions-judicial-nominees-about-protecting-americans-right-to-vote-during-senate-judiciary-committee-hearing", "Durbin Questions Judicial Nominees About Protecting Americans\u2019 Right To Vote During Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing", "2026-09-30", "2026", "2026-09", "Democrat", "Senate", "IL", "Richard J. Durbin", "D000563", "www.durbin.senate.gov", "durbin", "https://www.durbin.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases", "scraper", "Durbin questioned Judge Lee Philip Rudofsky and Jesus Osete about their views on the Voting Rights Act\n\nWASHINGTON \u2013 U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today questioned judicial nominees during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.\n\nDurbin began by questioning Lee Philip Rudofsky, nominated to be a U.S. Circuit Judge for the Eighth Circuit, about his view on the Voting Rights Act.\n\n\u201cFor 60 years, under the Voting Rights Act, individuals could bring [private] causes of action under that Act. I imagine the theory behind it, and I think I am right, is that that\u2019s the only way for an individual to have a voice questioning government action which denies or limits a person\u2019s right to vote. Is that your understanding?\u201d Durbin asked.\n\nJudge Rudofsky replied that he believes that the Voting Rights Act did not write an express right of action. Despite precedent, Judge Rudofsky previously ruled in a 2022 case that the Voting Rights Act does not have an implied right of action, and as a result, he diluted the voting power of the Black Arkansans who brought the case.\n\n\u201cIn 2022, and you referred to the case, you presided over a case that challenged Arkansas\u2019 House of Representatives redistricting map for diluting the voting power of Black Americans. In your own words, there was a \u2018strong merits case that at least some of the districts\u2026are unlawful under [Section] 2 of the Voting Rights Act.\u2019 Yet, you claimed you could not reach the merits of the case and instead ruled that private citizens have no private right of action to enforce Section 2,\u201d Durbin said.\n\n\u201cFor 60 years before your decision, courts recognized private plaintiffs, individuals for example, who may have lived in those districts that were being contested, were able to bring cases under Section 2 challenging the policies and practices that made it more difficult for people to vote. To the detriment of voters of color in Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota, a divided panel of the Eighth Circuit embraced your fringe reasoning. The Eighth Circuit is the only appeals court in the nation to adopt your extreme position. Even the conservative Fifth Circuit declined to stray from precedent. That means state and local politicians can now freely violate the voting rights of their constituents, knowing they will go unchallenged by private citizens and without a doubt be ignored by this Department of Justice,\u201d Durbin continued.\n\n\u201cAs you reflect on the practical impact of denying to individuals, in all the states that I\u2019ve mentioned, an opportunity to use the Voting Rights Act to assert the protection of their right to vote, do you have any misgivings about your ruling?\u201d Durbin asked Judge Rudofsky.\n\nDespite harming Americans\u2019 right to vote, Judge Rudofsky defended his ruling.\n\nDurbin replied, \u201cI have to say that for 60 years, individuals could protect their own right to vote through the Voting Rights Act. Your position is a deviation from that precedent to the detriment of the voters and their rights in the future. I think that is significant.\u201d\n\nDurbin then questioned Mr. Jesus Osete, who has been nominated to be a U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Missouri, about his efforts to weaken voting rights legislation, especially because he now serves as Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the Justice Department. Notably, in 2016, Mr. Osete authored an article entitled \u201cVoter Suppression Rears Its Ugly Head,\u201d in which he criticized the Supreme Court\u2019s 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder for opening the floodgates to voter suppression.\n\n\u201cNow at the Justice Department, you have advocated to further change, and I believe, lessen the Voting Rights Act, building on the first major blow that came over a decade ago in Shelby County v. Holder. The Administration also continues to attack voting rights and undermine confidence in our elections, often under the guise of preventing voter fraud or ensuring so-called election integrity. Where do you stand today as a person working at the Justice Department, having made very clear in your statements in 2016 your feeling about voter suppression?\u201d Durbin asked Mr. Osete.\n\nMr. Osete distanced himself from his 2016 article, instead claiming that he has upheld the law while touting his efforts to defend voter ID laws.\n\nDurbin pushed back, \u201cThere is a genuine concern by many on my side of the aisle, and even some others that do not have a partisan identification, that there\u2019s going to be an attempt to undermine the voting in the next election in November, just a few weeks away. At the Justice Department, can you give me your assurance that you have done nothing and will do nothing to inhibit the right of legal Americans to legitimately and fairly vote?\u201d\n\nMr. Osete said he will enforce voting rights laws.\n\n\u201cWhen we hear from one of the assistant attorneys general that she\u2019s going to send 1,000 observers into the [voting] precincts, what are we to make of that?\u201d Durbin asked.\n\nMr. Osete replied that these observers will ensure election laws are complied with. Notably, in 2022 while at the Missouri Secretary of State\u2019s Office, Mr. Osete objected to the Biden Justice Department\u2019s planned efforts to deploy officials to monitor Americans with Disabilities Act compliance on Election Day, claiming that their presence would be \u201cdisruptive\u201d and \u201conly undermine confidence in our elections and deter Missourians from casting their votes.\u201d\n\nVideo of Durbin\u2019s questions in Committee is available here.\n\nAudio of Durbin\u2019s questions in Committee is available here.\n\nFootage of Durbin\u2019s questions in Committee is available here for TV Stations.\n\n-30-", 1, "2026-10-01T11:23:28Z", "2026-10-01T11:25:15Z"]], "columns": ["url", "title", "date", "year", "month", "party", "chamber", "state", "member_name", "bioguide_id", "domain", "scraper", "source", "date_source", "text", "has_text", "collected_at", "updated_at"], "primary_keys": ["url"], "primary_key_values": ["https://www.durbin.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/durbin-questions-judicial-nominees-about-protecting-americans-right-to-vote-during-senate-judiciary-committee-hearing"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 2.194677945226431, "source": "dwillis/congress-press", "source_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press", "license": "MIT", "license_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press/blob/main/LICENSE"}