{"database": "press", "table": "releases", "rows": [["http://www.thune.senate.gov//public/index.cfm/press-releases?ContentRecord_id=CA35F514-989B-48E7-82D0-F87A5685F42E", "Thune: Judge Amy Coney Barrett Will Be an Outstanding Addition to the U.S. Supreme Court", "2020-10-26", "2020", "2020-10", "Republican", "Senate", "SD", "John Thune", "T000250", "www.thune.senate.gov", null, null, "legacy", "Washington\r\n\t\t\r\n\t\t\r\n\t\tU.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) today discussed the upcoming Senate vote to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court, which is expected to occur later today. Thune also discussed COVID relief and urged his Democrat colleagues to work with Senate Republicans in good faith to deliver much-needed resources to the American people.\r\nThune's remarks below (as prepared for delivery):\r\nMr. President, later today we will confirm Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.\r\nBy now, I don't need to tell anybody that she is one of the most highly qualified Supreme Court candidates in living memory.\r\nHer appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee was a master-class in what a Supreme Court justice should look like  which is probably why a majority of voters want the Senate to confirm this outstanding nominee to the nation's highest court.\r\nMr. President, a CNN anchor recently pointed out that, and I quote, in another age  Judge Amy Coney Barrett would be getting 70 votes or more in the United States Senate  because of her qualifications.\r\nThat's unquestionably true.\r\nBut unfortunately it's extremely unlikely that Judge Barrett will be collecting 70 or more votes later today.\r\nBecause for my Democrat colleagues, this has never been about Judge Barrett's qualifications.\r\nDemocrats were never going to support this nomination, no matter how supremely qualified the individual in question. \r\nThe president could have nominated the wisest, most outstanding jurist in the history of the world, and Democrats would still be opposing this nomination  in large part simply because it was made by this president.\r\nDemocrats had their talking points ready from the beginning  the same talking points they trot out for every Republican Supreme Court nominee.\r\nThe sky will fall if this nominee makes it onto the court, they cry.\r\nMinorities will suffer.\r\nWomen will suffer. \r\nAmericans will lose their health care.\r\nThey've used that one a lot this time.\r\nDemocrats would like to convince Americans that Republicans are trying to confirm Judge Barrett to the Supreme Court for the sole purpose of eliminating the Affordable Care Act and protections for preexisting conditions.\r\nIt's a ludicrous charge  every Republican in the Senate supports protections for preexisting conditions  but apparently that doesn't matter to Democrats.\r\nThe truth is, Mr. President, Republicans have no idea how Judge Barrett would rule on any particular Obamacare case.\r\nThe facts of each case are unique, with unique legal and constitutional issues.\r\nWhat we do know is that Judge Barrett will approach each case without prejudices or preconceived notions.\r\nWe know that she will examine the facts of the case, the law, and the Constitution, and make her decision based solely on those criteria.\r\nNot her political beliefs.\r\nNot her personal opinions.\r\nJust the law and the Constitution.\r\nNo matter which party drafted any legislation in question.\r\nThat should reassure Democrats.\r\nBut it doesn't.\r\nBecause for many Democrats, their primary concern in confirming judges is not whether they will uphold the law, but whether they will deliver the policy outcomes Democrats want.\r\nThat's why some Democrats are threatening to resurrect the long-discredited idea of court-packing, should they return to the majority.\r\nThey're not sure that they can rely on a Supreme Court with Judge Barrett to deliver the policy outcomes they want.\r\nSo they want to add justices to the Supreme Court until they can be sure that they'll get the results they desire.\r\nOne has to wonder where this will end.\r\nLet's say Democrats add three more justices to the court. \r\nThen when Republicans take the majority back, we add three more justices, to counteract Democrats' power grab.\r\nThen Democrats get back in power and add still more justices.\r\nIt won't be long before the members of the Supreme Court are more numerous than the members of the Senate.\r\nMr. President, in addition to trying to scare Americans by suggesting that Republicans are trying to take away Americans' health care, Democrats have also tried to delegitimize the process.\r\nThey've tried to suggest that it's wrong for Republicans to take up this nomination in an election year, because Republicans didn't confirm Merrick Garland when President Obama nominated him in an election year.\r\nMr. President, I'm not going to spend a lot of time on this because the Republican leader, myself, and others have spent ample time demonstrating that confirming Judge Barrett is well within historical precedent.\r\nBut I will say this.\r\nThe Constitution gives the Senate the power to advise and consent to nominations made by the president.\r\nThe Senate has full authority to accept or reject the president's nominations  at any point in time during a Congress or a president's term.\r\nThere is no constitutional carve-out for election years.\r\nThe minority party may not always like it when the majority confirms a nominee  which I completely understand, having been in the minority myself.\r\nBut that doesn't mean that the majority party is doing anything wrong by proceeding with a nomination.\r\nI also have to ask: Are Democrats seriously suggesting that if they were in the same position  if they were in the majority in the Senate and the president were a Democrat  that they would decline to approve a qualified jurist to the Supreme Court simply because the vacancy had occurred in an election year?\r\nI think everyone knows that if Democrats were in the same position they would absolutely confirm a Democrat nominee to the court  as they repeatedly urged us to do in 2016  and they would be well within their constitutional rights to do so.\r\nJust as Republicans are well within our constitutional rights to confirm Judge Barrett. \r\nMr. President, before I close, I'd like to touch on another claim the Democrat leader keeps making  that Judge Barrett's nomination is somehow distracting Republicans from the COVID crisis, or that her nomination is preventing us from taking up COVID legislation.\r\nThat is flat-out false, Mr. President.\r\nThe Senate is capable of focusing on more than one important issue at a time.\r\nIn fact, it's pretty much a requirement of our job that we be able to do so.\r\nHas the Democrat leader forgotten that Republicans tried to bring up additional COVID relief legislation just days ago  and that Democrats filibustered it?\r\nAnd that they did the same thing when we tried to bring up COVID relief legislation in September?\r\nRepublicans have been ready to pass additional COVID legislation for months.\r\nThe only reason we haven't passed it already is because Democrats have refused to agree to any compromise legislation that could actually make it through the Senate and to the president's desk.\r\nI'm hoping that sooner rather than later, my friends on the other side will see the value in working together to deliver real relief to our fellow Americans.\r\nThis disease doesn't recognize party differences, and I'm hopeful that my colleagues will realize that passing COVID relief shouldn't be a time for insisting on partisan priorities. \r\nMr. President, it's unfortunate that Judge Barrett's nomination has been overshadowed by so much partisanship from Democrats. \r\nBut ultimately, Mr. President, what matters is that we are confirming this outstanding nominee.\r\nAs I said yesterday, I came to the Senate with the hope of putting judges like Amy Coney Barrett on the bench  thoughtful, intelligent men and women with a consummate command of the law and, most of all, with a clear understanding that the job of a judge is to interpret the law, not make the law.\r\nTo call balls and strikes, not rewrite the rules of the game. \r\nMr. President, I am very proud to cast my vote to confirm Judge Barrett.\r\nAnd I look forward to calling her Justice Barrett in the very near future.", 1, "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z", "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z"]], "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": ["http://www.thune.senate.gov//public/index.cfm/press-releases?ContentRecord_id=CA35F514-989B-48E7-82D0-F87A5685F42E"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 2.1804538555443287, "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"}