Hoyer Joins Congressional Black Caucus to Discuss Supreme Court Vacancy

WASHINGTON, DC – House Democratic Whip Steny H. Hoyer (MD) joined the Congressional Black Caucus on the House Floor this evening to discuss the Senate’s constitutional responsibility to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court. Below is a transcript of his remarks and a link to the video:

Click here to watch the video.

“I thank my friend from New York, Mr. Jeffries, for his excellent presentation. I want to thank Mr. Scott, who, as the Gentleman observed, is one of the leaders in this Congress on the Constitution and on the law and on equal justice. I want to thank my friend from Ohio, the Gentlelady from Ohio, for her remarks. And I notice that the Chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, Mr. G. K. Butterfield, formally a judge on the court in North Carolina [is here].

“I want to first, Mr. Speaker, say that I thank the Congressional Black Caucus for sponsoring this special order. Mr. Speaker, I want to tell every Member - and all Americans ought to know - this is not an issue related to one group,  to one gender, to one race, to one nationality. The failure to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court will affect every American. And so we rise tonight to ask the Senate to do its duty.

“Mr. Speaker, I’m pleased to be here on the Floor this evening with my distinguished colleagues from the Congressional Black Caucus, for this special order. The Supreme Court now has a vacancy, as everyone knows, that must be filled. The American people deserve a Supreme Court operating as full strength.

“Mr. Speaker, I am old enough to have been alive at the time that John Kennedy was assassinated. Within hours of his death, we swore in Lyndon Johnson as President of the United States because we wanted to make sure that there was a continuity of service. As sad and as tragic as those hours were, the responsibility of having a President of the United States was met within just a few hours.

“Mr. Speaker, when a vacancy occurs in this House, and there are after all 434 of us left when that happens, the state laws put a time limit on the governor's action to call an election so that that vacancy can be filled. Why? Because the constitution[s] of those states do not want to have a vacancy exist for very long and have their state or their district not represented. Now, there's not a time limit with respect to the Supreme Court, per se. And the reason for that, of course, is the process, as Mr. Scott just pointed out, sometimes takes a little longer, sometimes takes a little shorter. But in seven months, as the Gentleman pointed out, they had three nominees considered. Two were defeated after debate and a vote, and the third was confirmed. The process worked, and it worked in the last year of [the Reagan] Administration.

“President Obama has a constitutional responsibility to nominate a candidate for the Court who will exercise sound judgment, uphold the principle that all people are created equal and must be treated equally under the laws. The Founders of our country very wisely made the number on the Supreme Court an odd number, not an even number. Because the Founders did not want gridlock. Now, we're used to gridlock in this Congress. But they did not want gridlock on the Court. And so they provided for a decision to be made by five members out of nine. Now, however, with four and four, they will maybe not be able to make a decision. That was not contemplated by the Founders. Nor will it have been welcomed by the Founders.

“Shamefully, Senate Republicans have said they have no intention of even meeting with a nominee put forward by President Obama. That is not only disrespectful of the President of the United States, Barack Obama, but it is contrary to the best interests of the Supreme Court, but more importantly, to the people of this country. It is appalling that Republicans would prefer to leave a vacancy on the Supreme Court, thereby rendering it in some cases unable to make a decision, unable to perform its duties of being the final arbiter when circuits may differ on an issue.

“If Members of one party or another were simply to ignore the other side and refuse to carry out their duties within a divided government, our democracy would break down. And in some respects it has. We ought not to carry that conduct to the Supreme Court. We must not let that happen. And we must not allow this Supreme Court vacancy to remain unfilled. The Court currently has a number, as the Gentleman from New York has pointed out, of major cases pending that require a decision - not to be remanded to a lower court. Because if that's done, that judgment may stand for that circuit, but there will be other circuits around the country who may make a different decision.

“Mr. Speaker, the Supreme Court has been a powerful safeguard of Americans’ liberty and equality over the past century and beyond. From recognizing the right of every child to attend desegregated schools, to protecting every loving couple who wishes to marry, the Court has breathed life into the words of our Declaration of Independence that all are ‘created equal and they are endowed by their Creator’ - not by us, not by the Constitution, ‘by their Creator with certain inalienable rights.’ That may be self-evident, Mr. Speaker, but it is not self-executing. And we have established the Supreme Court of the United States to make a decision so that that can be realized.

“Melissa Hart, Director of the Byron White Center - [Byron White,] a former member of the Supreme Court - for Constitutional Law at the University of Denver said: ‘If we don't act, it would be a monumental crisis for the development of the law and the need to resolve legal questions.’ Caroline Frederickson, President of the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy, wrote on February 19: ‘It would be unfathomable to go through this term’ - and, as Mr. Scott pointed out, the next term - ‘with a Supreme Court hobbled by a vacancy.’

“Mr. Speaker, let me remind you again, if a President dies immediately we fill the vacancy. If a Member of Congress dies every state has a time limit in which that must be filled, so that democracy can be represented and operate in the way our Founders wanted it to operate.

“When the President nominates a candidate to the Court, the Senate, in my view, Mr. Speaker, has a responsibility under the Constitution to give that nominee every due consideration. They do not have a Constitutional responsibility to approve it, as Mr. Scott has pointed out. But they have a responsibility to consider it. We must not allow politics - we must not allow politics - we must not allow politics to allow the obstruction of this most essential institution of our democracy and the rule of law.

“I want to thank my friends in the Congressional Black Caucus for leading this special order and for their efforts to hold Senate Republicans accountable for their blatantly irresponsible action on this matter. Mr. Speaker, there is always another election. It may be two years away, it may be four years away, but if we adopt the principle that if we don't think we can win now we will obstruct now and hope to win later, America and Americans will not be well served. I thank my friend for yielding and yield back the balance of my time to Mr. Jeffries.”