A Quote by Thom Tillis

My Democratic colleagues should not forget that President Obama's Supreme Court nominees Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan were both given up or down votes by Republicans.
Tester voted for President Obama's nominations of Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan but opposed President Trump's nomination of Neil Gorsuch. That's not representing our Montana values.
If Democrats get another Elena Kagan, who has no business being there, if they get another Senorita Sonia Sotomayor, if they get another Stephen Breyer, who may be one of the absolute worst, Ruth "Buzzi" Ginsburg, if they get another one of these, then we don't have a Supreme Court, folks.
When President Donald Trump nominated Judge Neil Gorsuch to serve on the Supreme Court, I said that he deserved a fair hearing and a vote. I said this even though Senate Republicans filibustered dozens of President Obama's judicial nominees and then stopped President Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Judge Merrick Garland.
We made history when President Obama appointed Sonia Sotomayor, a proud Latina, the first Hispanic Supreme Court justice. And as the President likes to say, 'Every single one of them wasn't just the best Latino for the job, but the best person for the job.'
To hear both critics and defenders talk about the fitness of Judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court, you'd think the most successful Supreme Court justices had been warm, collegial consensus-builders. But history tells a different story.
In my first week as a U.S. senator, I had the privilege of participating in the Supreme Court confirmation hearing for Judge Sonia Sotomayor.
With Republicans in control of the Senate for the first time since Barack Obama took office, the president may find it harder to appoint left-wing lawyers to judgeships. Whether he compromises on some of his nominees, including any to the Supreme Court, may depend on the willingness of the new Republican majority to engage the president on judicial philosophy.
President Obama had two Supreme Court nominees in his first term. There was no filibuster against them.
The fairest and most democratic process in terms of Supreme Court nominees is let the American people have a voice.
In 1987, I had my first opportunity to provide 'advice and consent' on a Supreme Court nominee. At that time, I stated that the qualifications essential for evaluating a nominee for the bench included 'integrity, character, legal competence and ability, experience, and philosophy and judicial temperament.' On that test, Elena Kagan fails.
There are so many really good role models out there, we just have to make sure that we don't glorify just one type. We have the first Latina Supreme Court Justice, Sonia Sotomayor, who is ready to be a force in kids' lives. I could name hundreds of people like her.
The Florida Supreme Court wanted all the legal votes to be counted. The United States Supreme Court, on the other hand, did not want all the votes to be counted.
The Frist fairness rule guarantees up-or-down votes for every circuit court or Supreme Court nomination, regardless of which party controls the Senate or the White House.
During the Obama years, the Republicans have done an unprecedented amount of stonewalling on cabinet-and-below appointees. I would also argue that their war on judicial nominees has been way beyond what went before. Really, if the president nominated God to serve on the D.C. Court of Appeals, Mitch McConnell would threaten a filibuster.
Nominees [to Supreme Court] shouldn't be expected to pre-commit to ruling on certain issues in a certain way. Nor should senators ask nominees to pledge to rule on issues in a particular way.
Jon Tester needs to be held accountable for his extreme partisan liberal record of supporting President Obama's judicial nominees 99% of the time but then opposing President Trump's nominees.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!