Mitch McConnell

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 358, submitted earlier today.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I know of no further debate on the measure.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate vote on the nomination with no intervening action or debate; that if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action; that no further motions be in order; and that any statements relating to the nomination be printed in the Record.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the following nomination: Executive Calendar No. 356.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to legislative session for a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule XXII that at 4 p.m. on Tuesday, December 12, there be 30 minutes of postcloture time remaining on the Grasz nomination, equally divided between the leaders or their designees, and that following the use or yielding back of that time, the Senate vote on the confirmation of the Grasz nomination and that, if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported amendment be agreed to, the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 274, S. 447.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, yesterday the Senate advanced the nomination of Mr. Leonard Steven Grasz to be a judge on the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. Mr. Grasz has sterling credentials and strong support from the Nebraska legal community. I proudly voted to advance his nomination, and the Senate will confirm him soon. Next, we will vote to advance the nomination of another well- qualified individual, Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Willett, to serve on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Justice Willett respects the rule of law and our foundational legal principles, and he will be a strong addition to the Fifth Circuit. His story is an inspirational one. Adopted at a young age and raised by a widowed mother in a town of 32 people, he was the first person in his family to graduate from high school. As our colleague Senator Cornyn said at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, ``Justice Willett's life [reflects] the best of Texas, and the best of America.'' From these humble beginnings, Justice Willett has led a remarkable career. After graduating from Duke School of Law, he clerked for Judge Jerre Williams of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, the panel he has now been nominated to join. He spent a short time in private practice before entering public service in then-Gov. George W. Bush's administration as a legal and policy adviser. When President Bush entered the White House, Justice Willett joined him as the Special Assistant to the President. In that role, he helped shape the domestic legal policy of the Bush administration, especially in the President's efforts to increase charitable activities in neighborhoods across the Nation. The next year, he became Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Policy. There, he oversaw both civil and criminal policy initiatives, including what became the PROTECT Act of 2003, which increased law enforcement's ability to prevent and prosecute violent crimes against children. Afterward, Justice Willett returned to Texas to serve as the Deputy Attorney General for Legal Counsel. As the top legal aide to then- Attorney General Greg Abbott, he advised the office on a wide variety of legal matters. In 2005, he was appointed to serve as a justice on the Texas Supreme Court. Elected to a full term in 2006 and reelected in 2012, Justice Willett has served with distinction on the Texas high court now for over a decade. During that time, he has ruled fairly and impartially. Four of his former colleagues on the Texas Supreme Court wrote a letter to the Judiciary Committee supporting Justice Willett's nomination. They wrote, ``His demonstrated belief is that the courts should enforce both constitutional rights and constitutional limitations and uphold the rule of law, but not enforce a personal agenda.'' ``On occasion,'' they continued, ``we did not agree with each other or with him on the disposition of an appeal but we respected Don's opinions and never doubted his devotion to principle.'' In addition, the retired Texas Supreme Court justice, Wallace Jefferson, recommended Justice Willett's nomination, writing that he will be ``a thoughtful, hardworking, diligent, and influential member of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.'' Justice Willett has also been recognized for his excellence by the Texas Review of Law and Politics, which named him its Distinguished Jurist of the Year in 2014. I would like to commend President Trump for nominating Justice Willett to the Fifth Circuit. Under Chairman Grassley's leadership, the Judiciary Committee has done an excellent job processing this nomination and many others. By joining the Fifth Circuit, Justice Willett will use his talents to continue to serve his State and his Nation. I look forward to advancing his nomination, and I urge my colleagues to join me in doing so.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, today I wish to commemorate a groundbreaking program in my home State, the John G. Heyburn II Initiative for Excellence in the Federal Judiciary at the University of Kentucky. As I will explain, the initiative, under the leadership of my dear friend, Dr. Martha Heyburn, is both a testament to its namesake and a powerful representation of its leader. Through its work, this program will benefit and educate our citizens, students, and members of the Federal judiciary. Judge John G. Heyburn II served on the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky for more than two decades. During his distinguished time on the bench, John excelled as a scholar, a jurist, and a public servant. He was a man of intellectual curiosity, which could be seen in his work and his relationships. In addition to his efforts in the Western District, Chief Justice William Rehnquist appointed John to serve on the Budget Committee of the U.S. Judicial Conference in 1994. John eventually became the committee's chairman in 1997, where he was responsible for working with Congress to set the budget for the Federal judiciary. In 2007, Chief Justice John Roberts appointed him to chair the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, a body tasked with promoting efficiency and consistency in litigation across the Federal courts. During his career on the Federal bench, Judge Heyburn lived out a vision, in his words, ``to ever improve the legal system considered the envy of the world.'' Through each of his roles, John sought to continue the development and improvement of the Federal judiciary, understanding that the quality of justice was inexorably tied to sound administration. Throughout his life, I was proud to call John my friend. Like so many others who knew and cared for him, I was heartbroken by his passing in April of 2015. After John's death, his wife, Martha, was left with what she called ``the unenviable task'' of organizing his judicial papers. She expected to find his books, his notes, and his memos from a lengthy career on the Federal bench. What Martha found, however, surpassed even her grandest expectations. For many of his most important cases, John maintained meticulous records of his decisions. For one case in particular, Martha found a collection of 26 drafted opinions, news clippings, source citations, and even the biographies of the law clerks who had helped John reach his final decision. She recalled that, during his career, John would work tirelessly on his opinions, struggling over individual words or sentences to ensure he got each and every word just right. As she examined the vast quantity of research, documentation, and papers, Martha reached a conclusion that would ultimately inspire the establishment of the Heyburn Initiative. She knew ``this doesn't belong in [her] basement.'' Martha recognized the historical importance of the documents she had found. She knew that these papers should be seen by wider audiences so future students of the law can learn from them and understand her husband's decisions and the decision-making of the broader Federal judiciary. Martha believed that if there were any chance that John's work could inspire a future student, it was her responsibility to help make that happen. With this realization, Martha began to plan the future of the Heyburn Initiative. By organizing the papers and making them publically available, they would become the anchor of a national resource dedicated to understanding the Federal judiciary and its place in our democracy. Many of us are familiar with Presidential libraries and congressional centers throughout the country, but this project would be distinctive in its study of the Federal judiciary. From an impressive career of service, John had accumulated a wealth of materials that would be of interest to many students and judicial researchers. However, Martha knew that, to make this new program attractive to a broad audience, she would need more papers than just those of her late husband. Therefore, as is typical for a groundbreaker like Martha, she understood the best way to accomplish her goal would be to establish an archive with an ambitious mission. She wanted to create a repository for the papers of every article III judge in Kentucky's history that she could acquire. An undertaking of this size had never been attempted before in judicial archiving in any State, but Martha knew that, if she could pull it off, it would be an incredible resource for Kentuckians and those who study the courts for generations to come. From the initial planning stages through today, the Initiative has already obtained the papers of about a dozen Federal judges from Kentucky, and I expect that number to grow. Next, Martha decided that, to be of greater benefit to future generations, the documents in an archive would need to be put in their proper context. One of the best ways to do that would be to record oral histories from policymakers, contemporaries, and the judges themselves. These interviews provide a personal account of the history of our Commonwealth and our Nation. They are an incredible resource for students and researchers now and in the future. To date, many of the Federal judges in Kentucky have agreed to provide their own accounts for the archive, discussing their opinions, their work, and the judiciary. Martha chose to gather oral histories from other members of the Federal Government as well to show the interactions among the three branches at any particular moment in time, but to accomplish this feat, Martha would need resources and a staff to make her vision a reality. She entered into an agreement with the University of Kentucky to host this portion of the Heyburn Initiative. Martha chose John's charge, ``to ever improve the legal system considered the envy of the world,'' to be the initiative's mission statement, and I was proud to stand with her in Lexington in October of 2016 as she publically unveiled her vision. The initiative became her effort to enshrine her husband's legacy and to inspire future generations into public service. With a permanent home and a vision for the future, the Heyburn Initiative launched its second component. After the passing of Associate Justice Antonin Scalia in February of 2016, Martha recognized a new level of awareness about the importance of the Federal courts throughout our Nation. That attention sparked her interest in developing an approachable and programmatic feature to the Heyburn Initiative by hosting speakers and conferences for the benefit of students, current judges, and the public. By hosting these events in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Martha sought to make our State a destination for scholars and jurists, and she has already found great success in her efforts. In its first year, Martha hosted Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch at the Heyburn Initiative in Lexington. Both of these renowned jurists presented their views on the judiciary's particular place in our system of government. During each of these visits, Martha ensured that the distinguished speakers participated in both public events and in meetings with law students. Her aim for these carefully organized interactions with some of the most influential jurists in our country was to provide an opportunity for inspiration and learning. She hoped that the students would be inspired by the speakers and, in turn, the speakers might be inspired by the students. Martha also views Heyburn Initiative events as opportunities to showcase our home State. With a ``uniquely Kentucky'' event, she wanted the visitors to remember more than just a judicial conference. Martha wanted the judges and justices to remember the culture of Kentucky. That is why, for example, when Chief Justice Roberts came to Lexington, she organized a group to attend a University of Kentucky men's basketball game, a coveted experience in the Commonwealth. In the Heyburn Initiative's first year, it has already achieved much success and has set itself on course for a bright future, and the credit for all the achievements belongs to Martha. Her vision and tenacity grew this program from an idea into a national resource for students, judges, and scholars. I know that the Heyburn Initiative will continue to be a fitting legacy for John because Martha is leading it. After so many accomplishments in 1 year, Martha has her sights set on further growth and success. She sees the Heyburn Initiative as an example for other States--to develop a home for the judiciary's rich history and an inspiration for its future. I would like to congratulate my dear friend and her family on her many achievements, and I look forward to seeing the great things that Martha will continue to do.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, as we continue to learn more details about the attempted terror attack this morning in Manhattan, I wish to commend the law enforcement and intelligence community that quickly reacted to the attack. Their courage in the face of danger protected the lives of those around them.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, this week, the Senate will consider three more outstanding individuals nominated by President Trump to serve on our Nation's Federal circuit courts. For 8 years, we had a President who selected judicial nominees based on a so-called ``empathy standard.'' It was an ideological litmus test designed to find nominees who would favor certain groups or individuals over others. While that may sound like a good standard for the party in the case for whom the judge has empathy, it doesn't sound so great if you are the other person. On the other hand, President Trump has nominated talented individuals who will ensure that the Federal judiciary maintains its particular role in our constitutional system. The judicial nominees before the Senate this week are each well-credentialed and have the integrity and temperament to serve our Nation on the circuit courts. They are dedicated to upholding the rule of law and giving every litigant a fair shake. That is how the American people expect judges to decide cases, and the Senate is working to confirm President Trump's nominees, who will do just that. First, the Senate will consider the nomination of Leonard Steven Grasz to serve on the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. Then it will consider the nomination of Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Willett to serve on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Finally, later this week, the Senate will consider the nomination of James Ho to serve on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Each of these nominees will make strong additions to the Federal bench, and I look forward to considering them in the coming days. I wish to once again commend Chairman Grassley for his leadership of the Senate Judiciary Committee. His excellent work has allowed us to bring these nominees to the floor. Later today, the Senate will advance the nomination of Mr. Grasz, a talented individual with experience in both private practice and public service. After graduating from law school at the University of Nebraska, Mr. Grasz began a distinguished career in law. Working as the chief deputy attorney general of Nebraska for nearly 12 years, he excelled, representing the State of Nebraska in numerous appellate cases, including before the U.S. Supreme Court. Nebraska Governor Pete Ricketts, along with five other top State officials, wrote a letter to the Judiciary Committee supporting Mr. Grasz's nomination. Here is what they had to say: Steve has become a leading expert on state and federal constitutional law. His demeanor and temperament have earned the respect of Nebraskans across the political spectrum in our state. Mr. Grasz has won the support of prominent Nebraskans from both sides of the aisle. Our former colleague, Senator Ben Nelson, came to know Mr. Grasz when Senator Nelson was the Governor of Nebraska. Senator Nelson wrote: Steve won my respect by putting considerable skills to work as an effective legal advocate for our state. We sometimes found ourselves disagreeing on policy; nevertheless, I quickly learned that Steve was the kind of consummate professional who is capable of putting whatever personal views he may have aside when appropriate in his capacity as a public servant. He was an asset to our state, and Nebraskans benefitted from having such a capable and thoughtful professional in public service. Furthermore, the Obama administration's U.S. attorney for Nebraska worked with Mr. Grasz in the State, and she wrote in support of his nomination: Steve has always enjoyed a reputation for honesty, impeccable integrity and dedication to the rule of law. He possesses an even temperament well-suited for the bench, and always acts with respect to all [who] interact with him. In addition, a letter from the current and previous presidents of the Omaha Bar Association stated that the Omaha legal community supports Mr. Grasz's nomination ``without hesitation.'' The letter goes on to say that he ``possesses the legal expertise, professionalism, character, and ethics that are demanded of a Judge on the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.'' The local legal community--both government officials and private attorneys--overwhelmingly attest not just to Mr. Grasz's impressive qualifications but to his commitment to fairness and the rule of law. Through his decades of legal practice, Mr. Grasz has shown that he is the right choice to serve on the Eighth Circuit. I am proud to join with our colleagues from Nebraska in supporting Mr. Grasz's nomination. I look forward to voting to advance this nomination later today and to confirming all three of these circuit court nominees this week.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 4 p.m. on Monday, December 11; further, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; further, that following leader remarks, the Senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the Grasz nomination; finally, that notwithstanding the provisions of rule XXII, the cloture motions filed during today's session ripen at 5:30 p.m., Monday.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following Senate resolutions, which were submitted earlier today: S. Res. 351, S. Res. 352, and S. Res. 353.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum calls for the cloture motions be waived.

Mr. McCONNELL. I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to legislative session for a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 535.