Chris Van Hollen

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 711, submitted earlier today.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 710, submitted earlier today.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam 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. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that all postcloture time be considered expired on Executive Calendar No. 968 and the Senate vote on confirmation of the nomination at a time to be determined by the majority leader, or his designee, following consultation with the Republican leader; further, that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 3 p.m. on Monday, July 18; and 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; that upon the conclusion of morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of Calendar No. 1035; and that cloture motions filed during today's session ripen at 5:30 p.m. on Monday.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate consider the following nominations en bloc: Calendar Nos. 924, 979, 982, and 983; that the Senate vote on the nominations en bloc without intervening action or debate; that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the Record; and that the President immediately be notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise to honor the life of a dedicated public servant and a champion for education: Mr. Reginald ``Reggie'' M. Felton from my State of Maryland. Our community lost Reggie only a few days ago, at the age of 75. Today, I would like to take a moment to celebrate his extraordinary life and pay tribute to his lasting legacy of good works. The story of Reggie's life can be defined by one word: service. He served our Nation in the military as a member of the U.S. Coast Guard and, later, as a Senior Executive within the Department of the Navy. He served his town and county as president of a local citizens association, as chair of the Silver Spring Center Citizens Advisory Board, and as chairman of the Freedom Fund Dinner organized by the Montgomery County Branch of the NAACP. But most of all, Reggie served our students. With the trust of his community behind him, Reggie won a seat on the Montgomery County Board of Education in 1994. He would serve on the board for another 20 years, winning reelection in 1998 and 2002 and rising to become the first African-American president of the Montgomery County Board of Education, a position he held for three terms. Reggie's commitment to the mission and spirit of the school board led to real results during his tenure. The Montgomery County School Board earned national recognition for excellence while Reggie served on the board, and it is no wonder why. Under his leadership, the Montgomery County Public Schools, which make up the largest school district in my State, saw major improvements in the quality of education and in the process for selecting and onboarding superintendents. Reggie also focused his efforts on establishing higher standards in curriculum, and those higher standards continue to inform a tradition of excellence at Montgomery County Public Schools that lives on to this day. In short: Reggie's time as president of the Montgomery County School Board helped make Montgomery County schools some of the best in the Nation. Throughout his extraordinary life, Reggie Felton nurtured his talent for leadership, stepped up to serve his community and his country, and did all that he could to improve the lives of his fellow citizens. He was beloved by all--respected across our communities for his kindness, his good humor, his brilliance, and his grace. On a personal note, Reggie was a good friend whom I admired greatly. I will always remember his warm and generous spirit, his wonderful smile, and his determination to serve others. I know I speak for Marylanders everywhere when I say our State is eternally grateful for his service and sacrifice. Today, Reggie's legacy lives on in every young student who benefits from his good deeds--whether they know it or not--and his story will continue to inspire us all. Thank you, Reggie. We love you.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise to recognize the 100th birthday of my constituent the Reverend Doctor Phillip Webster Davis, Sr. It is my pleasure to celebrate him on this special occasion and to share the details of his extraordinary life, his dedication to our community, and his service to our country. The Rev. Dr. Davis grew up in a household guided by family and faith. He was born the seventh of eight sons--and even at an early age, he quickly learned the values of brotherhood, community, loyalty, and love. His father, Reverend James William Davis, pastored at Mt. Calvary Baptist Church in Rockville, and together with his wife Mary, the older Reverend Davis instilled in his children many core teachings of the scriptures, among them: love thy neighbor, pursue a life of service, and strive to achieve your inner potential. The Rev. Dr. Davis marshalled the wisdom of those core teachings to steer the course of his extraordinary life and career. The arc of his career began in the Armed Services. In 1944, the Rev. Dr. Davis was drafted into the U.S. Army and served in the New Guinea and Philippines region during World War II. In a moment of crisis, he was called by his country to fight back against the forces of fascism and totalitarianism that had pulled the world into war--and he answered that call with action. The State of Maryland is deeply proud of the Rev. Dr. Davis' service to our country, and our entire Nation is grateful for his commitment to defending freedom everywhere. After he was honorably discharged from the Army, the Rev. Dr. Davis entered the private sector and owned several businesses over the years, including a restaurant, a barber shop, a charter bus service, and an automotive body shop. The Rev. Dr. Davis has been many things: a protector of freedom overseas, a community leader at home, an entrepreneur, and a business owner. But today, the Rev. Dr. Davis is most well-known throughout Marylander as the founder and former senior pastor of the Inter- Denominational Church of God. In building that community from the ground up, the Rev. Dr. Davis set out to grow a congregation that would accept all people, regardless of background and culture. His vision has been realized through the many dedicated parishioners of the Inter- Denominational Church of God, who continue working together to create an inclusive community of worship. After 38 years of exceptional service, the Rev. Dr. Davis stepped down as senior pastor during the week of his 90th birthday. Now, his legacy lives on under new leadership that will sustain and build on the Rev. Dr. Davis' vision for years to come. As a result of the Rev. Dr. Davis's work in the ministry and community, he has received numerous recognitions and honors. But despite these achievements, the Rev. Dr. Davis has always stayed humble and remained true to those guiding principles of family and faith that he first learned a young boy growing up in Rockville. To the Rev. Dr. Davis, the greatest recognition he could ever receive is in knowing he is the best husband and the best father to five children, six grandchildren, and one great-grandchild. The Rockville community, the Maryland community, and our country are indebted to Rev. Dr. Davis for his faithful service. On his 100th birthday, I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating this extraordinary milestone and sending our deepest gratitude to the Rev. Dr. Phillip Webster Davis, Sr., for all he has done.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, first, I want to thank my friend and colleague, the Senator from Michigan, for coming to the floor to share his own powerful and personal story and the stories of his constituents about why so many of us are here on the Senate floor this evening, and it is because 8 days ago, our country received a terrible wake-up call. A leaked draft opinion from the Supreme Court of the United States indicated that a majority of five Justices may be on the verge of overturning the constitutional protections of reproductive freedom set forth in Roe v. Wade. We don't know if this draft opinion will be the final decision, but we do know there is a very high chance that the Supreme Court of the United States will soon blow up 50 years of precedent and strip women of their constitutional right to make choices about their own body and their own self-determination. And while the content of this opinion is shocking, it is not totally surprising. This is the premeditated outcome of years--years--of plotting and planning by the rightwing legal movement and the Republican Party. Candidate Donald Trump promised the Nation he would handpick Justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade. On the campaign trail, he even claimed that Roe would be overturned ``immediately'' once he assumed office. And he stated on national television that women who receive abortions should be punished. Leader McConnell and Senate Republicans made up their own rules and then broke their own rules in order to play their part in this scheme. First, Senate Republicans refused to even hold a hearing on President Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland, on the grounds that it was a Presidential election year. Four years later, Senate Republicans rushed through one of President Trump's own Supreme Court nominees just weeks before the 2020 election. And in between, Senate Republicans carved out an exception to the Senate filibuster rule so they could push through all three of Trump's anti-choice Supreme Court picks: Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. Each of these nominees raised their right hand before the Senate Judiciary Committee and swore under oath that they respected the weight of judicial precedent. In fact, when Brett Kavanaugh was asked about Roe v. Wade, he pointed to Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which affirmed the core holding in Roe establishing a constitutional right to abortion, and he called the decision in Casey ``precedent on precedent,'' a double precedent. But let's be very clear, this draft opinion has no respect for judicial precedent. If the draft holds, all three of President Trump's nominees to the Supreme Court, along with some others already on the Bench, will have deliberately deceived and defrauded the American public. Rightwing ideologues set out to stack the Court with Justices ready and willing to overturn Roe v. Wade. Now, this rightwing establishment, this machinery, is on the verge of achieving their goal, even though their win will be a horrible loss for the reputation of the Supreme Court, a horrible loss for the integrity of our Constitution, and most of all, a horrible loss for the American people. More than half of the women and girls of reproductive age in our country live in States that would likely ban or severely restrict abortion if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade. Thirteen States have so-called trigger laws that will kick into effect automatically the day Roe is overturned. Nine States have passed laws that were struck down in the past because they violated the protections of Roe, but those laws could come back if Roe v. Wade is overturned. Many of these laws we are talking about are extreme. One trigger law in Kentucky would ban all abortions at any point in pregnancy, with no exceptions for rape, no exceptions for incest, or a situation in which a child could be born with a fatal birth defect. Another trigger law in Idaho would make providing an abortion at any point in pregnancy and under almost any circumstances a felony crime punishable by 5 years in prison. A Texas law that is on the books right now would put doctors in jail or fine them up to $10,000 for prescribing pills for medication abortions through telehealth or the mail for women who are more than 7 weeks pregnant. And a law that has been on the books since 1931 in Michigan would snap back into effect, making nearly all abortions at any point in pregnancy a felony. And women who undergo medication abortions would be made felons, even in the case of rape and incest. Just last week, State legislators in the Louisiana House advanced a bill through committee that would allow women who obtain abortions at any time in pregnancy to be prosecuted for murder--for murder. Experts say that this extreme law could also be used to restrict emergency contraception and in vitro fertilization, which is a critical process that helps customers with infertility build their families. Like many of our colleagues, I have been hearing from my constituents, my constituents in the State of Maryland, who have learned just how dangerous this situation is for women and families across the country. One constituent named Connie shared her story of taking emergency contraception after she was attacked and raped by a stranger at the age of 18. She told me about the importance of being able to make that choice about her body and her future instead of potentially becoming pregnant because of a rape. Today, Connie is a social worker, a therapist, and has a wonderful son. I have received other testimonials from constituents across the State of Maryland who have shared their stories and expressed their deep concern and fear about the Court striking down Roe v. Wade. If Roe was overturned, women living in States where safe and legal abortion is banned will have to travel away from their homes, away from their communities, away from their families simply to exercise control over their own bodies. Those who lack the money or the time will either be forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term or find somebody performing abortions in the shadows in their States, a throwback to the dangerous back-alley abortions. In 1965, 8 years before the Roe v. Wade decision, illegal abortion accounted for 17 percent--17 percent--of all deaths attributed to pregnancy and childbirth. That past could soon be our present. So, you see, this Supreme Court decision doesn't just turn back the clock on precedent, it turns back the clock on public health as it strips women of their reproductive freedoms. And in a world where Roe has been overturned, as you drive across our great country, your rights will change from State to State as you cross each State border. That is the result of taking away a constitutional right, and that is why polling shows the great majority of the American people do not want the Supreme Court to take away the rights under Roe v. Wade. Now, I am proud to represent a State that has codified a woman's right to reproductive choice. In fact, during my very first campaign for public office, the right to reproductive choice was the defining issue in my election to the Maryland General Assembly. It was another time when there was great fear that a Supreme Court might overturn Roe v. Wade. And so I ran on the pro-choice ticket, and after I was sworn in, in a matter of months, my colleagues and I passed a bill in 1991 codifying Roe v. Wade as a matter of Maryland State law. But here is the thing, laws like the one we have in Maryland, laws like the one we passed back in 1991, will be on the chopping block if this decades-long, rightwing project continues to go according to plan because the Republicans' ultimate objective isn't just to overturn Roe v. Wade; it is to enact a Federal law passed in this Senate and in the House banning abortion nationwide. Last week, Leader McConnell acknowledged that a national ban on abortion was a real possibility during an interview with USA TODAY. That should sound alarm bells all over America. This has been a two-step process. Step No. 1, strike down the constitutional protections of Roe v. Wade that prohibit elected officials, whether it is State legislatures or in Congress, from enacting laws that prohibit or restrict unnecessarily the right to choose. That is step No. 1. It seems we are on the verge of that happening. Once you clear the way, step No. 2, enact a Federal law in Congress banning abortion everywhere in the country, and we have seen exactly how extreme those laws can be from the State examples I cited earlier. That could happen here if this Republican, rightwing project sees its logical end; that Federal law would supersede Maryland's law. If Congress passed that law and it was enacted, State laws like those in Maryland protecting the right to choose in Maryland would be knocked off the books. That is true of other State laws, statutes, that protect a woman's right to choose. No woman in America would be safe to obtain a safe and legal abortion if such a national law were enacted. Now, everyone should also understand another huge danger posed by the draft. Its flawed logic not only would dismantle the right to an abortion, it could also be used to strip away other rights protected by the Constitution. I have read Justice Alito's draft opinion. I have read all 98 pages of it. In this opinion, Justice Alito tries to distinguish this case on abortion from other cases involving other individual rights. Alito claims that this case is special because it involves abortion and the State's interest in protecting life, while other cases do not. Well, that is obvious on its face, but it misses the bigger danger in Alito's opinion. Because it doesn't change the fact that Justice Alito's reasoning for dismantling the right to obtain an abortion can be used to dismantle many other rights that we currently take for granted as well. Justice Alito claims that, even as you look at the entire Constitution, you cannot find a right to choose for women; that you cannot derive that from the Constitution. In fact, on page 5 of the draft opinion, Justice Alito writes: The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision. And if we follow Justice Alito's flawed logic, the same could be said of a host of other rights that are not specifically named in the Constitution. The Constitution doesn't have the word ``contraception'' in it. The Constitution doesn't talk about consenting adults engaged in sexual relations. Look, this is the thing: Over time, the Supreme Court has recognized components of liberty through a close analysis of the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment, and that includes the right to use contraception, the right of consenting adults to have sexual relations with who they choose, and the right to marry who you love. These are rights the American people don't want elected officials to take away, whether they are State legislatures or Members of the Senate or the House. But they are all at peril too if the logic of Alito's reasoning is played out. And the terrible irony--the terrible irony-- here is those who most claim to oppose government regulations of any kind are now the ones rushing to regulate the most intimate, personal, and private aspects of American life. They say they don't want government having any role in their life--get out of my way--except for when it comes to them taking away this right and planning to pass laws that would ban abortion nationally, and as I said, open the door to going after other liberties as well. So those are the stakes that we are facing as we gather here this evening in anticipation of tomorrow's vote. And that is why we are taking this vote tomorrow. That is why we need to pass the Women's Health Protection Act, but even if we fall short this time, having a vote now is important. It is important to the country. Democracy requires accountability, and it is important that the American people know where each of the Senators stands on this issue. It is a fundamental question. So as we move into November toward the midterm elections, the American people will be watching closely how Members of this body vote on this fundamental constitutional question. And they will look to see who voted to strip away constitutional rights and who rose to protect them. And I believe that the majority of this country--the overwhelming majority of this country--wants to stand up to protect fundamental liberties in the Constitution of the United States. I yield the floor.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to a constituent, a trailblazer, a pillar of the Montgomery County community, a neighbor, and a dear friend: Ms. Marcine D. Goodloe. Ms. Goodloe has spent over 40 years advocating for the interests of volunteer firefighters and first responders across Maryland. She has been a special champion for Montgomery County, the place where I raised my family and where I still live. It is my honor to recognize her extraordinary life and dedication to our community and to the safety of all Americans. Marcine D. Goodloe has made service her mission. She began her career as the executive secretary for Montgomery County Fire and Rescue Services and later served as executive director for the Montgomery County Fire and Rescue Commission. Over the years, Ms. Goodloe's commitment to community service moved her up the fire-rescue ranks. At the height of her career, she oversaw the operations of 19 local volunteer fire and rescue departments and more than 2,400 fire, rescue, EMS, administrative, and auxiliary members serving over 1 million Montgomery County residents. Following years of exemplary service, Ms. Goodloe made history as the first woman elected president of the Montgomery County Volunteer Fire- Rescue Association in its century-long history. Her distinguished tenure lasted 16 years. As president, Ms. Goodloe worked tirelessly to advance the priorities of the entire association family. She partnered with community leaders at all levels of government--from the county council to the U.S. Congress--and delivered real results. At the local level, she successfully advocated for innovative policy solutions that helped strengthen physical standards, first responder training, and drug and alcohol testing. She raised the concerns of the Montgomery County volunteer fire-rescue community in Washington D.C. too, working with Members of Congress to secure Federal resources for first responders. Ms. Goodloe's commitment to service also reached beyond my State. In 2005, she raised more than $20,000 for a fire department in Mississippi that was damaged by Hurricane Katrina. Ms. Goodloe has been a vocal ambassador for first responders everywhere, and her leadership has been nothing short of inspiring. Throughout her decades of service, Ms. Goodloe has always brought dignity, strength, and kindness to her work. She has toiled in the trenches, working day-in and day-out to ensure that the men and women who stand guard over our communities get the support they need to do the job and come home safe. Ms. Goodloe has not only served her community honorably, but she has also empowered women across the Nation to enter a career in fire service. Her legacy of good works have earned her numerous accolades including the Mason Fire Lankford Fire Service Leadership Award, the Chief Leslie B. Johnson Community Service Award, and a spot in the Maryland State Firemen Association's Hall of Fame. On a personal note, I always look forward to meeting with Marcine on her visits to Capitol Hill to champion Federal programs that support all firefighters. She always did her homework. No one could say no to Marcine. I ask my colleagues to join me in extending our deepest gratitude to my friend Marcine Goodloe for her outstanding service to Maryland's Volunteer Fire and Rescue Service and in recognition of all she has done to keep our communities and our first responders safe.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

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

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 5681, which was received by the House and is at the desk.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate consider the following nomination: Calendar No. 659, Katherine Vidal, to be Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office; that the Senate vote on the nomination without intervening action or debate; that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; that any statements related to the nomination be printed in the Record; and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported amendments be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 277, S. 2123.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

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

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, later this week, the full Senate will take up and vote on the nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Over the last several weeks, the Congress and the country and, indeed, the world have gotten to know Judge Jackson. We have learned about her broad life experience, her exceptional career, her deep love of the law. Judge Jackson endured a verbal marathon of intense questioning from members of the Judiciary Committee. She endured challenging and sometimes specious lines of questioning from some of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, but through it all, she shined. She approached every moment of the hearing with grace, with wisdom, and with brilliance. Her good judgment and sharp mind were on full display for all to see. She was unshakable; she was inspiring. If confirmed, she will make history as the first Black woman to sit on the highest Court of the land. With Judge Jackson on the top Bench, we will get one step closer to ensuring that the Supreme Court of the United States looks like the Nation it serves; and with Judge Jackson on the highest Court, we will be even closer to realizing the noble ideal inscribed on the face of the Supreme Court building: ``Equal Justice Under Law.'' Her confirmation will be a victory for all of America. My State of Maryland is also proud to have a small connection with Judge Jackson. Not only did she reside in Maryland for a period of time, but her brother served on the Baltimore Police Department for 7 years, and he has also served two tours of duty as a member of the Maryland National Guard. Other members of her family also pursued careers in public service. Two of her uncles were police officers, and her parents were public school teachers. Like her family members, Ketanji Brown Jackson has taken up the mantle of public service as a public defender, as a member of the U.S. Sentencing Commission, as a district court judge, and as a Federal circuit court judge. It is no mystery as to why her nomination has been met with widespread praise. She has been lauded by the Fraternal Order of Police and by the International Association of Chiefs of Police. Prominent Republican-appointed judges and lawyers have spoken in favor of her confirmation. The American Bar Association listed her as ``well-qualified'' for the position to which she has been nominated-- their highest rating. There is no question in my mind that she will serve our Nation well and with distinction as the newest Justice of the Supreme Court, and I will vote in favor of her confirmation this week, proudly. I have watched many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle strain to find some justification for voting against Judge Jackson. They know she is highly qualified. They know she is a person of integrity. They know she has the training and judgment required of a Supreme Court Justice. Last week, one Republican member of the Senate Judiciary Committee called Judge Jackson a ``person of exceptionally good character, respected by her peers, and someone who has worked hard to achieve her current position.'' Another Republican member of the committee noted that she had ``impeccable credentials and a deep knowledge of the law.'' You would think these were words leading up to state support for Judge Jackson, but in both of those cases, those Senators have announced their decisions to vote against her. The pattern is the same for too many of our Republican colleagues. They come out and praise Judge Jackson and then announce they are voting against her. So the question is, Why? What is the reasoning here? And I have been listening carefully. Many of our colleagues tie their opposition to what they have called her ``judicial philosophy.'' They say Judge Jackson will push her own political ideology at the expense of the law. They say she is going to be an activist instead of a judge. They say she will create ``new rights from the Constitution out of whole cloth.'' In fact, that was a quote from my colleague, the senior Senator from Texas, who took to the floor last week in opposing Judge Jackson's confirmation. When my friend from Texas made that statement, I happened to be sitting where the Presiding Officer is right now, as I was presiding over the Senate, and I listened very closely to his arguments and others that were made along similar lines. None of the claims that I have heard hold water when you look at the facts because here is what Judge Jackson herself said during her confirmation hearing when asked about judicial restraint: I am acutely aware that, as a judge in our system, I have limited power, and I am trying in every case to stay in my lane. This is not just a hollow promise. Judge Jackson has explained to this Senate her clear methodology for ruling on cases to ensure that she stays in her lane. The methodology is simple. Step 1, start from a position of neutrality. We have all seen the scales of justice. We want them to be evenly balanced. Everybody who walks into a court should get a fair shot. That is step 1. Step 2, evaluate all of the facts from various perspectives. Step 3, apply the law to those facts. That is it. She was clear. That is how she makes decisions. That is how she rules from the bench. So what about the Constitution itself, that great document? What about this notion that she would be a runaway Justice, ``creating new rights from the Constitution out of whole cloth''?--to use the language, the expression, of some of my colleagues. That, too, is just plain wrong. Here is Judge Jackson again when she said: I believe that the Constitution is fixed in its meaning. I believe it is appropriate to look at the original intent, original public meaning of the words when one is trying to assess because, again, that is a limitation on my authority to import my own policy. Judge Jackson understands the boundaries of her authority as a judge. She has stayed within those boundaries for over a decade on the Federal bench. So enough of the spurious arguments that she is going to be an activist on the Court. Her method is clear; it is fair; it is balanced and honest, and I am confident that her rulings will be clear, fair, balanced, and honest. Let's not forget this: There are certain rights that most Americans would acknowledge are central to our Nation's traditions and values but that are not specifically and expressly enumerated in the Constitution, not each and every one with its own sentence. I have a short list here: the right to travel, the right to vote, the right to privacy, the right to marry. None of these rights are explicitly, expressly referenced in the text of the Constitution, but all of them have been derived by a close analysis of the letter and spirit of our Constitution and laws. These are rights we all embrace. These are rights the American people don't want elected officials to be able to take away from them. Let's not forget that the First Amendment, as written, only protects Americans from Federal action, from congressional action, that would violate their right to freedom of religion, press, speech, and assembly. Over time, the Court has taken action to protect these rights in the face of all government action, whether Federal or State or local, to make sure that those rights are protected against all government action no matter what its source. Justices appointed by Presidents of both parties have worked to protect rights Americans hold dear. President Reagan's appointee Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority opinion in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges, which protects the rights of same-sex couples to marry. His fellow Reagan appointee Sandra Day O'Connor joined the majority in the case of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which reaffirmed the reproductive liberties guaranteed under Roe v. Wade. Let's be clear: The Supreme Court considers the most challenging questions in American law. Judge Jackson will have to take on these challenging questions, like her peers on the Court, if she is confirmed; but one thing is crystal clear from her testimony and from the record: She will apply the law based on the facts. She will not be a partisan in a robe. She will be a fair, independent Justice of the Supreme Court, and she is very deserving of that title. I had the great privilege of meeting with Judge Jackson just yesterday. During our conversation, I was struck, again, by her brilliance, her intelligence, her kindness, and resolve. That came across on television during the hearings, but it was very evident in our one-on-one meeting. I thought about another Supreme Court nominee who broke barriers nearly 55 years ago, a man from Baltimore, MD: Thurgood Marshall. He was the first Black man to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States. So, during my conversation with Judge Jackson, I invited her to join me in West Baltimore at P.S. 103. This is public school building 103. It is in West Baltimore. It is the school where Thurgood Marshall learned to read and write. It is no longer an active school. The building is in bad condition. Just this year, as part of the omnibus appropriations bill, Senator Cardin and I were able to secure some Federal funds to help renovate that building and to turn it into a living memorial to Justice Thurgood Marshall and to expand opportunities for people in West Baltimore. So I told Judge Jackson that once she gets settled, it would be a great honor and privilege to bring her, the first Black woman on the Supreme Court, to the place where the first Black man on the Court grew up and went to school. Justice Thurgood Marshall inspired a generation of leaders and public servants to enter the legal field. Soon, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson will do the same. Young people from all across our country will look at the Supreme Court of the United States and feel more included. Her presence on the Court will be a victory for ``we the people.'' In 1978, Justice Thurgood Marshall said to a group of university graduates: This is your democracy. Make it. Protect it. Pass it on. I am deeply honored to work alongside my colleagues in the Senate to advance that vision, as we all strive to form a more perfect Union. And there is no doubt in my mind--no doubt at all--that elevating Judge Jackson to Justice Jackson will make our Union a little more perfect. I yield the floor.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam 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. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, I understand that there is a bill at the desk, and I ask for its first reading.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I now ask for a second reading, and in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10 a.m., Wednesday, April 6, and 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; that upon the conclusion of morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson to be Associate Justice of the Supreme Court; that at 11:45 a.m., the Senate execute the previous order with respect to the O'Brien nomination and vote on the confirmation of the nomination; finally, if any nominations are confirmed during Wednesday's session of the Senate, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. The clerk will call the roll. The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I just wanted to take a few moments to respond to some of the remarks made by my colleague from Wyoming. I think we all saw a jump in big gas prices when Putin invaded Ukraine. Then this body called upon the President, in a bipartisan manner, to say that we don't want to import any Russian oil into the United States because we don't want our dollars going to Putin to help fund his war. That was the right thing to do. That also increases gas prices. We also know that there are thousands of leases on public lands that are not being used today and drilled by oil companies that have those leases. In fact, the Senator from Massachusetts, the Presiding Officer, has said we should have a law saying use it or lose it. And I support that position because instead of using it, you see oil companies exploiting the current situation to have windfall profits and use those profits not to reinvest in war production but to engage in stock buybacks to help their CEOs while they keep the prices high. Ukraine Mr. President, I am here today on the floor as we mark day 27 of Vladimir Putin's unprovoked war against Ukraine. Each day that the war grinds on, Putin's brutality exceeds the last. As his advances against major cities like Kyiv have slowed, his barbaric war crimes have mounted. Americans have seen the harrowing images of Russian strikes hitting schools, hospitals, maternity wards, and designated humanitarian quarters, indiscriminately killing children, women, and men. The horror of each day is amplified by the fact that this is not a war of necessity. This is a war of choice, a war chosen by Vladimir Putin. And that choice grew out of Putin's fear of democracy, his fear of freedom of expression. Just today, Putin's crony court sentenced Russian democracy activist Alexey Navalny to 9 years in a maximum security prison. First, they tried to poison Navalny; now they want to silence him with 9 more years in jail. So you see the lengths to which Putin is willing to go to silence one man. You can imagine how he fears a democracy of 44 million Ukrainians on his border. He is scared of the example it sets to the Russians that he keeps under his authoritarian thumb. He wants to extinguish--snuff out--the flame of liberty in Ukraine before it catches fire in Russia. So he started a war, a brutal war. Now, Vladimir Putin has shown the world who he really is: a scared tyrant who thinks he can snuff out democracy and freedom by brute force. But he is wrong. He can kill a lot of people, and he has; but whether it is a matter of weeks or many months, Putin will not be able to kill the aspirations of the people of Ukraine. We see proof of that fact every day in the defiant words and heroic actions of Ukrainians everywhere. Amidst the horror, the blood, and the misery, we have seen amazing strength. The people of Ukraine are fighting for their homeland, for their freedom, and for the power to control their own destiny. Ukrainian men and women of all backgrounds and ages have joined in this cause, blocking the path of Russian tanks with their bodies, making Molotov cocktails, tending to the wounded, and taking up arms. Their courage speaks to the very best of the human spirit. Like most Americans, I am deeply inspired by their resolve and their fortitude, and the whole world should learn from their determination because the stakes in this war go far beyond the borders of Ukraine. This is a fight for the future of democracy itself. As President Zelenskyy said in his address to Congress last week: Russia has attacked not just us, not just our land, not just our cities. It went on a brutal offensive against our values . . . against our freedom, against our right to live freely in our own country, choosing our own future--against our desire for happiness, against our national dreams--just like the same dreams you have, you Americans. That was President Zelenskyy last week before Congress. He spoke of self- determination. He spoke of individual liberty and freedom. Those are values enshrined in America's own founding documents. So Putin is not just trying to take over Ukraine; he is, as President Zelenskyy said, trying to destroy the notions of democracy and freedom that we hold dear. Putin wants to see freedom fade and democracy fail, and he is not alone in that effort. Just before the Winter Olympics in Beijing, Putin traveled to China and met with another autocratic leader, President Xi Jinping. Putin and Xi signed an agreement stating that relations between Russia and China had ``no limits,'' ``no limits.'' On that day, they formed a pact of autocracy. And, today, China's state-run media parrots Putin's lies as Russian tanks encircle Ukrainian towns. President Xi is watching closely to see if Putin's model of autocracy by conquest might work in other places, might work in Asia. China has already violated its international obligations by stomping out freedoms in Hong Kong. Now, the Chinese Communist Party is eyeing their own democratic neighbor, Taiwan. As Beijing weighs the risks of trying to forcefully unite Taiwan with mainland China, its leaders are monitoring Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and they are watching closely how we and the world respond. Mr. President, the good news is the United States has rallied our NATO allies and partners in Europe. Even partners beyond the West have responded with unity and resolve, including Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan, and Singapore. One hundred forty-one countries voted at the United Nations to condemn Putin's war. Support has come not only in words and votes but also in deeds and help. Last week, President Biden signed the $14 billion emergency Ukraine legislation passed by the Senate and the House. The United States, our NATO partners, and others are supplying Ukrainians with the weapons they need to fight Putin's army. We are providing millions of Ukrainian refugees in Poland, Romania, and other neighboring countries with humanitarian assistance, and we are delivering aid to the millions more displaced within Ukraine itself. The United States has also worked in concert with our allies to unleash sweeping, punishing sanctions at a speed the world has never seen; and these sanctions are aimed right at the heart of Russia's economy, at Vladimir Putin, and at his cronies. We have cut off Russia's financial system from the world. The ruble is in shambles. The ill-gotten gains of the oligarchs are being seized at this very moment. The unity we see today among democracies in the face of Putin's aggression marks a double triumph. Not only does it allow us to form a united front against Putin, it also undermines his strategy of weakening democracies. He has long conspired to erode support for NATO from within its member countries. He believes freedom means unending chaos, and he wants to see us bicker ourselves into oblivion. When NATO and our key democratic allies are divided, Putin and authoritarians can win. When we are united, we win. When it comes to Putin and Russia, Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle have known this for years. Even when the former President attacked NATO and belittled our democratic partnerships, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle united to reaffirm our support for the alliance. In 2018, a bipartisan group of Senators reestablished the NATO Observer Group to keep an open line of communication with our NATO partners. I am proud to be a member of that group. In 2019, the Senate passed a resolution reaffirming our support for NATO in the face of the former President's attacks. That same year, Speaker Pelosi invited NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg to address a joint meeting of Congress. She did that on behalf of a bipartisan group. That was the first-ever such address by a NATO Secretary General. President Biden pledged that he would strengthen that tradition of unity, rebuild U.S. relations with our allies, and stand up for democracy, and that is what he has done. On day 1, he got to work repairing our tattered alliances after the beating they took during the last administration. He organized the first of two summits for democracy last December to rally global partners, and the Biden State Department organized dozens of diplomatic missions to countries around the world to foster democracy. So let's be clear: This speedy, severe, and synchronized response from the United States and our partners did not come about by chance. It wasn't random. Our unity came from the deliberate strategy of this President and his administration. President Biden understands that there is a global contest between autocrats like Putin and Xi, who want democracy to die, and those like Zelenskyy, who want it to flourish; and he has shown that democratic unity is the strongest instrument we have against the forces of autocracy. Mr. President, that unity was on full display in February when I traveled to the Munich Security Conference with a bipartisan group of lawmakers from both the House and the Senate. We met in Munich on the eve of Putin's invasion. And because President Biden had the foresight to share our intelligence about Putin's intentions with the world, NATO, the European community, and members of the G-7 had time to prepare and coordinate our response. It allowed us to plan the rapid delivery of weapons and the imposition of unified, crushing sanctions-- unity in action. I hope we can maintain that unity of purpose here at home. There was, as the Presiding Officer knows, a time in American life when politics stopped at the water's edge. I realize that era is for the most part over, but I hope--I hope this country is strong enough and wise enough to put aside our politics at least for the purpose of making common cause to support democracy and stand up against Putin, as long as it takes. That unity will be tested. I already see divisions in Congress over the administration's response to this invasion. Sometimes Members of the Senate or the House will have an idea to help Ukraine or an idea to punish Putin that they want implemented immediately. I often have the same impulse. But let's be clear: The success of the President's strategy has been the rapid coordination of our steps with our allies, whenever possible. That is how we pack the biggest punch. There are also some measures where the President has asked for immediate action and Congress has delayed. Five days ago, the House of Representatives passed a bill to strip Russia of its most-favored- nation trading status. It passed 424 to 8. When is the last time we saw a vote like that in the House of Representatives? That bill is sitting right here in the Senate right now. We should and could pass it today. We should certainly pass it before President Biden leaves Wednesday--tomorrow--to meet with NATO allies and leaders from the European Union and G-7. Sometimes around here, if the President announces a sanctions measure a day after somebody else thinks about it, he gets criticized for it being too late; but here, the Senate has been sitting for days on the House bill, and every day that goes by is another day that Russian producers and exporters make more money, make more dollars. Every day that goes by provides some relief to Putin's cronies and the Russian economy. So let's stand together in this Senate and act on that legislation now. I also appeal to my colleagues--especially on the Republican side--to speak out against those here at home who are spreading Putin's propaganda. A case in point has been the fast-spreading lie that the United States and Ukraine have bio labs in Ukraine to help develop bioweapons. That is just flatout false, but that lie has been fueled in part by some in the rightwing media. On March 3, the Kremlin circulated a memo to Russian media saying it is ``essential'' to feature Tucker Carlson, who has been spreading this kind of misinformation about Putin's war on his show. The lie about the so-called American and Ukrainian bioweapons labs was also picked up and peddled by China's state media. So, Mr. President, all of us should stand up and speak out against this misinformation. American media figures can say what they want. That is their right. But so can we as Members of Congress, and I would argue we have a duty to make our voices heard and join in the chorus of those calling out Russian lies across the globe. Every day, we see thousands of Russians flood the streets, from St. Petersburg to Siberia, to protest Putin's war. The world witnessed Russian journalist Marina Ovsyannikova speak out against the invasion on live, state-sponsored TV, with a sign calling out Putin's lies. These heroes are carrying on knowing full well the risk that they put themselves in, the risk that they will be thrown in jail or worse. The least we can do in Congress is to stand up to lies here at home that aid and abet Putin's propaganda machine. Make no mistake, even in unity, there will be spirited debate here. We will have disagreements over how to best respond to Putin's aggression, but we should never ever disagree about who the true enemy is. Vladimir Putin is to blame for this attack on democracy. Vladimir Putin is to blame for death and destruction in Ukraine. Vladimir Putin is the enemy--not one another; not the other party; not the President. There are plenty of things for us to fight about, but in the current battle for democracy and freedom in Ukraine and the larger fight for democracy and freedom around the world, the stakes are simply too high for us to fall back on partisan games. Let's come together. Let's stay together. And if we do, I am confident that democracy and justice will prevail. To those countries and leaders around the world who stand on the sidelines, I say that neutrality in the face of evil is complicity. In the end, freedom and the dignity of the human spirit will prevail over subjugation and oppression every single time. They need to get on the right side of history. I yield the floor.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise to support the historic nomination of Shalanda Young to be the next Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Ms. Young brings deep experience with the Federal budget process to her role at OMB, having served as staff director of the House Committee on Appropriations. She has been serving as Acting Director of OMB for the past year, and her top-notch performance in that role leaves no doubt that she is eminently qualified to be confirmed as OMB Director. Ms. Young came into OMB in March 2021, the same month that Congress passed the American Rescue Plan. This was a time when the Nation faced an uncertain future, with coronavirus vaccines just starting to go out and unemployment remaining stubbornly high at 6 percent. Under Ms. Young's leadership, OMB played a key role to implement the American Rescue Plan to fight the pandemic and move our economy forward. The results have been widespread vaccinations, millions of new jobs, unemployment falling to 3.8 percent, and the fastest economic growth in nearly 40 years. We have achieved a great deal during the first year of the Biden administration, but we must recognize that there is still so much left to accomplish. Shalanda Young is the right person to have at the helm of OMB to craft responsible budgets and turn the policies we craft into actions that make a real difference for the American people.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Cheryl A. Hickmon, national president of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Incorporated and chair of the national board of directors. A native of Hartford, CT, Cheryl, the youngest of three children, was born in 1962 to the late Dr. Ned Hickmon and Consuella Anderson Hickmon. Cheryl passed away peacefully on Thursday, January 20, 2022, at the age of 60, following a battle with a recent illness. She leaves to cherish her memory two brothers, Ned N. Hickmon and David W. Hickmon of Hartford, CT, many cousins throughout the United States, coworkers, many friends, and sorority sisters internationally, including members of the Hartford Alumnae Chapter. Cheryl was deeply devoted to Delta Sigma Theta, and her loss will be felt by many. An active member for 39 years, Cheryl's devotion to Delta Sigma Theta began in 1982 with her initiation into the Alpha Xi Chapter at South Carolina State University. She served in multiple leadership positions at the local, regional, and national levels, including as Alpha Xi chapter president in 1983, South Atlantic regional representative in 1984, Hartford Alumnae chapter president in 2009, and was ultimately elected the 27th national president and chair of the national board of directors in November 2021. Her leadership has shaped generations of women across this country and was inspired by a deep belief in Delta's core values of sisterhood, scholarship, service, and social action. Cheryl shared her wisdom, care, and compassion with all who crossed her path. Her unwavering commitment to making the world a better place meant Cheryl always sought new opportunities to uplift Americans, especially Black women. Her passion enabled her to have a profound impact on many through Delta Sigma Theta and her service with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the Children's Defense Fund, and the National Council of Negro Women. Cheryl will be remembered as a true champion for civil rights and social justice. Cheryl's motivation to lend a helping hand to others in need also shaped her career of more than 30 years as a licensed clinical laboratory technologist. She supervised the In Vitro Fertilization Laboratories for andrology and endocrinology at Montefiore's Institute for Reproductive Medicine and Health. One of her greatest joys was supporting couples in their journey to become parents. Cheryl was guided by the motto, ``Don't measure life by the number of breaths you take but by the number of moments that take your breath away.'' Her servant leadership in every endeavor she pursued will leave a lasting and meaningful legacy across this country. I extend my deepest condolences to her family, friends, and the entire sisterhood of Delta Sigma Theta. I join each of them in honoring Cheryl's life by holding up her work as an example, one rooted in mentorship, enthusiasm, and service to our community. Rest in peace, Cheryl.