Click HERE for Senator McConnell’s Coronavirus Response Portal

Recent Press Releases

There is Not One Single Principled Reason to Oppose Judge Gorsuch

It’s time to move beyond this hollow rhetoric and get back to the serious business of governing. Confirming Judge Gorsuch would mark a significant step in that direction.

March 30, 2017

WASHINGTON, D.C.U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) made the following remarks today on the Senate floor regarding Supreme Court Nominee, Judge Neil Gorsuch:

“Many members came to the floor yesterday to debate the Gorsuch nomination, and we’ll have all of next week to continue that debate. I would encourage my colleagues to continue debating this important nomination. Two months ago today — before Neil Gorsuch had even been nominated — I spoke on the Senate floor about the rhetoric we could expect to hear from the other side after the president’s nominee was announced. I predicted then that we would see many on the Left ‘[try] to paint whomever is actually nominated in apocalyptic terms.’

“‘Doesn’t matter who this Republican president nominates,’ I said then.

“‘Doesn’t matter who any Republican president nominates, really,’ I continued.

“No matter the nominee, I said, ‘We can expect to hear a lot of End Times rhetoric from the Left... [and] [i]n fact, we already have.’ I was alluding then to the fact that, sight unseen, we had already begun hearing from those on the Far Left who vowed to oppose anyone the president nominated. The Democratic Leader even joined in, saying he would oppose anyone from the president's list of candidates and would ’fight it tooth-and-nail, as long as we have to’ in order to keep Justice Scalia's seat open, even for the entirety of the president's term.

“Remember, that was before Judge Gorsuch was even selected — before we knew his credentials, before we’d heard from current and former colleagues, before we’d examined his judicial record, and well before his hearing before the Judiciary Committee. Our friends across the aisle made it clear then that their opposition to this nominee would have nothing to do with the nominee himself. In fact, I said we could expect to hear a number of convoluted excuses as to why they wouldn’t support the president’s yet-to-be-named nominee — excuses that would amount to little more than their dissatisfaction with the outcome of the election.

“Sure enough, that’s just what we’ve seen over the past few weeks. They are opposing this well-qualified nominee despite his impressive credentials, bipartisan support and excellent testimony before the committee. Judge Neil Gorsuch is such an outstanding candidate, so non-controversial, so well-esteemed by people across the political spectrum that Democrats have been forced to talk about pretty much anything — President Trump…think tanks…you name it — but the nominee himself.

“Yesterday’s comments by the Democratic Leader are a good example. He gave a lengthy speech about why he wouldn’t support Judge Gorsuch, but when you boil it down, his remarks actually had little to do with Gorsuch at all. Essentially, he concluded that because Judge Gorsuch had earned the praise of legal groups like the Federalist Society, Democrats should not support him. By the way, all current sitting justices have participated in events with this same organization. That includes justices who were nominated by Democratic presidents, including President Clinton and President Obama.

“So yes, Judge Gorsuch has received high praise from a number of conservatives — just as he’s earned the support of centrists and leftists too. As I’ve pointed out on several occasions, many longtime Democrats you might not expect have even complimented Judge Gorsuch — people like President Obama’s former acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal; President Obama's legal mentor, Professor Laurence Tribe; President Carter's district court appointee, Judge John Kane; President Clinton's appointee to the Tenth Circuit and former Chief Judge of that court, Judge Robert Henry; and liberal Harvard Law Professor Noah Feldman, and so many more.

“Judge Gorsuch has such a proven record of judicial independence and impartiality that people from the Left to the Right — and everywhere in between — have voiced their confidence in his fitness to serve on the High Court. It explains why the American Bar Association — which, according to the Democratic Leader and former Democratic Judiciary Chairman, is the ‘gold standard’ for evaluating judges — gave Gorsuch its highest rating possible, unanimously well-qualified.

“So let’s be clear, the support for Judge Gorsuch is anything but one-sided. The Democratic Leader also noted his concerns yesterday about the process by which we arrived at this point. But, Mr. President, as we all know, this Supreme Court nomination process has been historically transparent.

“Here’s what I mean: Months and months ago, then-presidential candidate Trump took the unprecedented action of compiling a list of potential nominees he would consider nominating to the Supreme Court. Those potential nominees were made public for the American people, including every Senator, to review.

“Before making his selection, now-President Trump's White House consulted on a bipartisan basis with each and every Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, as well as numerous other Senators. And the president followed through with his pledge, selecting from that public list Judge Neil Gorsuch of Colorado — who we can all agree is well qualified to serve on the Supreme Court and who the Senate confirmed to his current position without a single vote in opposition.

“Since being nominated, Judge Gorsuch has continued this transparent process by meeting face-to-face with nearly 80 Senators, from both parties. So you see, this process has been as straightforward and bipartisan as possible from the very beginning — before we even knew that the president would indeed be making this nomination.

“Only in the upside down world of my Democratic colleagues is telling the entire world months before one is even elected president the list of people you would choose from if you became president a ‘secretive’ process.

“So look, it’s time to move beyond this hollow rhetoric and get back to the serious business of governing. Confirming Judge Gorsuch would mark a significant step in that direction. He’s proven himself a worthy successor to the Supreme Court, he’s earned high acclaim along the way from various news publications, and lawyers, and judges, and clerks who represent all walks of life and all political ideologies.

“People like David Frederick — a longtime Democrat and board member of the left-leaning American Constitution Society — who may have summed it up best in a recent Washington Post op-ed. ‘The Senate should confirm [Gorsuch],’ Frederick wrote, ‘because there is no principled reason to vote no.’

“No principled reason to oppose him—none. As this American Constitution Society member says, there is not one single principled reason to oppose Judge Gorsuch, so it makes sense that Democrats can’t come up with a single substantive reason to oppose him either.”

WASHINGTON, D.C.U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) made the following remarks today on the Senate floor regarding a Congressional Review Act that would roll back an Obama-era regulation and help restore state control over health funding:

“The Senate will soon act to prevent workers from being forced into risky government-run savings plans. Then we’ll turn our attention to an additional opportunity to protect the American people from executive overreach with another resolution under the Congressional Review Act.

“On its way out the door, the Obama Administration issued a regulation that prohibited states from allocating certain health-prevention funds in the way that best serve local communities. It substituted Washington’s judgement for the needs of real people, controlling Americans’ access to health care services while hurting the community health centers that so many Americans — especially women — depend upon. This regulation is an unnecessary restriction on states that know their residents’ own needs best.

“Fortunately, by sending the CRA resolution before us to the president’s desk, we can once again return power back to the people — and we’ll do so without decreasing funding for women’s health by a penny.

“I’d like to recognize my colleague Senator Ernst, who introduced the Senate companion to the House bill we’ll vote on, for her leadership on this important issue. I look forward to supporting it later today.”

Senate Democrats Search For Excuse to Filibuster Judge Gorsuch

Senate Democrats aren’t looking out for what’s best for the Court, for the Senate, or for the country. They simply refuse to accept the outcome of the election.

March 29, 2017

WASHINGTON, D.C.U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) made the following remarks today on the Senate floor regarding Judge Neil Gorsuch, the president’s nominee for the Supreme Court:

“Since Judge Neil Gorsuch was nominated to the Supreme Court, Senate Democrats have searched high and low for a reason to oppose him.

“They looked at his background — and found a Columbia alum, a Harvard law graduate, and an Oxford scholar. They looked at his reputation — and found an impartial and fair judge, an incisive and eloquent writer, and a humble and even-tempered man. They looked at his record as a judge — and found someone who follows the facts where they lead without favoring one party over another; someone respected by Democrats, Independents, and Republicans alike; and someone who understands his role is to interpret the law, not legislate from the bench.

“Our colleagues across the aisle also had the opportunity to spend hours with Judge Gorsuch at his confirmation hearing. Once again, they found little to hang their hat on when it comes to a reason to oppose Gorsuch. Instead these hearings made clear a point recently stated by a board member of the liberal American Constitution Society: ’The Senate should confirm him because there is no principled reason to vote no’ on Judge Gorsuch.

“That was David Frederick — a self-proclaimed ‘longtime supporter of Democratic candidates and progressive causes’ — in a recent Washington Post op-ed. This prominent Democrat said he supports Judge Gorsuch because he ’…embodies a reverence for our country’s values and legal system.’ ‘We should applaud such independence of mind and spirit in Supreme Court nominees,’ he said. But unfortunately, instead of coming together behind this nominee, some of our colleagues continue to press forward with convoluted excuses as to why they won’t support him.

“Just yesterday, my friend the Democratic Leader came to the floor to share his reasoning. He talked about the need for the nominee to be independent and impartial. Well, Judge Gorsuch passes that test, and the American Bar Association — the organization revered as the ‘gold standard’ for evaluating judges by the Democratic Leader and the former Judiciary Chairman — certainly agrees. It said, ’Based on the writings, interviews, and analyses we scrutinized to reach our rating, we discerned that Judge Gorsuch believes strongly in the independence of the judicial branch of government, and we predict that he will be a strong but respectful voice in protecting it.’

“In addition to independence, the Democratic Leader talked about his concern that Judge Gorsuch has earned the support of conservatives. Well, it’s true, Judge Gorsuch has earned the support of Republicans, just as he’s received praise from many on the Left as well — like President Obama’s former Solicitor General Neil Katyal; and President Obama’s legal mentor, Professor Laurence Tribe; and left-leaning law professor E. Donald Elliot; among so many others.

“The Democratic Leader talked about the need for the nominee to offer assurances about how he’d rule on a certain case and assurances that he’d stand up for certain groups. But, as Judge Gorsuch pointed out, nominees are — to quote Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg — to offer ‘no hints, no forecasts, no previews’ on how they would rule in certain cases. Similarly, judges are to decide cases based on the facts — not personal views or political preferences. And finally, the Democratic Leader talked about the importance of a nominee’s record. Well, I’d like to take a moment to remind my colleagues of Judge Gorsuch’s record now.

“As he said at his hearing, ’I have decided… over 2,700 cases, and my law clerks tell me that 97 percent of them have been unanimous, 99 percent I've been in the majority. They tell me as well,’ he continued, ‘that according to the Congressional Research Service, my opinions have attracted the fewest number of dissents from my colleagues of anyone I've served with that they studied over the last 10 years.’

“More than 2,700 cases… In the majority on 99%... And part of a unanimous ruling on 97%. It simply doesn’t get much better than that. No wonder the American Bar Association gave him its highest rating, unanimously well-qualified.

“So when we hear our Democratic colleagues talking about breaking longstanding precedent to oppose this non-controversial, outstanding judge by mounting the first-ever purely partisan filibuster to try to defeat his nomination, we can only assume one thing: This isn’t about the nominee at all. It’s about a few on the Left whose priority is to obstruct this Senate and this president, whenever and wherever they can. Months after the election, they’re still in campaign mode calling for Senate Democrats to obstruct and resist.

“Let’s be clear: these left-wing groups aren’t concerned by the qualifications of this judge. They aren’t looking out for what’s best for the Court, for the Senate, or for the country. They simply refuse to accept the outcome of the election.

“We realize the enormous pressure that our Democratic colleagues are under. It’s why we’re hearing talks of some mythical 60-vote standard that doesn’t exist. Just ask the fact-checkers that have repeatedly debunked that idea. A 60-vote threshold has never been the standard for a Supreme Court confirmation — not for President Clinton’s Supreme Court nominees in his first term and not for the Supreme Court nominees of a newly elected President Obama either.

“As The Washington Post fact-checker reminded us again just this morning, ‘Once again: There is no ‘traditional’ 60-vote ‘standard’ or ‘rule’ for Supreme Court nominations, no matter how much or how often Democrats claim otherwise.’

“So let me ask our Democrat friends. Do they really want to launch the first wholly partisan filibuster of a Supreme Court nominee in American history? Do they really think history books or the American people will look kindly on them for filibustering this amazingly well-qualified and widely-respected nominee?

“Judge Gorsuch has earned an enormous amount of praise from across the political spectrum and from a wide array of publications across the country.

“Like the Chicago Tribune. It recently called for his confirmation, saying that Judge Gorsuch ’has shown himself to be committed to the principle that judges should rule on the law as written, and apply it equally to all.’

“And the Detroit News. The paper said Judge Gorsuch ’is proving himself an even-tempered, deeply knowledgeable nominee who should be confirmed by the Senate. The hearings confirm,’ it said, ’that Gorsuch is [eminently] qualified, and there is nothing radical in his judicial history.’

“And The Denver Post. ‘As we’ve noted several times in the run-up to Gorsuch’s confirmation hearings,’ it said, ‘the 10th Circuit judge possesses the fairness, independence and open-mindedness necessary to make him a marvelous addition to the Supreme Court.’ The Post went on to say that Senators should not ‘[miss] the chance to rally behind Gorsuch — who has been roundly praised here by Democrats and Republicans alike…’

“In other words, Judge Neil Gorsuch should be treated fairly, receive an up-or-down vote, and be confirmed to the Supreme Court, just like all four first-term Supreme Court nominees of Presidents Clinton and Obama. Because, again, as even those on the Left can’t help but admit: ‘there is no principled reason to vote no’ on Judge Gorsuch. It’s a sentiment we’ve heard from many of our colleagues here on the floor as we’ve been debating Judge Gorsuch’s nomination over the past few weeks.

“As we wait for the Judiciary Committee to report out his nomination, I would encourage Members from both sides to continue taking advantage of available floor time to discuss this important issue. I’d also remind Senators that we’ll have all of next week to continue debating Judge Gorsuch’s nomination too. I look forward to hearing from our colleagues as we work to advance this extremely well-qualified nominee.”