Click HERE for Senator McConnell’s Coronavirus Response Portal

Recent Press Releases

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.”

The Tragic Loss of LMPD Officer Nick Rodman

‘Officer Rodman followed in a strong family tradition of law enforcement, and his life displayed the best virtues of public service.’

March 29, 2017

WASHINGTON, D.C.U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell made the following statement today on the passing of Louisville Metro Police Department (LMPD) Officer Nick Rodman:

“Elaine and I are deeply saddened to hear of the tragic loss of Officer Nick Rodman of the Louisville Metro Police Department. Officer Rodman followed in a strong family tradition of law enforcement, and his life displayed the best virtues of public service. Officer Rodman’s tragic death is a reminder of the tremendous debt of gratitude we owe to all the courageous men and women, like him, who daily put themselves in harm’s way to defend our communities. They deserve our utmost respect. We join with all of Louisville and the law enforcement community in offering our sincere condolences to Officer Rodman’s family, friends, and fellow officers.”

American Energy Independence Executive Order is Good News for Kentucky Coal Communities

‘The Obama Administration launched energy attack after energy attack on Kentucky and…Coal communities face enough challenges without Washington piling on more with these unreasonable attacks. Fortunately, we now have a president who will work with us to provide much-needed relief.’

March 28, 2017

WASHINGTON, D.C.U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) made the following remarks on the Senate floor regarding the Energy Independence Executive Order that President Trump plans to sign today:

“Throughout my career in the Senate, I’ve worked hard to defend coal communities and the jobs that they, and so many across the country, depend upon. These men and women have dedicated their lives to providing an affordable and reliable power source for our homes, businesses, and communities. They deserve our respect and our support. The same is true of America’s middle class more broadly. Middle-class families had a hard enough time the last eight years without Washington making things worse. I think they deserve respect and support, not fewer jobs and unaffordable energy bills.

“Unfortunately, the previous administration didn’t see things the same way. Instead, the Obama Administration launched energy attack after energy attack on Kentucky and America’s middle class, threatening critical jobs and making coal more costly to mine and to use. Indeed, a couple years ago, then-President Obama finalized a massive, regressive energy regulatory scheme that claimed to be about helping the climate but actually would have done little to truly impact global emissions. What it would have done is punish coal families, ship middle-class jobs overseas, and hurt the economy. It was also likely illegal.

“So, I sent a letter counseling governors to wait for the courts to rule on the legality of the regulation before submitting a compliance plan. It was not a popular move at the time. Turns out, it was the right one. I’m glad that nearly half of our nation’s governors agreed with my advice to take a ‘wait and see’ approach before needlessly putting their states in economic jeopardy. I’m proud to report that we will notch an important victory in this struggle later today. I commend President Trump for the decision to sign the Energy Independence Executive Order and send several anti-middle class regulations back to the drawing board.

“From the outset, I warned that regulations like these would hurt coal workers and America’s middle class. One report predicted that more than 40 states could have seen double-digit electricity rate hikes as a result of the CPP energy regulatory plan. And we all know that low- and fixed-income families would have suffered the most. And for what? This regulation would hardly have moved the needle on the climate anyway. Talk about bad policy. It’s important to remember how we got here.

“President Obama came into office with huge majorities in both houses of Congress. He could’ve done virtually anything he wanted and certainly tried. He pushed through one left-wing policy after the other. He even tried to push through a regressive, anti-middle class energy regulatory plan — one so extreme that he couldn't even get his own Democrat-controlled Congress to go along with it. Undeterred, he went around Congress and imposed a similarly regressive energy scheme anyway.

“It was evident that the Obama Administration had overstepped its authority. That’s why I sent the letter I mentioned earlier to the nation’s governors urging them not to comply with the CPP's demands, but to instead take a ‘wait and see’ approach before putting their states into economic jeopardy. Because of the legal uncertainty of President Obama’s plan, 27 states joined the fight in federal court. In February 2016, the Supreme Court issued an unprecedented nationwide halt on this regulation.

“Despite the Court’s order, the damage of President Obama’s ‘War on Coal’ has already negatively impacted middle-class families across the country and coal communities in Kentucky. When plants shut down and miners lose their jobs, the entire community feels the pain. With less tax revenue, local governments are unable to pay teachers and first responders. These hardships often lead to the rise of crime and drug abuse that trouble these communities.

“Moreover, the Obama Administration’s massive regulatory burdens were imposed during a period when production and supply of natural gas had been high and its costs relatively low — a devastating one-two punch to families already struggling to make it. To make matters worse, President Obama didn’t stop at the CPP; he also sought to impose similar limitations on any new plants in an attempt to prevent them from being built. It’s an equally concerning regulation, and one that would have further devastated coal communities. I’m glad President Trump will include it in his executive order today.

“Coal communities face enough challenges without Washington piling on more with these unreasonable attacks. Fortunately, we now have a president who will work with us to provide much-needed relief. Today’s executive order is good news for coal communities, it’s a victory for middle class families, and it’s another important step away from the overregulation of the Obama years.

“We all want clean air and clean water. But that’s not what President Obama’s energy regulatory policies were actually about. It was an ideological vanity project. It wouldn’t have even solved the problem it purported to address.

“Fortunately, the EPA will now have the opportunity to go back to the drawing board and get this right with balanced and serious policies. The EPA should work with stakeholders across the country to develop sensible policies that balance the economic needs of our communities with the realities of the environment. This way, we can protect America’s middle class, America’s miners, and America’s natural resources — all at once.”