Vision of “More Perfect Union” threatened, Principle of “Presumption
of Innocence” trampled
Maintaining a “standard of fairness” in the U.S. Senate confirmation
proceedings — which are not court proceedings — requires that claims presented to the Senate must
at least “meet a threshold of ‘more likely than not.’”
Text Excerpt (some
rearrangement) from Sen. Collins’
October 5, 2018, Speech on the Senate Floor
|
B
|
roken American Union
“We live in a time of such great disunity, as the bitter fight over
this nomination both in the Senate and among the public clearly
demonstrates.
It is not merely a case of different groups having different opinions.
It is a case of people bearing extreme ill will toward those who disagree with them. In our intense focus on our differences, we have forgotten the common values that bind us together as Americans.
When some of our best minds are seeking to develop ever more sophisticated algorithms designed to link us to websites that only reinforce and cater to our views, we can only expect our differences to intensify.
“This would have alarmed the drafters of our Constitution, who were
acutely aware that different values and interests could prevent Americans from
becoming and remaining a single people.
Indeed, of the six objectives they invoked in the preamble to the
Constitution, the one that they put first was the formation of ‘a more perfect
Union.’
Their vision of ‘a more perfect Union’ does not exist today, and if anything, we appear to be moving farther away from it.
It is particularly worrisome that the Supreme Court, the institution that most Americans see as the principal guardian of our shared constitutional heritage, is viewed as part of the problem through a political lens.…”
|
P
|
resumption of Innocence Principle
“This debate is complicated further by the fact that the Senate
confirmation process is not a trial. But
certain fundamental legal principles—about due process, the presumption of
innocence, and fairness—do bear on my thinking, and I cannot abandon them.
“In evaluating any given claim of misconduct, we will be ill served in
the long run if we abandon the presumption of innocence and fairness, tempting
though it may be. We must always
remember that it is when passions are most inflamed that fairness is most in
jeopardy.
“The presumption of innocence is relevant to the advice and consent function when an accusation departs from a nominee’s otherwise exemplary record. I worry that departing from this presumption could lead to a lack of public faith in the judiciary and would be hugely damaging to the confirmation process moving forward.
“Some of the allegations levied against Judge Kavanaugh illustrate why
the presumption of innocence is so important.
I am thinking in particular not of the allegations raised by Professor
Ford, but of the allegation that, when he was a teenager, Judge Kavanaugh
drugged multiple girls and used their weakened state to facilitate gang
rape.
This outlandish allegation was put forth without any credible supporting evidence and simply parroted public statements of others. That such an allegation can find its way into the Supreme Court confirmation process is a stark reminder about why the presumption of innocence is so ingrained in our American consciousness.
|
U
|
nwanted Sexual Contact Issue
Let me emphasize that my approach to this question should not be
misconstrued as suggesting that unwanted sexual contact of any nature is not a
serious problem in this country. To the
contrary, if any good at all has come from this ugly confirmation process, it
has been to create an awareness that we have underestimated the pervasiveness
of this terrible problem.
I have been alarmed and disturbed, however, by some who have suggested
that unless Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination is rejected, the Senate is somehow
condoning sexual assault. Nothing could
be further from the truth.…
On average, an estimated 211,000 rapes and sexual assaults go
unreported every year. We must listen to survivors, and every day we must seek
to stop the criminal behavior that has hurt so many. We owe this to ourselves, our children, and
generations to come.
|
B
|
reach of Anonymity (a letter); Broken Process, Breach of Process
“… [T]he politically charged atmosphere surrounding this nomination had
reached a fever pitch even before these allegations were known; and it has been
challenging, even then, to separate fact from fiction.…
To that leaker, who I hope is listening now, let me say that what you did was unconscionable.
You have taken a survivor who was not only entitled to your respect, but who also trusted you to protect her – and you have sacrificed her well-being in a misguided attempt to win whatever political crusade you think you are fighting.
My only hope is that your callous act has turned this process into such a dysfunctional circus that it will cause the Senate – and indeed all Americans – to reconsider how we evaluate Supreme Court nominees.
If that happens, then the appalling lack of compassion you afforded Professor Ford will at least have some unintended positive consequences.”
|
P
|
rocess and Responsibility
“Our Supreme Court confirmation process has been in steady decline for
more than thirty years. One can only
hope that the Kavanaugh nomination is where the process has finally hit rock
bottom.
“Against this backdrop, it is up to each individual Senator to decide
what the Constitution’s ‘advice and consent’ duty means. Informed by Alexander Hamilton’s Federalist
76, I have interpreted this to mean that the President has broad discretion to
consider a nominee’s philosophy, whereas my duty as a Senator is to focus on
the nominee’s qualifications as long as that nominee’s philosophy is within the
mainstream of judicial thought.
“I have always opposed litmus tests for judicial nominees with respect
to their personal views or politics, but I fully expect them to be able to put
aside any and all personal preferences in deciding the cases that come before
them.
I have never considered the President’s identity or party when evaluating Supreme Court nominations. As a result, I voted in favor of Justices Roberts and Alito, who were nominated by President Bush, Justices Sotomayor and Kagan, who were nominated by President Obama, and Justice Gorsuch, who was nominated by President Trump. …
“Despite the turbulent, bitter fight surrounding his nomination, my
fervent hope is that Brett Kavanaugh will work to lessen the divisions in the
Supreme Court so that we have far fewer 5-4 decisions and so that public
confidence in our Judiciary and our highest court is restored.”
Sources
Official Website of Senator Collins
“Senator Collins
Announces She Will Vote to Confirm Judge Kavanaugh” posted Friday, 10/05/2018 -
15:31 (Press Releases section) https://www.collins.senate.gov/newsroom/senator-collins-announces-she-will-vote-confirm-judge-kavanaugh
Biographical Directory of the United States Congress
Senator Susan Margaret Collins Senate Years of Service: 1997-
Party: Republican
Senator Collins of the U.S. state of Maine (born in Caribou, Aroostook
County, Maine) — Member of the U.S. Senate since 1997 (elected 1996, reelected
2002, 2008, 2014, term ending January 3, 2021); chair of the Committee on
Governmental Affairs, member of the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs, Special Committee on Aging—has served in State and Federal
government since the 1970s: the office of U. S. Senator William S. Cohen (1975-1987);
staff director of the Senate Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on the Oversight
of Government Management (1981-1987); commissioner of the Maine Department of
Professional and Financial Regulation (1987-1992); New England regional
director, United States Small Business Administration (1992); deputy state
treasurer of Massachusetts (1993). Senator Collins is a graduate of St. Lawrence University (Canton, New York) http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=C001035
Insight Beyond Today’s News, CLB - © All Rights
Reserved
No comments:
Post a Comment