Politics 18 edited

“U.S. SUPREME COURT” published by the Congressional Record in the Senate section on Oct. 4

Volume 167, No. 174 covering the 1st Session of the 117th Congress (2021 - 2022) was published by the Congressional Record.

The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.

“U.S. SUPREME COURT” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Justice was published in the in the Senate section section on pages S6879-S6880 on Oct. 4.

The Department is one of the oldest in the US, focused primarily on law enforcement and the federal prison system. Downsizing the Federal Government, a project aimed at lowering taxes and boosting federal efficiency, detailed wasteful expenses such as $16 muffins at conferences and board meetings.

The publication is reproduced in full below:

U.S. SUPREME COURT

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, today is the first Monday in October. It is the date that marks the start of a new term for the U.S. Supreme Court.

All indications are this term will be of major consequence. The Court has chosen to take up a number of cases that have the potential to dramatically change America as we know it. For example, the Court has decided to hear cases in which it is being asked to overturn Roe v. Wade, as well as strike down State laws regarding the carrying of weapons in public places. These are among the momentous issues on the Court's first term.

Madam President, I would yield the floor to the leader.

Mr. SCHUMER. Take your time. I am going to get settled.

Mr. DURBIN. He has asked me to carry on for a little bit here.

Back to my statement.

These are among the momentous issues on the Court's merits docket this term.

But the Court has been also very active on another docket, the

``shadow docket.'' Most are not familiar with that term and don't know what it means. We learned in the Senate Judiciary Committee. It refers to decisions issued by the Supreme Court outside of the regular routine merits docket. These decisions are often rendered on a very short timetable without full briefing, public deliberation, detailed explanation, or signed opinions.

Historically, shadow docket orders were mostly noncontroversial. They typically involved routine or procedural questions, such as establishing deadlines for parties to file briefs. But that has changed in recent years. Not only have the orders from the Supreme Court shadow docket become more substantive and controversial, they have also been taking an increasingly clear, ideological bent.

Consider the weeks leading up to the start of this new October term. The Court's conservative majority used the shadow docket to block the Biden administration's COVID eviction moratorium and to reinstate the Trump administration's cruel ``Remain in Mexico'' policy that, unfortunately, blocked families and children fleeing persecution.

The Court's majority also used the shadow docket last month to allow Texas law S.B. 8 to take effect, a law that effectively bans abortion after 6 weeks, directly violating the constitutional protections the Court recognized half a century in Roe v. Wade.

These and other shadow docket orders from the Court's conservative Justices are having profound consequences for millions of Americans.

Last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee, which I chair and the Presiding Officer has joined as a member, held a hearing on the Court's use of the shadow docket.

We heard from a number of experts about the increased use of the docket and the increasing ideological nature of its use. They pointed out, for example, that President Trump's Justice Department, in 4 years, requested the Court take emergency action on their shadow docket a recordbreaking 36 times in 4 years. The Court granted 28 of those requests.

What about previous Presidents? In contrast, the Justice Department only requested emergency relief eight times total--eight times--in 16 years of George W. Bush and Barack Obama, and on only four occasions was the shadow docket approved--the request was approved.

At this point, I am going to yield the floor and ask unanimous consent that when I return to the floor, I be able to resume these remarks. But I want to yield to the majority leader.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

____________________

SOURCE: Congressional Record Vol. 167, No. 174

More News