Honoring and recognizing the distinguished service, career, and achievements of Chief Justice William Hubbs Rehnquist upon his death, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House entered into previously today, I call up the resolution (H. Res. 423) honoring and recognizing the distinguished service, career, and achievements of Chief Justice William Hubbs Rehnquist upon his death, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 423 which honors and recognizes the distinguished service, career, and achievements of Chief Justice William Hubbs Rehnquist upon his death.

Mr. Speaker, the passing of Chief Justice Rehnquist means that a long and distinguished career has come to an end. William Rehnquist was born on October 1, 1924, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin and was raised in nearby Shorewood, Wisconsin, which currently lies in the congressional district I am proud to represent. The future Chief Justice attended Kenyon College briefly before joining the U.S. Army Air Corps during World War II.

Following his career in the Army, Chief Justice Rehnquist attended and graduated from Stanford University, where he received a bachelor's and master's degree in political science and a second master's degree in government from Harvard University.

At Stanford Law School, the future Chief Justice graduated first in the class that famously included his future colleague, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. It was also at Stanford Law School that the Chief Justice met his future wife, Natalie ``Nan'' Cornell, whom he married in 1953.

After graduation, William Rehnquist clerked for Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson for the 1952 and 1953 terms. He then went on to practice as an attorney in his adopted home State of Arizona for several years before returning to Washington, DC, to serve as Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, where he advised the Nixon administration on constitutional law from 1969 until 1971.

On October 22, 1971, President Nixon nominated William Rehnquist to fill the vacancy on the United States Supreme Court created by Justice John Marshall Harlan's retirement. The Senate confirmed him to the post of Associate Justice on December 10, 1971, and he was sworn into office on January 7, 1972, at the age of 47.

Under his leadership, federalism, judicial restraint, and State autonomy once again became staple features of the Court's jurisprudence. Chief Justice Rehnquist deeply respected the proper roles of each branch of government and the separation of powers envisioned by our Founders. He repeatedly acknowledged that the first amendment to the Constitution guaranteed the free exercise of religion.

By the time President Reagan nominated him to become the 16th Chief Justice of the United States on June 20, 1986, to replace Warren Burger, the pieces were in place for the Chief Justice to make a profound impact on American jurisprudence. His commitment to his principles were evidenced in his majority opinion upholding Cleveland, Ohio's program of school vouchers, which allowed public school students in poor areas to use vouchers to attend better, and often religious, schools, against an Establishment Clause challenge. His support for freedom of religion was also evidenced in his concurring opinion of Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, in which he rightly concluded that the phrase ``under God'' in the Pledge of Allegiance was not a violation of the Establishment Clause.

Most recently, Chief Justice Rehnquist joined Justice O'Connor's dissent in Kelo v. City of New London in which they correctly concluded that it is a violation of the fifth amendment's Public Use Clause when a government takes private property and gives it to another private entity to use for private commercial purposes.

Apart from the doctrinal changes the Chief Justice brought to the Court, he also streamlined the manner in which the Court operated. His keen intellect and evenhandedness were appreciated by all of his colleagues. On the 30th anniversary of Rehnquist's swearing in, Justice John Paul Stevens, who often found himself on the opposite side of opinions from the Chief Justice, praised him for the ``efficiency, good humor, and absolute impartiality that you have consistently displayed when presiding at our conferences.'' These traits have led observers of all political persuasions to view Chief Justice Rehnquist as one of the most consequential jurists in our history.

When Chief Justice Rehnquist was diagnosed with thyroid cancer in October of 2004, many of his admirers feared that his tenure on the Court would come to an end. The Chief Justice, however, had other plans and continued to make his presence felt on the Court even as he battled his disease. Unfortunately, last Saturday, Chief Justice Rehnquist lost that battle, and the country has lost a great intellect and a great public servant. His decision to swear in President George W. Bush last January while battling his illness inspired millions of Americans.

From a personal standpoint, let me say that I first met the future Chief Justice back in 1968 going door-to-door while running for a seat in the Wisconsin Assembly, and when I knocked on his parents' door, they introduced me to the Chief Justice-to-be, and he and I have kept contact up for a number of years until he passed away, both before he was selected for the Court and I was elected to the Congress.

As the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, let me say that I deeply appreciated the Chief Justice's invitations to address the twice-yearly meetings of the Judicial Conference of the United States on issues relating to the separation of powers and the interrelationship to how the laws the Congress passes relate to the operation of the third branch of government. I can say that the Chief Justice was extremely responsive when I had complained that the Judicial Discipline statute enacted in 1980 was not being utilized properly and effectively in terms of disciplining judges in the appeals court and in the lower Federal courts that may have strayed from the bounds of propriety and the ethical standards that we hope all of the judges will uphold.

I can say that probably one of my most profound memories of the Chief Justice was at a Judicial Conference meeting on the morning of September 11, 2001, where, because I had the first three bills up on the floor at 10 o'clock, the Chief Justice put me on first. At that time the Twin Towers had both been hit, and the Chief Justice came in, sat down and said, ``Jim, make this snappy. Something bad is going on.''

So my remarks got condensed to a minute and a half and the Chief Justice said, ``There are no questions of the chairman, are there?'' And everybody else in the room got the message, so I was then excused, and when I got here to the Capitol to make the three motions for suspensions of the rules, the Pentagon had already been hit. So the Chief Justice, I think, was advised that we were all in danger, he wanted to get the business done despite the danger, and he was able to do that. I think that this shows his character, and it is a way that touched me in an extremely personal way.

While the country has lost so much, his family, including his children James, Nancy, and Janet, and his six grandchildren have lost a loving family member as well. I know that the whole House will join me in extending our condolences to his family and our thanks for his great service to this country. I hope that all Members will join me in supporting House Resolution 423 honoring, recognizing, and expressing our gratitude for the distinguished service, career, and achievements of Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot), the chairman of the Subcommittee on the Constitution.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert).

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to celebrate the life of Chief Justice Rehnquist. Justice Rehnquist was devoted to the highest Court of the land and, more broadly, to our system of justice; and throughout his long tenure, he served them both admirably. During his 33 years on the Court, 19 of which were as Chief Justice, he chartered a definitive path which reflected his philosophy and left an unquestionable impact on the direction of the Court.

In his early years on the Court, at a time when his approach to constitutional interpretation often was not shared by a majority on the Court, Justice Rehnquist stuck closely to his principles, earning him the moniker ``The Lone Ranger.'' Over time, he was joined by other Justices who shared his ideology, and he was able to craft majorities that moved the Court towards adopting his vision of the law. To his great credit, when faced with a conflict between his own strongly held position and the dictates of stare decisis, as happened with recent efforts to limit the Miranda decision, he frequently sided with precedent.

While it is fair to say that over the years on decisions which have split the Court, I have probably disagreed with Chief Justice Rehnquist's opinions more often than I have agreed with them; however, I have admired many of his efforts to protect the independence of the judiciary and his willingness to criticize his own party.

Chief Justice Rehnquist often stated his discomfort with Congress encroaching on a court's prerogative in an attempt to guard judicial independence. He lashed out at those attempting to impeach judicial activists and threaten judges for rulings they did not like. ``The Constitution protects judicial independence not to benefit judges but to promote the rule of law. Judges are expected to administer the law fairly, without regard to public reaction,'' he once said.

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist also criticized Congress for repeatedly enacting Federal criminal laws that overlap State laws. The States have the primary role in the area of crime and law enforcement, he said in his annual message on the judiciary, and Congress needs to think twice before turning ``every highly publicized societal ill or sensational crime'' into a new Federal law. ``The trend to federalize crimes that traditionally have been handled in State courts not only is taxing the judiciary's resources,'' he said, ``but it also threatens to change entirely the nature of the Federal system. Federal courts were not created to adjudicate local crimes, no matter how sensational or heinous the crimes may be. State courts do, can, and should handle such problems.''

The impact of Congress having relegated more complex and time- consuming cases appropriate for State court adjudication to Federal jurisdiction, such as Congress did with class action reform, warranted Rehnquist's rebuke: ``Congress should commit itself to conserving the Federal courts as a distinctive judicial forum of limited jurisdiction in our system of federalism. Civil and criminal jurisdiction should be assigned to the Federal courts only to further clearly define national interests, leaving to the State courts the responsibility for adjudicating all other matters. This long-range plan for Federal courts is based not simply on the preferences of Federal judges but on the traditional principle of federalism that has guided this country throughout its existence.''

As noted by the New York Times, Chief Justice Rehnquist was also duly critical of hastily enacted limitations on judicial sentencing decisions and the potential damage that compiling information on the sentencing habits of individual judges could do to fair and impartial justice. Chief Justice Rehnquist plainly saw his role as defender in chief of the Nation's independent court system, which he famously called ``one of the crown jewels of our system of government.''

His often practical approach to immeasurably weighty responsibility of having one out of nine votes on the most powerful Court in the country reflected his devotion and respect for the institution of the Supreme Court and its effect on the lives of all Americans. Nowhere did Justice Rehnquist's love for the Court shine through more than in his numerous books on Supreme Court history and lore.

Chief Justice Rehnquist also displayed considerable skill in managing an often divided Court. His colleagues have spoken of his deft ability, good humor, and impartiality as he led the Court through landmark cases. On top of this, he served for nearly 2 decades as the chief judicial officer of the Nation's Federal court system, constantly advocating for the resources needed to improve the courts' mission of delivering evenhanded justice throughout the Nation.

I would commend to my colleagues the op-ed piece in the New York Times yesterday by Laurence Tribe, a frequent litigator in the Supreme Court who argued many, many cases, who speaks of Chief Justice Rehnquist's career there and finds many, many reasons to praise and admire him. He closes his article urging that as the Senate now considers the confirmation

of a new Chief Justice, they look to one of the issues that he felt Chief Justice Rehnquist so ably stood for and that is the ability of new Justices to help the Court earn the respect of all who take part in its proceedings or are affected by its rulings, which means everyone. ``Chief Justice Rehnquist,'' Professor Tribe noted, ``was a master at that mission. For that, and for the steadiness of his leadership, I will always remember him with profound gratitude and admiration.''

We are all saddened by the loss of Chief Justice William Rehnquist. As we mourn his death, regardless of our political differences, we must remember how he selflessly gave to the Court and the Nation. His work is an important legacy that impacts every American's life and will shape the lives of future generations. I join the Nation in applauding his accomplishments, and I express my sympathy for our collective loss.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I join all of my colleagues in expressing our deepest condolences to the family of Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist. I mourn his loss, and I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Sensenbrenner, and the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Conyers, for introducing this resolution.

I had the privilege yesterday of paying my respects to the Chief Justice as he lay in repose at the Great Hall. As I prayed, I thought of the great courage he displayed in the last few months, and his devotion to duty, even in the face of illness.

As a Nation, today we honor his memory and a lifetime of dedicated public service. Chief Justice Rehnquist was a man of great intellect and passion for the Supreme Court and its traditions, who was an outstanding leader and administrator of the judiciary. He was not only a student of history, an author of books on American history, but he also wrote chapters in our Nation's history as Chief Justice.

As a law clerk to a great Justice, Robert Jackson, he formed an early appreciation for the institution that he would serve in a long and distinguished career. As Justice John Paul Stevens noted, Chief Justice Rehnquist set an exemplary example as leader of the Court. His colleagues uniformly spoke of his fair and impartial leadership of their proceedings, and of his efforts to prevent disagreements from becoming personal.

His legacy is his steadfast and proud defense of an independent judiciary. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said on Sunday: ``He regarded an independent judiciary as our country's hallmark and pride, and in his annual reports, he constantly urged Congress to safeguard that independence.''

I hope all of us in Congress will honor his legacy by preserving an independent judiciary. It is our oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States--and that means protecting an independent judiciary free of manipulation and intimidation.

As the New York Times noted this morning, Chief Justice Rehnquist disapproved of recent Congressional attempts to ``intimidate individual judges, strip federal courts of jurisdiction to decide certain constitutional challenges, and otherwise undermine the constitutional separation of powers and checks and balances.'' In his last annual report, the Chief Justice wrote that ``A judge's judicial acts may not serve as a basis for impeachment. Any other rule would destroy judicial independence.''

An independent judiciary has served for more than two centuries as the guardian of our constitutional liberties and as the words on the Supreme Court building so nobly state, has ensured ``equal justice under law.'' We must preserve an independent judiciary and honor his memory by doing so.

It is with sadness and respect that I extend my sympathies to Chief Justice Rehnquist's family and friends. I hope it is a comfort that so many people are praying for them at this sad time. He will long be remembered and missed.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to one of the most influential jurists of the 20th Century, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the 16th Chief Justice of the United States upon his passing on the evening of Saturday, September 3, 2005.

First appointed to the Supreme Court as an Associate Justice by President Richard Nixon in 1972, Rehnquist would go on to serve for 33 years, the final 19 of which as Chief Justice. During his time on the Court, Rehnquist

earned the reputation as a conservative intellectual who would challenge the status quo in the name of judicial restraint and federalism principles. He respected the Court's role as an independent body whose role was not to legislate subjectively on the issues of the day; but rather, to serve as the objective arbiter of the rule of law.

Notwithstanding the politically charged nature of the Court during the latter half of the 20th Century, Rehnquist was very well liked and respected by all his colleagues, even those with whom he frequently disagreed. In fact, Justice John Paul Stevens, the Justice with whom Rehnquist most frequently disagreed, commented on ``the efficiency, good humor and absolute impartiality that [Rehnquist had] consistently displayed when presiding at [Supreme Court] Conferences.'' This ability to work closely with all of his colleagues was a testament to Chief Justice Rehnquist's affability, professionalism and evenhandedness.

Not only will Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist be missed as a jurist, he will also be missed as a loving family man. Though his wife preceded him in death, he is survived by three wonderful children to whom he no doubt passed his strong work ethic, patriotism, and deep and abiding respect for our American institutions.

In closing Mr. Speaker, please let me extend my condolences to Chief Justice Rehnquist's family and friends on their loss. He was a great American and will be missed by us all.

Mr. Speaker, as chairman of the Constitution Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee, I want to take this opportunity to honor the late Supreme Court Justice William Hubbs Rehnquist. Our country was privileged to have Justice Rehnquist serve as a member of our Supreme Court for 33 years, the last 18 years, as we know, as Chief Justice. Once considered the maverick lone star justice for his solo dissents, he eventually led a majority which perhaps most importantly favored a shift in power from Washington back to the States where it belongs.

Among other challenges he met during his tenure, Chief Justice Rehnquist presided over the impeachment trial of a President, President Clinton. Having served as one of the House managers myself, I can say that he did so with an evenhanded approach, showing fairness and dignity to both sides. Also, notably, he was the last member of the Court who voted on the landmark case of Roe v. Wade, dissenting from that ruling that legalized abortion. I will always appreciate his respect for the value of human life and his commitment to this body and local government's making decisions to protect life, such as the ban on partial-birth abortion.

Through his opinions, the Chief Justice showed that an active Court could uphold conservative policy through judicial restraint. As we begin the process of finding a replacement for Justice Rehnquist, I hope that we will remember the important impact of his presence on the Court and his commitment to upholding the text and history of the Constitution.

His strength and dedication to our country could be seen most recently when he fulfilled his duties of swearing in our 43rd President for the second time while battling terminal thyroid cancer. Let us remember this, I believe, historic Chief Justice for his love of the law and his love for his country. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family on this day.