Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Madam President, late last month, President Biden announced the nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.

As I said the day her nomination was announced, it is hard to think of a better jurist to replace highly regarded Justice Stephen Breyer. Over the past 10 days, we have all had a chance to learn about her record, and last week I met with her in my office. I would like to share what impressed me the most about her.

First is her breadth of experience. A graduate of Harvard Law School, she has worked in private legal practice. She served as a Federal public defender and served on the U.S. Sentencing Commission. She has clerked at every level of the Federal judiciary: for Judge Patti Saris on the District of Massachusetts, Judge Bruce Selya on the First Circuit, and Justice Breyer on the Supreme Court. That is an amazing resume.

She went on to serve as a Federal district court judge. Currently, she sits on the DC Circuit, often regarded as the second highest court in the land. And once confirmed, she will be only the second current Supreme Court Justice with experience as a trial court judge.

That means Judge Jackson will bring to the Court insights into the issues confronting Federal district courts every single day. And these same questions often make it to the Supreme Court for final review.

Second, I was impressed with her character and temperament. They are unimpeachable. During our conversation last week, we spoke about her family, her daughters, her upbringing, and the highlights of her career. I particularly enjoyed one story, which she has told before, about a letter that her daughter wrote to President Obama a few years ago. In it, she asked the President to appoint her mother to the Supreme Court. Well, it may have taken a bit longer than Judge Jackson's daughter anticipated, I can only imagine how proud she is today.

My conversation with Judge Jackson also made clear that she has the exact temperament we need on the Court. She is personable, humble, approachable. That last attribute is particularly important for a Supreme Court Justice.

The Supreme Court should not be shrouded in secrecy and mystery. Its process and its decisions should be clear and easily understood for the people in the Court as well as for the American public. With Judge Jackson on the Court, we can trust that will be true.

Third, Judge Jackson is clearly--clearly--within the judicial mainstream. She has a record of evenhandedness and impartiality, guided by the Constitution, the law, and the facts of the case. She is not a partisan or an ideologue. She is independent in her thinking, and she will maintain the Court's proper role.

Don't take my word for it. Judges and lawyers from across the political spectrum have said the same thing. Consider the support Judge Jackson enjoys from David Levi, who was appointed by President George H. W. Bush to serve on the Eastern District of California.

He wrote to the committee, and he said a Supreme Court nominee ``must be neutral, nonpartisan, exercise self-restraint, model civility, and approach each case with an open mind and with a determination to reach as just, wise, and correct a result as possible.''

And he concluded that ``[b]ased on what I know of Judge Jackson . . . I believe she has been that kind of a judge and will be that kind of a Justice.''

I could not agree more. Often, I have seen my colleagues on the other side of the aisle in their initial reaction to the judge--Judge Jackson--have said, well, I want to know more about her judicial philosophy. Certainly, they can draw their own conclusions, but I hope that they will read what David Levi had to say as well as other conservative jurists.

Sadly, Judge Jackson has already been subject to a number of baseless attacks so let's set the record straight. First, she has drawn criticism for refusing to comment when asked whether the Supreme Court should remain at its current size. Well, Judge Jackson's exactly right not to offer an opinion. As a nominee to the Supreme Court and a sitting judge on the DC Circuit, it would be totally inappropriate for her to opine on a public policy decision that only we can make in Congress.

Indeed, Judge Jackson's handling of this question mirrors the approach taken by Justice Amy Coney Barrett just a few months back when she was nominated to the Court.

At her hearing, when then-Judge Barrett was asked about the size of the Court, she then responded, it is ``a question left open to Congress'' and that if there were a ``specific constitutional question'' about the Court's size, she ``could not opine on it.''

Judge Jackson also has faced offensive questions from figures on the far right about her qualifications. This past Wednesday, FOX News talking head Tucker Carlson demanded that President Biden produce Judge Jackson's score on the LSAT exam.

Mr. Carlson said he wanted to see Judge Jackson's LSAT score to gauge if she was, in fact, ``a once in a generation legal mind.''

Isn't it interesting that Mr. Tucker Carlson never once asked for LSAT scores of President Trump's nominees to the Court: Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, or Amy Coney Barrett. He never once questioned their qualifications to sit on the Court or their academic credentials.

Let's be clear: Judge Jackson graduated magna cum laude from Harvard University and cum laude from Harvard Law School. Not bad. As an undergrad, she received the Harvard College Scholarship for Academic Achievement. Let me repeat that--academic achievement. And she served as supervising editor on the Harvard Law Review.

Mr. Carlson, of course, is notorious for his outrageous comments. I don't expect he is going to offer any apology to Judge Jackson, but I would urge all my Republican colleagues to disavow his remarks and disassociate themselves from the innuendo.

We also continue to hear false allegations that Judge Jackson was handpicked by so-called liberal dark money groups. Once again, that claim is completely divorced from reality. The truth is this: President Biden undertook a rigorous process to select Justice Breyer's successor, seeking the advice of a bipartisan group of Senators. And after weeks of consideration, he, and he alone, chose Judge Jackson.

President Biden's selection process was deliberative, collaborative, and it took seriously the Senate's advice and consent role. It did not involve dark money groups. I can't help but note the irony of this line of attack coming from the other side of the aisle.

After all, it was President Donald Trump who bragged--bragged--that groups like the Federalist Society and Heritage Foundation actually drove his selection process for the Supreme Court.

As a candidate, Trump said:

We're going to have great judges, conservative, all picked

by the Federalist Society.

Trump, never at a loss for words, made it very clear where he went to find his nominee.

And Don McGahn, the Trump administration's first White House Counsel, said about the Federalist Society in judicial selection:

I've been a member of the Federalist Society since law

school. Still am. So, frankly, it seems like it has been

insourced.

``Insourced'' was his word.

And it is worth adding that Republicans, including Senator McConnell, have blocked every single effort to address the presence of hard money--dark money in our political system. We should have full disclosure. I support that. We are ready to vote on the floor. The leader on the Republican side resists.

Judge Jackson also has faced baseless claims that she is a partisan Democrat just nominated to rubberstamp the Biden agenda. These claims have no basis in fact. She is evenhanded and impartial, confirmed by the Senate on a bipartisan basis three different times, including last year.

If Judge Jackson were such a partisan, why would so many prominent conservatives be supporting her? The short answer is they wouldn't.

But she has that support and plenty of it, including from former Republican Speaker of the House Paul Ryan; retired DC Circuit Judge Thomas Griffith, a George W. Bush retiree; retired Fourth Circuit Judge Michael Luttig, a George H. W. Bush appointee; Bill Burck, a prominent Republican attorney who worked in the George W. Bush administration; Charles Fried, who served as Solicitor General during the Reagan administration, and many more.

These conservative jurists and attorneys have endorsed her precisely because she is independent and fairminded. She will not rubberstamp any President's agenda. These conservative leaders know that on the Court, Judge Jackson will be faithful to the Constitution and the rule of law.

Finally, we hear the false allegation that Judge Jackson will be ``soft on crime.'' Look at her life, look at her record and at the support she now has from the law enforcement community.

As Judge Jackson noted in accepting the President's nomination, she has two uncles and a brother who serve as police officers. One of her uncles was chief of police in Miami.

On the bench, she has approached each criminal case in a manner that we

would ask of every judge. Look at the law; look at the facts.

It is not surprising that she has garnered the support of multiple law enforcement groups. This nominee, who is attributed as being soft on crime, has the endorsement of the Fraternal Order of Police. They wrote the following about her:

We are reassured that, should she be confirmed, she would

approach her future cases with an open mind and treat issues

related to law enforcement fairly and justly.

Wouldn't we all be proud to have that endorsement for our pursuits?

Superintendent David Brown of the Chicago Police Department wrote:

I have no doubt that if confirmed, Judge Ketanji Brown

Jackson's appointment will make history by adding a powerful,

moderate, and informed voice to the highest court in the

land.

As Senators and the American people continue to learn more about Judge Jackson and her amazing record, I hope and expect they will reach the same conclusion that leaders have reached all across America's political spectrum. Judge Jackson will be a strong, fair, principled, evenhanded, and impartial Supreme Court Justice.

In closing, let me say that we have scheduled the hearings of the Judiciary Committee to begin on March 21. That is 24 days after President Biden announced his nominee.

The previous Justice nominated for the Supreme Court, Amy Coney Barrett, under President Trump, was brought to the committee for a hearing in 16 days. So we are certainly within the window and beyond it in producing Judge Jackson on the 24th day.

We are also providing materials that have been requested, including documents from the U.S. Sentencing Commission, of which Judge Jackson was a member.

She will produce 12,000 pages of documents that are going to chronicle what happened in the Commission while she was serving. They include minutes and the Board's discussions of the important issues that are before us.

Lucky for all of us, it is a very transparent Agency, and they have lived up to that transparency with this disclosure.

In the meantime, the judge is going to do her best to meet with as many Senators as possible. She has prioritized those members of the Senate Judiciary Committee on the right and on the left, Democrats and Republicans, as well as other leaders in the U.S. Senate.

She is available, and I am certain that if my colleagues are fair in their appraisal, they will come to the same conclusion that I have come to. She is an excellent choice to be Justice Breyer's successor on the Supreme Court.

I yield the floor.

I announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) is necessarily absent.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Madam President, 260 years ago, a young nobleman from Poland and a military officer helped lead a rebellion against what he and many others saw as a Russian puppet King in what was known as the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. He was driven into exile in France, where Lafayette and Benjamin Franklin urged him to go to America to join in the fight, the Revolutionary War.

That young Polish nobleman's name was Casimir Pulaski. When he arrived in America, he wrote to General George Washington and said to him:

I came here, where freedom is being defended, to serve it,

and to live or die by it.

Pulaski was at Washington's side and is credited with saving George Washington's life at the Battle of Brandywine. He is remembered fondly as the Father of the American Calvary.

Pulaski died at age 34 in the fight for freedom and independence in America.

Today is Casimir Pulaski Day, which we know full well in Illinois, where it is a State holiday. Today, however, we look at the world and realize that freedom is being defended in Ukraine. And today, we seek Casimir Pulaski's spirit and fierce commitment to freedom and human dignity in a historic young Ukrainian President and in Ukrainian men and women who are fighting to save their Nation from another would-be Russian czar.

I have been in Congress for a few years. Over the weekend, I had an experience unique to my service in Congress.

Early on Saturday morning, hundreds of Members of Congress joined a video call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. I have never seen anything like it.

With the Russian military laying siege to his country and a Russian bull's-eye on his back, President Zelenskyy spoke to us with remarkable dignity and courage. He didn't mince words about what is happening in Ukraine--the brutal Russian assaults literally trying to destroy his nation. He said we all share the same basic values and dreams: to live our lives in peace, watch our kids grow up, and to kiss them. He said the Ukrainian people are fighting for these basic freedoms, and they are prepared to be friends and share culture with their Russian neighbors, if they can.

But over the last 12 days, his country, Ukraine, has faced full- fledged war with barbaric attacks on kindergartens, nuclear powerplants, apartment buildings, infrastructure, and innocent civilians.

Last Thursday, Russia and Ukraine agreed to create humanitarian corridors in Ukraine, to allow civilians in areas under the heaviest Russian attacks to evacuate safely. Twice over the weekend, Ukraine was forced to close those corridors because Russia was attacking them mercilessly. This is Vladimir Putin's war, deliberately targeting women and children who have left everything and are trying just to reach safety.

This photo shows the result of one horrific attack by Russian soldiers on the people of Ukraine. Many people have seen it. It was on the front page of the New York Times this morning. It took place in the city of Irpin on Sunday. A Russian mortar struck an evacuation point where these civilians were waiting to board a bus to go to safety.

Irpin's mayor said the attack killed at least eight people, including a family. Sadly, you can see the children lying on the street. These are among the 364 Ukrainians killed during the last 12 days of Putin's barbaric war.

Mr. Putin, these deaths, like the death of that little girl I showed on the floor last week, are your doing. Your reputation as a war criminal and a bloody tyrant is now sealed in history.

More than 1.7 million Ukrainians have fled as refugees to neighboring countries, such as Poland and Moldova. The open arms of the Polish people and Moldovan people to their Ukrainian brothers and sisters is remarkable and a reminder to the rest of us that we do share common human bonds.

Some of you may have seen the moving stories last night on ``60 Minutes'' of the families with their children, desperately trying to reach Poland, other countries nearby so that they can escape the bonds of Vladimir Putin.

This strategy is like nothing we have seen in Europe since World War II. But Putin's war on Ukraine is not simply an attack on one young democracy; it is an attack on democracy itself.

I am proud to represent the city of Chicago, prouder still that it is the home of so many immigrants who have made a difference in that city and in America, Polish immigrants and descendants of Polish immigrants. Per capita, there is a larger number in Chicago than anyplace outside of Warsaw.

We are also home to many immigrants who trace their heritage to the Baltic States. I happen to be one who does as well.

We have such a long history of Ukrainian immigrants coming to our city that there is a neighborhood in Chicago called Ukrainian Village.

Last Friday, I went over to the Ukrainian National Museum. It is near their Orthodox church. I take great pride in it. One woman there, who is a Ukrainian artist, had displayed many of the creations she had made on the wall. She said to me: They are for sale, Senator.

And I said: Well, I am glad to know that.

And she said: All the proceeds are going to the Ukrainian Army.

Naturally, I left with one under my arm.

Putin's war on Ukraine and the wave of refugees pouring into Poland and other neighboring nations hits home in Chicago. People from all backgrounds are donating money and goods--whatever they can--to help.

Meest-Karpaty is a Chicago-area shipping company with experience in Eastern Europe. For 7 days now, the company's shipping facility on the Northwest Side of Chicago has been an operations center for an incredible volunteer effort to rush critical supplies to Ukraine. People and companies are dropping off supplies of first aid equipment, non-perishable food, diapers, and basic essentials: warm clothes, sleeping bags, tents, flashlights.

Scores of volunteers assemble the donations into first aid kits and baby kits--whatever is needed. They pack the donations in the boxes that will be flown and delivered to the Polish border, where more volunteers deliver them to Ukrainians who need them. People are doing everything they can to support Ukraine's fight for freedom and democracy.

Andriy Herha is a banking executive from Oak Brook, IL, who was born in Ukraine's capital city of Kyiv. His dad, in-laws, cousins, friends-- they are still there in Ukraine. In one day last week, he raised $40,000, personally, to buy bulletproof vests, helmets, first aid kits, and other supplies. When he learned that it would take weeks for the supplies to reach those who needed them, he decided to pack them into suitcases and board a flight to Poland and deliver them himself. As Andriy Herha told a reporter, ``we are trying to do anything possible to help them.''

We in this Senate must also do what we can to help Ukraine in its fight for freedom and democracy. Last week, I led more than 40 Senators--both parties, Democrats and Republicans--in asking President Biden to extend temporary protected status to the 75,000 Ukrainians who are currently in the United States, including on student and work visas. On Thursday, as I knew he would, the President responded favorably. He is granting that protection.

Congress should also act without delay to approve $10 billion this week in emergency aid to assist Ukraine and bolster our NATO allies, as well as support neighboring nations like Poland and Moldova that are providing safe havens to the refugees.

And after listening to President Zelenskyy on Saturday, I thought to myself: How can we possibly be importing Russian oil and gas, giving the profits of those transactions to Vladimir Putin to pay for his war machine?

I believe now--and I have cosponsored the legislation that reaches this goal--that the United States should ban the purchase of Russian oil to further tighten economic pressure on Putin. I joined in the legislation introduced by Senators Murkowski and Manchin to do that.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken was talking with our NATO allies. Many of them also seem willing to consider a ban on Russian oil.

Vladimir Putin is threatening not only the security of Ukraine; he is threatening the security of the world. We must not even indirectly fund his war machine. While Putin wages war on democracy, the world, including the United States, will likely pay more to fill our tanks at the gas stations and heat our homes. We have to be ready for that reality, but that is the price today of defending freedom and democracy. The Ukrainians are paying with their lives. We may end up paying some more at the pump.

Amid all this utterly outrageous and unnecessary suffering and destruction, all to assuage Vladimir Putin's warped sense of grievance and his twisted nostalgia for the dark days of the Russian Empire, President Zelenskyy ended his talk with us on Saturday morning on a memorable note. He said we are all one big, undefeatable army for freedom and that we should all live in peace and openness and, despite the horrors inflicted on his people, we must hold on to our humanity.

He was a standup comedian at one point. He did a movie, which was a spoof on someone as unlikely as himself being elected President. Lo and behold, in the next free election, he was elected President of the country.

Many people questioned whether he was up to the job. Boy, his detractors are very quiet now. This man has risked his life for his country, as so many are in Ukraine. It is time for us to stand behind Ukraine solidly--solidly for their leadership.

I hope this crisis ends soon. Until then, the United States and the rest of the civilized world must stand with Ukraine for freedom and democracy.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, on Tuesday evening, President Biden delivered his first State of the Union Message to Congress and to the American people. His remarks were timely, strong, and statesmanlike.

He touched on many topics. I think his message really boiled down to two profound questions: How do we protect democracy in other nations, particularly in Ukraine, which is now entering the second week of a horrific and unprovoked invasion by Russian forces; and then he asked, how can we protect and preserve democracy here in America?

Dictators like Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping want the world to believe that democracy is nothing more than chaos and gridlock. The people of Ukraine are showing the world just how wrong these despots are.

I speak to you today from the comfort and safety of the Senate Chamber in the United States of America, in Washington, DC, on a beautiful springlike day. But I have to reflect for a moment on what life must be like at this very moment in Kyiv, in Ukraine, and what it must be like in Lviv; two cities in Ukraine that I visited where bombs are raining down on innocent people--children, women, and men who are losing their lives because Vladimir Putin believes that he can restore the Soviet Union to its borders.

We have all seen the video of the Ukrainian grandmother, armed with nothing more than sunflower seeds and courage, confronting Russian soldiers.

We have seen ordinary Ukrainian men and women and teenagers taking up arms, making Molotov cocktails, building barricades, taking down highway and road signs to confuse the invading Russians--even laying down their lives to stop Russian tanks and convoys.

In the back of my mind, I am sure I am thinking what many Americans are thinking: Could I do the same thing? Could I bring together the courage at this moment to stand up and fight if my home is at stake, if my family is at stake, if my country is at stake?

The Ukrainians are answering that message every minute of every day. Their courage and unity in the face of this Russian barbarity is inspiring the world.

For months, President Biden, Secretary of State Tony Blinken, and others in the Biden administration have worked behind the scenes to revitalize the NATO alliance. That critical alliance emerged after the last great land war in Europe in 1945 from the allies who came out of it and said: Never again. We will stand together to stop any invader against the NATO coalition, the NATO alliance.

The Biden administration has worked behind the scenes to remind this alliance that there comes a moment when you have to bring to this alliance the courage and direction to stand for the kind of democracy which we are all committed to.

Two years ago, we had a President who took Putin's word over the assessment of America's own intelligence Agencies and said he threatened to pull the United States participation out of NATO. Today, we have a President who actually shared U.S. intelligence with our allies to show Putin for the liar that he was from the very start.

NATO is more unified today--thank you, Vladimir Putin, for that--than it has ever been since the Cold War or the end of World War II. In fact, nations that are not formally part of NATO--Sweden and Finland, for example--have stepped up, in concert with the NATO alliance, to stand our ground and protest what is happening in Ukraine and to protect Europe--even Switzerland. Switzerland, which is famously neutral in all major conflicts, has come out of its neutrality and made it clear that they, too, stand against the Putin invasion.

In his State of the Union Address, President Biden urged Congress to approve billions of dollars in emergency military and humanitarian assistance for Ukraine. Sign me up. I will vote for that in a second, and I hope it comes soon. We need to agree on an aid package without delay and get it to the President as quickly as possible, not just for the humanitarian purpose but for the purpose of showing American unity with the resistance in Ukraine.

Ukrainian ordinary citizens are dying today because of Vladimir Putin and the bombs and missiles he is launching. As in every war, innocent Ukrainians will soon be facing greater suffering, greater hunger--even starvation. In the year 2022, is it imaginable that this is happening in Europe? We must rally the world to support those still in the Ukraine, assist our allies in neighboring nations who are housing and feeding neighboring Ukrainians who have fled their homeland. They estimate 800,000 to a million Ukrainians have left the country to find safety nearby.

Once again, let me thank the people of Poland. They have been opening their doors to the people of Ukraine for many years, and now, they are being called on in an extraordinary way to harbor these refugees and to take care of them at this moment of need. They are fleeing Putin's war, and their numbers are growing dramatically. Some have suggested that a humanitarian airlift is a possibility. I don't want to rule that out. Let's explore that and see whether that is the best way to provide relief to those still in Ukraine facing Putin's attack.

President Biden also promised to form a high-level task force to enforce U.S. sanctions against Putin, sanctions against Russia's political elites, and sanctions against the corrupt oligarchs. That always brings a cheer here in America because people think that those who have been engaged in a kleptocracy in the name of personal greed should be held accountable. The thought that they are shopping in New York City or buying luxury condos and apartments in London or are harboring their yachts in any country is disgusting.

They need to pay a price. We shouldn't just freeze their assets; we ought to seize their assets and hold them to rebuild Ukraine amid the devastation that the Russians are causing. Putin wants to be a czar. He and his cronies have become a pariah.

We will support Ukraine, but we also have work to do to strengthen our own democracy. We also have to remember that the bordering nations, the Baltic States of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia, are especially vulnerable to Russian aggression. They, as members of the NATO alliance, know that they have friends at their back, but we have got to reinforce that to the people of those small countries who worry about their very survival.

Let's take a look at home. As the President said, we have finally moved

to a safer direction with the pandemic. What a relief it was to go to the State of the Union Address and not wear a mask. Following doctors' orders, I might add, we listened to the medical experts who told us it is safe now not to be wearing a mask unless you are in a particular category of people. So most of us enjoyed one of the first public gatherings of a political nature where we were without masks and relieved to be so. We need to get back to our normal routines. We need to get our kids back in school--all of them--as quickly as possible.

We added 6 million new jobs last year, an alltime record. Things are good and positive, but inflation still is haunting this Nation. Wages are up; inflation is up. But it is not just our Nation. Inflation is a global problem. COVID-19 constricted the economy of the world. We are now emerging from it with new jobs, new businesses, new appetites, and new consumption. It is all good. But the cost of it is inflation.

I trust that we can bring this under control soon. Inflation is real. It is eating away at families' wages and savings and their faith in the future. When people work hard and can't get ahead, that is not just an economic problem; that can be a threat to our democratic spirit because it can open the door for anti-democratic demagogues.

In his State of the Union Address, President Biden laid out a plan to help American families afford big-ticket items that are essential; restore the enhanced child tax credit; help parents raise their kids and themselves out of poverty; help families with quality affordable daycare, childcare; expand family and medical leave so workers don't have to choose between caring for an ailing member of their family or a terminally ill parent and keeping their jobs; make healthcare more affordable and accessible; expand veterans' health benefits to cover more cancers and other service-related health conditions; and make prescription drugs more affordable by letting Medicare negotiate the price for medication.

Just one simple thing seems to be so popular across this country, cap the monthly cost of insulin at $35--$35. There are some 34 million people who are suffering from diabetes in this country, and of course their families are pulling for them every day. Think of all of the lives that could be improved if insulin were affordable. If a fourth or half of those who are diabetic have to now ration their insulin and risk their health, that is just wrong in a great nation. We should have insulin at affordable prices, and $35 a month is that. It is an outrage that the price of insulin has been raised countless times to more than $300 a vial.

As we support the Ukrainian people and their immense courage, I hope we will also find the courage to protect America's future.

Tribute to Tom Balanoff

Mr. President, when it comes to the American labor movement, I selfishly say all roads lead to Chicago. At the turn of the 20th century, workers from all walks of life and from every corner of the globe joined together in support of a simple but profound belief: An injury to one is an injury to all.

Few leaders have embodied that philosophy of solidarity and mutuality more than Tom Balanoff, president of the Service Employees International Union--SEIU--Local 1 in Chicago and the union's State council. If you are a worker in Illinois or a worker anywhere in America, there is a good chance you know Tom. He has devoted his life not only to building a strong labor movement but a more inclusive one.

Now, he is retiring from his post as president of Local 1. Though his leadership will be missed, he leaves behind a formidable legacy.

He helped build a global labor movement, led by essential workers. I am talking about janitors, security officers, airport staff, and nursing home and home healthcare workers who are reclaiming their power in the workplace.

As president of Local 1, Tom Balanoff transformed the chapter into one of the most influential forces in the American labor movement, and every step of the way, he held true to the chapter's progressive roots. Formed in Chicago in 1921, Local 1 was the first racially integrated union in America, bringing together immigrant janitors from across the globe who were fighting for better working conditions.

From that moment on, SEIU has been synonymous with merging the fight for workers' rights with the fight for social equality, and Tom has carried that legacy to new heights. He has been a steadfast champion of racial equality, gender equality, and protecting the rights of immigrant workers, and he has assembled the most diverse leadership team in SEIU's history.

Importantly, Tom's commitment to leading a socially conscious labor movement is steeped in a proud family tradition. It began when Tom's grandfather, James Balanoff, immigrated to America from Bulgaria and found work in a live chicken shop on Commercial Avenue in Chicago. Since then, each generation of the ``Battling Balanoffs'' has been grounded in a commitment to defending the rights of working people in and outside of the workplace.

The Balanoff family notes with pride that both Tom's father and grandfather attended the 1937 Memorial Day Massacre, where police opened fire on unarmed protesters at the gate of the Republic Steel Company in South Chicago, killing 10 men and injuring scores of others. If the police had hoped to fracture union solidarity, the massacre had the exact opposite effect on the Balanoff family and many others.

The Balanoff family has stood by workers. Tom's father, James Jr., organized steelworkers at a time when manufacturing was the dominant industry in America, and he eventually rose to be president of the largest steelworkers union in America, Local 1010, in East Chicago, IN. Tom has been helping lead the charge for justice for all since he was in middle school--middle school--when he and his siblings were the only White kids in class to protest racial segregation in American schools.

By the time Tom was ready to follow in his family's tradition of union activism, America's economy was going through a dramatic shift. Factories were shuttering and good-paying union jobs disappearing, shipped overseas. As more and more Americans left the factories and found new opportunities in airports, hospitals, nursing homes, offices, and coffee shops, Tom discovered his life's mission: defending the rights of the service workers who make our economy tick. To complement the commitment to economic and labor justice that runs in the Balanoff family's veins, Tom earned a master's degree in labor and industrial relations from the University of Illinois.

For decades, whenever and wherever his skills were needed to protect the rights of workers, you could count on Tom Balanoff to be there. He worked for the International Association of Firefighters here in Washington, for the Allied Industrial Workers in Chicago, and the Cement, Lime and Gypsum Workers in Kansas City before then-SEIU president, John Sweeney, spotted Tom's exception abilities and brought him to work for SEIU in Washington, DC.

Tom would go on to serve as trustee of John Sweeney's old SEIU local, Local 32BJ, in New York City. After a successful tenure there, he returned to Chicago, first as SEIU Local 46 trustee and eventually as president of both SEIU Local 1 and president of the Illinois State Council.

Tom always has seized opportunities to uplift disempowered workers. In 2005, he traveled down to Houston to help unionize janitors who were being paid as little as $20 a day. In the heart of one of the most anti-union States in the country, Tom secured a contract for more than 5,000 janitors that doubled their pay.

Never content to settle, Tom kept the victories coming. Just a few months later, he helped thousands of janitors in Cincinnati, Columbus, and Indianapolis win a similar contract. It was a testament to his lifelong belief that, when working people of all identities come together, they win.

In the world of politics, my friend Tom has been a champion of the downtrodden. Several years ago, he helped launch the progressive caucus in the Chicago City Council, despite facing significant political headwinds. Today, more than a third of the city council members belong to that caucus.

Perhaps the most consequential decision Tom ever made as a political changemaker was in the year 2003, when he became an early endorser of a

community organizer running for the U.S. Senate by the name of Barack Obama. That endorsement helped pave the way for former President Obama's stratospheric rise in the world of politics.

And a few years later, Tom became the first labor leader in America to endorse Barack Obama's campaign for President. At the time, Tom and I were part of the same lonely club. I was the first U.S. Senator to endorse President Obama's candidacy in 2007, and for more than a year, I was the only Senator to do so. But Tom and I knew that Barack Obama was the leader this country needed.

We had seen firsthand the amazing work he had done in Chicago, helping displaced workers rebuild their lives and partnering with churches to launch job training. We knew that President Obama had what it took to unite our country. And without Tom's support, his candidacy may never have gotten off the ground.

Tom has said one of the leaders who inspired him most during his career was Nelson Mandela. A few years after the end of apartheid, Nelson Mandela wrote: ``To be free is not merely to cast off one's chains, but to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of others.''

Tom has dedicated his life to enhancing the freedom of others. He has stood for immigrant workers so that they could find a voice in the workplace. He has stood in solidarity with Black workers protesting against racial injustice. And he has worked to protect our communities and our children by demanding climate justice as well.

In one of his final acts as president of Local 1, Tom helped make history again. He handed the reins of leadership of that storied local to the first Black president of the SEIU's State council. Greg Kelley is a proven champion of working people in Illinois and across the country. And I might add that when I sat down for breakfast to congratulate Greg on this new opportunity, he reminded me that he had once been an intern in my Senate office--something I am very proud of.

Tom Balanoff is leaving his post at a promising moment for the working people of America. Since the beginning of the pandemic, service workers have come together to demand safer working conditions, higher wages, and better benefits.

For instance, in December, workers in Starbucks in Buffalo, NY, voted to unionize. It will be the company's first-ever union. And those workers will soon be represented by Starbucks Workers United, an affiliate of SEIU. This moment is a culmination of Tom's decades of service to the labor movement.

I want to thank Tom Balanoff for everything he has achieved for working families in Chicago, throughout America, and literally around the world. He has cultivated progressive political power and helped build a fairer economy that rewards hard work, not just wealth.

Loretta and I wish him a long, joyous retirement with his wife Hetty and their two kids.

Tom, I am looking forward to seeing you some day soon in Highland Park--watermelon juice on me.

I yield the floor.

I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Feinstein), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kelly), and the Senator from California (Mr. Padilla) are necessarily absent.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

I announce that the Senator from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin), the Senator from California (Mrs. Feinstein), the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. Klobuchar), the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Lujan), the Senator from California (Mr. Padilla), and the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. Smith) are necessarily absent.

Mr. President, 2 weeks ago, I came to the floor to request unanimous consent for the Senate to take up and confirm six U.S. attorneys and two U.S. marshal nominations.

These nominees are all highly qualified. They have critical law enforcement experience, and they want to serve this country at new levels. They were voted out of the Judiciary Committee, which I chair, by a voice vote. They have the support of their home State Senators. They have the support of other local law enforcement. They deserve to be confirmed. We need them--right now--without further delay.

And the obvious question is, Why are they being held up? Why are these dedicated men and women not yet in office, ready to tackle violent crime--which we know is a problem across America? Why aren't they in office to prosecute fraud and terrorism? Why aren't they there to protect families and children across America? One reason--the junior Senator from Arkansas.

You see, when I made my unanimous consent request--a request joined by the majority leader and Senators from all the affected States--one Senator objected. Only one Senator refused to allow these individuals' confirmation so that they could continue to serve this Nation and the cause of law enforcement. And that same Senator, the junior Senator from Arkansas, continues to engage in this mindless obstruction, jeopardizing the safety of communities outside of Arkansas for reasons which are still hard to understand.

Why is the junior Senator blocking well-qualified individuals from law enforcement? What has he got against law enforcement at this moment in America's history? Well, it doesn't have anything to do with the nominees themselves or their qualifications. We have asked him over and over. He has no complaint about any single one of them. He happened to pick these people out as his political targets. He is concerned about a completely unrelated issue. Let me tell you what it is.

In the summer of 2020, Federal law enforcement personnel were dispatched to Portland, OR, to help protect the Federal courthouse. A number of those Federal officers now face lawsuits relating to the events that happened there.

The Department of Justice often represents Federal employees who were sued in their individual capacity. Under governing regulations, the Department of Justice goes through a process to determine that such representation would be ``in the interests of the United States.''

And in this matter, the Department of Justice has either represented or paid for the representation of more than 70 law enforcement officials who have been sued. The Department has declined to represent one individual--only one--and continues to review three additional requests for representation.

The Senator from Arkansas says he wants to know why, but the Department of Justice has made it clear it can't comment on these four cases. Remember what you first learned when you were elected to the U.S. Senate and somebody came to you and said: I need for you to be my advocate. I need for you to be my champion.

You said to them: I would like to do it, but first you have to sign a privacy waiver, a confidentiality waiver. I can't represent you or talk about you unless I have that waiver.

The last time we came to the floor, I asked the junior Senator from Arkansas: Have these three who are being under review, for example, these Federal employees, given you a privacy waiver? Can you tell us what the circumstances are that slowed it down?

No. So here he is, their champion and advocate, and they don't trust him with a privacy waiver or they would rather their circumstances not become public. They made that decision. It is pretty complicated in a way. The bottom line is, who is paying for this complication and the stalling tactic? Innocent people, six U.S. attorneys, two U.S. marshals--not in the State of Arkansas.

The Department of Justice has made it clear it can't comment on these cases ``in light of significant confidentiality interests and applicable privileges.''

The Senator from Arkansas is hearing none of it. For example, DOJ's regulations make it clear that communications about an employee's request for representation are protected by an attorney-client privilege. The Senator from Arkansas wants us to ignore that. The Privacy Act prevents the Department of Justice from disclosing personal records related to employees without their consent.

Unless things have changed in the last 2 weeks, the Senator who is advocating for these people has never received that. He has never received those consents. These privileges protect the privacy of the very law enforcement personnel whose interests the junior Senator from Arkansas claims to represent. The Senator claims to be speaking on behalf of his deputy marshals, but he is asking the Justice Department to violate legal privileges and attorney-client privileges that are designed to specifically protect them and other Federal employees.

It is important to add that it is standard practice for any Member of Congress to obtain a Privacy Act waiver. We have done it thousands of times in our office--an act that gives a waiver for a constituent, authorizing the office to make inquiries on their behalf. Apparently, the Senator from Arkansas doesn't have that waiver or he would explain to us what the circumstances are. It seems that the people he wants to protect don't trust him with that information or don't want it to become public.

The Senator is upset that the Justice Department is following the law and a process required by their own rules and regulations--a process that now affects four individuals. His response is to block the confirmation of every U.S. attorney and every U.S. marshal on the Senate calendar. How can you claim, as he does, to be tough on crime if you are blocking well-qualified law enforcement officials from serving because of a grievance that has nothing to do with them personally? The junior Senator from Arkansas should let these law enforcement officials do their job.

Often we hear the complaint: Oh, they want to defund the police. You heard last night, President Biden said we need to fund the police and got a standing ovation from everybody.

This is a new approach. Instead of funding the police, this one Senator is going to stop law enforcement from even doing their job. For example, yesterday, I chaired a hearing in the Judiciary Committee. We examined how the Federal Government can help prevent and respond to the surge in carjackings across America over the last 2 years. It was an important bipartisan hearing with witnesses from law enforcement, community groups, and the automobile industry testifying about solutions to a problem that is an urgent issue in many of our communities and testifying to the need for U.S. attorneys to enforce the law in their jurisdictions. The same junior Senator from Arkansas, who is leaving these U.S. attorneys spots vacant because he is unhappy with the way he is being treated by the Department of Justice, didn't attend the hearing. And he is blocking votes on Federal law enforcement nominees charged with helping to protect our communities from

carjackings and other violent crimes. How can that be anything other than soft on law and order?

Before I proceed to my unanimous consent, I want to note the overwhelming support these U.S. attorneys and U.S. marshal nominees have from law enforcement professionals in their States. We are receiving dozens of letters because of this outrageous hold by the Senator from Arkansas--letters that speak not just to the nominees' qualifications but the need to confirm them now.

Consider the support for Chief LaDon Reynolds to be the U.S. marshal for the Northern District of Illinois. Senator Duckworth and I have received letters from the director of the Illinois State Police and police chiefs in towns and cities like Park Ridge, Hazel Crest, and Calumet Park. It is unanimous. Chief Reynolds is a man for the job, and he is waiting and waiting and waiting on the junior Senator from Arkansas.

The Senate has also received letters of support for several of the other nominees who face this needless blockade. Aaron Ford, the attorney general of Nevada, has written in support for Jason Frierson to be that State's U.S. attorney. Both Senators from Nevada took the floor last time we brought this issue up and supported him.

The chiefs of police of Rochester, Duluth, and Saint Paul, MN, have joined the Sheriff of Ramsey County, MN, urging the Senate to quickly confirm Andrew Luger as Minnesota's U.S. attorney and Eddie Frizell to be the State's U.S. marshal.

Mark Totten, nominated to be U.S. attorney for the Western District of Michigan, has the support of county prosecutors and sheriffs throughout the State, as well as from Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel and the Michigan Association of Police Organizations.

And the Sheriff of DeKalb County, GA, urges the Senate to swiftly confirm Ryan Buchanan to be U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Georgia.

These law enforcement officials want reinforcement. We have the professionals to take over these positions now; one Senator holds them up. They are just a few examples of the broad bipartisan support these nominees enjoy.

These State and local law enforcement officials know how eminently qualified the nominees are, and they have told us as much. They know we can't and shouldn't waste another day supporting law enforcement. They know it is time for the Senate to act now.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations en bloc: Calendar Nos. 660, 661, 662, 663, 739, 740, 741, 742; that the Senate vote on the nominations en bloc without intervening action or debate; the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate; that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate resume legislative session.

Right and moral? Is it right and moral to deny law enforcement officials--the Senator is now leaving the floor.

Is it right and moral to deny these law enforcement officials an opportunity to serve across the United States?

I listened carefully, and I was waiting for him to spell out--the Senator from Arkansas who just walked off the floor--his objection as to the qualifications of these law enforcement officers. He has none. There are none.

These men he calls political appointees, the same thing happened under the Trump administration. Over 85 of their U.S. attorneys were approved by voice vote, with no delay. One was held over for 1 week; that was it.

And yet he has made a crusade of this to try to stop these individuals from serving in the States where they are desperately needed.

The Senator from Arkansas is blocking the confirmation of these individuals and, at the same time, calling the Democrats soft on law and order. Go figure.

Don't lecture me on law and order if you are coming to the floor to prevent qualified law enforcement professionals from helping the Justice Department combat violent crime.

The reason I come to the floor and will continue to come to the floor is because we have a serious crime problem in my State and in the city of Chicago. I want to have the U.S. marshal there on the job doing everything he is supposed to do to help the local and State law enforcement bring down the violence and the death rate.

The Senator from Arkansas just doesn't seem to understand basic law. The Department of Justice has an attorney-client privilege with these individuals as they review their cases. He has been unable to get a waiver so that he can even tell us publicly what the complaint might be by the Department of Justice from the viewpoint of those Federal officials.

He can't do it. It is good enough for him, if they are under review, to stop all other U.S. attorneys and marshals across the United States.

Is this what America wants to see in Washington, this kind of obstruction? I think not. It doesn't take political courage to harm an innocent person. And what the Senator from Arkansas has done is to harm individuals who simply want to serve America and make it safer.

My Republican colleagues frequently claim to be the party of law and order; but in this matter, they are the ones playing politics on law enforcement.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, this evening, the Ukrainian Ambassador, Oksana Markarova, will be the honored guest of President Biden in the State of the Union Address. Yesterday, we hosted the Ambassador for a meeting with almost 25 Senate colleagues. It was a meeting I won't soon forget.

Her country, Ukraine, is facing a barbaric, unprovoked military assault from Russian dictator Vladimir Putin. The images and the stories are heartbreaking and infuriating--more than 600,000 Ukrainians fleeing to neighboring countries; brutal destruction, leaving people without homes or power during the winter; and Russian shelling of residential neighborhoods. We are witnessing innocent lives callously taken and uprooted.

This is a photo from yesterday's Washington Post. It shows a paramedic in Ukraine desperately trying to save this man's young daughter. She had been a victim of Vladimir Putin's shelling in her country of Ukraine. She did not survive.

Why is Putin doing this? Because his own petty grievances and warped nostalgia for the dark days of the Soviet Union have taken control. In his twisted mind, an entire innocent nation of 44 million Ukrainians must be attacked and occupied at any cost.

There is another reason he is trying to end Ukraine as we know it. He cannot bear to have a free and independent nation on his border because it shows to the people living in Russia the stark contrast of democracy versus despotic rule.

This morning, the Human Rights Council in Geneva met. When Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov began his speech, 100 diplomats all rose and walked out in protest of Russia's war on Ukraine. All of NATO and nearly the entire world are united in outrage at Russia's aggression.

Mr. Putin should think about the infamy of his legacy. For years, he has poisoned and suppressed his own people. Now he is trying to destroy an entire nation, killing this little girl and who knows how many other innocent people. Mr. Putin will not win this war. And every day, every hour that Russia continues its assault on Ukraine, he is harming his own people and ensuring that he leaves a legacy of shame.

What is also remarkable about the meeting yesterday with Ambassador Markarova was the determination and courage she and her fellow Ukrainians are showing against Putin. She explained to us that Ukrainians are peaceful people, but they will fight.

They will participate in the negotiations, but they won't surrender. And they will fight until the Russians leave. Quite simply, the Ukrainians might be outmatched by the Russian military, but they will not be defeated by it.

Here is one of the many acts of courage and defiance in recent days. In Odessa's historic Brodsky Synagogue, performers sang a moving 19th century version of the ancient Jewish hymn ``Adon Olam''--now a prayer for an end to the invasion.

And the world is on Ukraine's side--with rallies of support in all corners of the globe, Japan, Sweden, Finland, Chicago, even in cities across Russia. Countries like ours are providing urgently needed weapons to help Ukraine defend itself against Russian aggression.

Poland and other Ukrainian neighbors are helping with hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing in panic and disbelief. Think of it. While we have political factions in the United States who are determined not to let any refugees into our country, Poland and other countries--Moldova, Romania, for example--are opening their doors and accepting the Ukrainian refugees to give them some safety and security.

We must continue and increase all of the help that we can send-- military and humanitarian. Let us be crystal clear: Putin will not win this. In the end, the Ukrainian people will prevail. And Putin's legacy and history will be written in the blood of the children and innocents his invasion of Ukraine has spilled.

Nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson

Mr. President, yesterday, I spoke briefly about President Biden's announcement on Friday of his nomination to the Supreme Court of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson. Today, I would like to offer some additional thoughts on this nominee.

For those who are less than familiar with Judge Jackson, let me tell you a bit about her. Born in Washington, DC, her mom and dad were public school teachers. When she was 3 years old, Judge Jackson and her family moved to Miami, FL, so her father could attend law school.

Judge Jackson's father later served as the top attorney for the Dade County School Board, and her mother spent 14 years as a high school principal in Miami. In Judge Jackson's family, education and service were honored.

Two of Judge Jackson's uncles were police officers. One became police chief in Miami. Her younger brother also became a police officer and a detective in Baltimore, MD, before going on to serve in the U.S. Army where he was deployed to Iraq.

From a young age, Judge Jackson has been recognized as brilliant and

thoughtful. In high school, she was the class president and the star of the debate team.

It was during a national high school debate championship at Harvard that she fell in love with the university. She would go on to graduate from Harvard College and Harvard Law School.

She then embarked on an amazing and storied career. She practiced law, civil and criminal, at several leading law firms and clerked at all three levels of the Federal judiciary, including--and with some irony--for Justice Stephen Breyer, the Justice she hopes to replace.

She has also worked as a Federal public defender, served on the U.S. Sentencing Commission, spent 8 years as a judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. She currently serves on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, which is often considered to be the second most prestigious court in our Nation. She was confirmed to that position just last year through our Senate Judiciary Committee on a bipartisan basis.

As I noted yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee has examined her record three times for three different positions and confirmed her on a bipartisan basis for all three positions.

She has performed each of these public service roles with distinction. In the coming weeks, the Senate Judiciary Committee will undertake another comprehensive review of her record, her qualifications, and her approach to judicial decision making. As chair of the committee, I am determined to see that this review is careful, fair, and professional.

I have great respect for her record, and I will be saying more in the coming days and weeks. For today, I want to focus on three important points: the President's selection process, the historic significance of this nomination, and how Judge Jackson will build upon the honorable legacy of Justice Breyer.

President Joe Biden is a leader who respects the Senate. When Justice Breyer announced a month ago that he intended to retire, President Biden pledged ``to fulfill my duty to select a justice not only with the Senate's consent, but with its advice.''

The President kept that promise; and for that, he should be commended. The process for nominating Justice Breyer's successor has been rigorous and bipartisan. It has included the Senate every step of the way.

Just days after Justice Breyer's announcement, the President hosted Senator Grassley--the ranking Republican on this committee--and myself in the Oval Office to discuss the nomination. Repeatedly, he said to Senator Grassley and to me, ``If you have someone you think I should consider, please let me know.'' And he was sincere.

Over the next several weeks, President Biden sought the advice of many Senators--not just the two of us--including all the members, Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, then he made this decision to nominate Judge Jackson.

Every Supreme Court nomination is critically important, but this one has special historic significance. In the United States history, our Supreme Court has had 115 Justices; 108 of those Justices have had one thing in common. They were all White men.

Five of those who served on the Court as Justices were women. Only three have been people of color, out of 115. With Judge Jackson's nomination, we have already seen history in the making. If confirmed, she will be the first Black woman ever to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. With this nomination, Judge Jackson and we have the opportunity to bend the arc of history toward justice.

In accepting President Biden's nomination last week, she said one of her heroes, another brilliant, trailblazing Black woman, was named Constance Baker Motley. Judge Motley was a champion of civil rights and women's rights, a key attorney on Thurgood Marshall's side when the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund argued Brown v. Board of Education and other cases which finally ended legal segregation in America.

Judge Motley was the first Black woman to ever argue before the Supreme Court. She went on to be the first Black woman appointed to the Federal judiciary, serving as a U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of New York.

Judge Motley didn't know it, but on her 48th birthday, a little baby girl was born in Washington, DC. She would grow up to be one of the finest legal minds of her generation, and she would be the first Black woman to be nominated to serve on the Supreme Court.

Upon accepting that nomination last week, Judge Jackson said: ``Today, I proudly stand on Judge Motley's shoulders, sharing not only her birthday, but also her steadfast and courageous commitment to equal justice under law.''

And then she added: ``If I'm fortunate enough to be confirmed as the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, I can only hope that my life and career, my love of this country and the Constitution, and my commitment to upholding the rule of law and the sacred principles upon which this great nation was founded will inspire future generations.''

I want to conclude my remarks by acknowledging the extraordinary legacy of Justice Stephen Breyer. It is a legacy upon which I believe Justice Jackson will build if she is confirmed. In his time on the Court, Justice Breyer has been defined by his rigorous intellect, his thoughtful, pragmatic approach to judicial decision making, his collegiality and consensus building, and his devotion to the core principles on which America is founded--freedom, liberty, and equality.

By all these measures and more, Judge Jackson is a natural successor to the Justice she once clerked for. She has proven her intellectual mettle--from the debate team in high school in Miami, to Harvard Law where she served as supervising editor of the Harvard Law Review, to clerkships on the District of Massachusetts, the First Circuit, and the Supreme Court, and to an extraordinary record of excellence on the Federal bench.

It goes without saying that if you are going to be the first of anything in America, you have got to be the best. You have got to bring remarkable achievements to your aspiration to make history. Judge Jackson does that.

She is a jurist who understands the importance of pragmatism and real-world experience. She will draw on her broad range of experience on the U.S. Sentencing Commission, as a Federal public defender, as a litigator in civil lawsuits in private practice. Judge Jackson has also demonstrated the premium she places on collegiality and consensus- building, especially with those who may not share her views. That may be unusual, but it sure is important in these days.

Judge Thomas Griffith, a conservative jurist appointed to the DC Circuit by President George W. Bush, wrote in support of Judge Jackson's nomination to the DC Circuit, and he has written again in support of her nomination to the Supreme Court.

Judge Griffith wrote: ``Judge Jackson and I occasionally differed on the best outcome of a given case . . . . However, I have always respected her careful approach, extraordinary judicial understanding, and collegial manner, three indispensable traits for success on the Supreme Court.

He added: ``Judge Jackson has a demonstrated record of excellence, and I believe, based on her work as a trial judge when I served on the Court of Appeals, she'll adjudicate based on the facts and the law and not as a partisan.''

Finally, like Justice Breyer, Judge Jackson has shown her dedication to the Nation's founding principles, on and off the bench. She has a deep faith in the power and promise of our Constitution and an unwavering belief that we must protect and preserve those ideals that set our Nation apart from so many others.

Last Friday, when President Biden nominated Judge Jackson, the Senate Judiciary Committee, we sent the traditional questionnaire that is sent to nominees and candidates. It was returned to us last night promptly. It was lengthy and comprehensive. We have seen much of it before, earlier last year when Judge Jackson was aspiring to be on the DC Circuit. And it is a great starting point for any Senator or any member of the staff who wants to understand Judge Jackson.

She has published over 500--in fact, 573--written opinions. Her background and thoughts on important issues will be no mystery or surprise for those who

want to take the time to look at those cases. It has been less than a year since she was approved here on the floor of the U.S. Senate, but we are starting this process anew with her visitations with Senator McConnell, Senator Schumer tomorrow, as well as myself and Senator Grassley.

Senators who wish to meet with her personally and talk about her positions on any issues or other relevant topics are welcome to do so. Senator Grassley this morning in the Judiciary Committee encouraged his colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle to take advantage of the opportunity if they wish. We want to make sure that this is an orderly, respectful, collegial, and professional process.

My dearest hope is at the end of the day, she will receive bipartisan support for this nomination. It would be a great day for the Senate, as well as for the Supreme Court if that happened. But she needs to earn it. And to do it, she will be making the rounds in the Senate with individual Members making her case and then appearing before our committee at a later date, which we will announce this week.

I want to thank my colleagues for taking this as seriously as they should. It is rare in our Senate career that we are allowed to bring up the issue of advise and consent to the highest Court in the land--a lifetime appointment, a critically important appointment for the history of the United States and the history of that great Court.

I want to make sure that on the Senate Judiciary Committee, we are respectful and bipartisan in every aspect of that effort.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Madam President, I want to begin my remarks by joining Senator McConnell in expressing my condolences to our friend and colleague Senator Dianne Feinstein on the passing of her husband and partner Richard Blum.

Dick Blum was a trailblazer in the Senate family, one of the first men to join the Senate Spouses club. He was proud of Senator Feinstein's historic career in public service.

He was a success at business and invested his wealth in easing human suffering--from the streets of San Francisco to some of the poorest corners of the globe. He founded the American Himalayan Foundation to assist the people of the Himalayas. He also founded the Blum Center for Developing Economies at UC Berkeley to help teach students about microlending, social enterprise, and other ways for poor people in developing nations to lift themselves from poverty.

A story in today's Los Angeles Times contained an anecdote that captured well Dick's good humor and generous spirit.

He said that in all the conversations he had over the years with Buddhist friends in the Himalayas, no one had ever convinced him of the likelihood of reincarnation. Maybe that is why he worked so hard to achieve so much good in this one lifetime he was given. He did more to ease human suffering than others might do in a dozen lifetime opportunities.

To Senator Dianne Feinstein, their beloved daughters and grandchildren, and all who knew and loved him, Loretta and I offer our condolences.

Dick Blum's friendship was a gift, and his memory will be a blessing.

Nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson

Madam President, on another note, there was a historic announcement last Friday when President Joe Biden announced Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson as his choice to serve as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. I am going to speak about her nomination at length tomorrow, but a few words now.

She is an extraordinary person. To become the first African-American woman nominated to serve on the Supreme Court, you have to be the best--and she has proven throughout her life that she is.

She was a clerk to the retiring Justice Stephen Breyer, whose seat she now aspires to. She worked in the practice of law in so many different aspects and then on three different occasions came before this U.S. Senate for approval, advise and consent. On all three occasions, she emerged with bipartisan support, and we certainly hope to see that revisited again.

She has authored some 500 different opinions, so there will be no mystery about her jurisprudence or her judicial philosophy. She has also been a person who has come before our committee as recently as last year when she was approved by the committee in June to serve on the DC Circuit Court.

I think she is an exceptional choice, and I want to make sure that the hearing that is given to her is respectful, fair, and professional. I have reached out to Senator Grassley, my friend and the ranking member on the committee, to work toward that goal, and I hope all members of the committee will join us.

Ukraine

Madam President, on a separate topic, I just returned from the Munich Security Conference and a visit to our NATO allies in Poland and Lithuania. On the latter part of that trip, I was joined by Senator Chris Coons of Delaware and Senator Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire.

Many here in this Chamber have heard me talk about my connection with my mother's birth in Lithuania and the fact that I have cared about that country in a special way ever since I have served in Congress.

Life was bleak and oppressive for the Lithuanian people and all the others in Eastern Europe living under the boot heel of the Russian czar. Countries such as Poland, which saw such devastation during World War II, found themselves suffering decades of communist dictatorship following the war. So it was no surprise that when the Soviet Union finally collapsed, these nations were determined to join the community of democracies and NATO. In fact, the Baltic States of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia helped lead this historic path to freedom.

I remember so many aspects of it. In the shivering cold winter of 1991, millions of people joined hands to form a human chain, connecting all three nations in the Baltic area. They called for change. Then in January 1991, the Soviets sent their tanks into Lithuania and Latvia and other places. The net result was deadly. Those Soviet tanks killed 13 innocent people, and hundreds were injured in Lithuania. What were they asking for? Freedom. A chance to vote for their own future. Well, soon, the Baltic States stepped out even further and courageously declared independence from the Soviet Union. They wanted to reclaim their freedom.

I remember visiting Lithuania in those days, seeing sandbags stacked up outside the Parliament, which they called the Seimas, and schoolkids who were taking a break from class to come pray the Rosary in front of those barricades, light a couple candles--basically to be there for their country at that moment of testing.

If this sounds familiar with what we are hearing in Ukraine today, it is.

Those earlier days of independence had many brave souls coming forward with nothing but determination. Their small ``arsenal of freedom,'' as they called it, which they brought me in the backdoor to show me, consisted of a broom closet with about 8 or 10 rifles in it. They were ready to stare down the Soviets if necessary.

I was so honored on this trip recently to visit with one of the champions of the restoration of freedom and Lithuania's Vytautas Landsbergis. Dr. Landsbergis is a music professor and was a leader of their revolution back to freedom in Lithuania. At 95 years of age, he remains a fierce champion of democracy, as he was in those early days confronting the Soviets.

I also met with former Lithuanian President Valdas Adamkus, who left Lithuania for Chicago as a teenager and returned decades later to serve two terms as President and shepherd his nation, Lithuania, into the European Union and NATO.

I visited military bases in both Poland and Lithuania, where I met U.S. troops supporting the NATO mission to protect the young democracies from Russian aggression. Among the servicemembers were several from my State of Illinois--from Latham, IL, which is near Decatur; Montgomery, IL, near Aurora; and Kankakee. They came and told stories of their service in the Regular Army and how they were now working in Lithuania to prepare their armies for any possible battles in the future. It has been a wonderful, strong relationship.

In Poland, when you mention you are from Illinois, virtually every military officer says they have been our friends for a long time, and they have been because for over 20 years, the Illinois National Guard has been a direct contact with the Polish military forces, modernizing them and preparing them for any challenges that might come.

Eastern European allies know the Russian threat far better than we do. Look at these maps of Russian troop movements in and around Ukraine and the borders of our NATO allies. As you can see here, Russia, Kyiv, Kharkiv, Mariupol, they are in the news virtually on a constant basis.

You can see those troop movements, hundreds of thousands of troops that are moving from the Russian front into Ukraine these days. With the Russian troops now flooding into Belarus in the area of the far corner here, they are essentially taking over that country too.

Nations on the other side--Poland you can see on that map--Poland, Lithuania, and Latvia understand that the threat today is very real for them. They share a 60-mile border that connects the Russian territory of Kaliningrad with Belarus. And the Suwalki gap is one that they are very concerned about keeping peaceful. It is a real threat, and they worry that the Russians are going to take this opportunity in Ukraine to extend their forces into Poland and into Lithuania and into Latvia.

Poland in particular is already generously hosting hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian refugees pouring across the border. It is an inspiration to me to see this country of Poland reach out to accept these Ukrainian refugees. The United States has to step into this picture with humanitarian assistance for Poland and all the other countries, Moldova, Romania, and others taking in Ukrainian refugees. We have to help them feed, clothe, and shelter these people during this period of invasion by the Russians.

Russia is unleashing a brutal war of choice against a free nation that wants to choose its own path, the path of democracy, and the result is sickening.

This shows what is going on in the subways in Ukrainian cities. People are bringing their children to escape the bombing that Putin is initiating above. We have many millions of people in that country in peril, and some are taking their kids and trying to escape to a safe place like Poland.

There has been terrible destruction that has gone on there as well. We have seen it on television right in the--this lady was in front of her own home at the time a rocket attacked it on February 25.

This is a picture which I saw in this morning's Washington Post. It is a most touching scene. You can barely see this father down here, covered in blood, bringing his daughter to this paramedic. The paramedic really tried to perform CPR on this little girl who was injured in the shelling by Putin and his troops. Unfortunately, she did not survive. That is the reality of what Vladimir Putin is doing today. The American people know it, and the strength and courage of the people in Ukraine resisting these advances is an example to the world.

We are seeing demonstrations of support across all of the world, the people of Ukraine. The Eiffel Tower, Empire State Building--I have to move some of these charts around. This one was especially impressive, the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin. Look at the crowds supporting the people of Ukraine.

It isn't lost on us because we have a wonderful Ukrainian community in Chicago. Here they are at the church on Chicago Avenue just this last weekend, and they have been coming back on a regular basis. I was there on Friday. I spoke to many of these same people about the situation which they are facing in Ukraine. They would come up to me afterwards and say they have been on the telephone with members of their family who are frightened for their lives, didn't know if they could survive this aggression by Vladimir Putin.

When you think about what he has done, sadly, he has failed on so many fronts. How could he get so many things so wrong?

He has unified NATO and support for NATO in a way which was unimaginable just a few years ago. NATO stands unified now in defense of Ukraine and in confronting the aggression of Vladimir Putin.

He has also unified the European Union. Countries like Sweden and Switzerland, which famously have been neutral in most of these conflicts, are now openly supporting the European Union's efforts to put pressure on Vladimir Putin--sanctions that will stop him from this aggression in Ukraine.

He has certainly, in the process, destroyed the reputation of his country as a reliable partner in the future. The Germans had entered into an agreement for a gas pipeline. Many of us questioned it from the start, but that was their decision--Nord Stream 2, drawing natural gas from Russia into Germany. Well, that pipeline is closed down now. Chancellor Scholz has announced he is looking for other services, such as LNG, to replace the gas resources which were supposed to be sent in from Russia for a long time to come. It is going to lead to our energy independence in Europe--independence certainly from the unpredictable and unimaginable Vladimir Putin.

I remember not so many years ago--30 years, as a matter of fact--when countries like the Baltics and Poland were finally given an opportunity for freedom. There were extraordinary examples of courage in each of those countries. I was lucky to be there to witness some of it. But what we are seeing now today in Ukraine is exceptional. The military experts thought they would last a matter of hours. Now, it is days, and maybe it is weeks. I hope it is months and even longer because they have the courage to stand up. Ordinary citizens who are showing up at recruiting offices for homeland defense are being given Kalashnikovs and other weapons sent out to stop the Russians. You can see that they are inspiring the world, as they should. It is a reminder to all of us that Vladimir Putin and his brand of aggression has been seen so many times in history. Someone like him or Lukashenka in Belarus think they are so powerful that they are above accountability, but that is not the case. We have got to make certain, as we go forward, that we stand with the people of Ukraine; that they know we are their friends; that we aspire to the same values.

And I want to thank President Biden for his leadership. I am going to be calling on him with many others. The first thing that I am going to do is send a letter, which will be headed out this evening, signed by colleagues on both sides of the aisle. What we are asking the President to do--and it is within his authority--is to grant temporary protected status to Ukrainians now on visas in the United States. Some of them are tourists; some of them are students; and some are on work visas, but oftentimes, those visas expire, and they are supposed to return home to their own countries at the moment of expiration. If there are circumstances in those home countries, the President has the authority to give temporary protected status to allow them to stay in the United States.

The Senators who are joining me in this letter will ask President Biden to extend temporary protected status to the people of Ukraine who are on visas in the United States and are present in our country. That, to me, is a way to give him them some peace of mind. We certainly wouldn't want them to return to that war scene that we have seen over and over broadcast on television.

And there is more to do, whether it is humanitarian assistance in countries like Poland or where it is lethal aid to help the insurgents in Ukraine defend their country, the United States needs to be there.

I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Feinstein), the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Lujan), and the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Warnock) are necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Feinstein), the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Lujan), and the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Warnock) are necessarily absent.