September 17, 1986 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE 23813

Bar Association. In 1982, President

Reagan appointed him to the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the District of

Columbia Circuit, considered by many

to be the preeminent circuit court in

the Nation. He has served on that

court with distinction since then. That

is many lifetimes worth of achievement for most of us.

Judge Scalia is a man of outstanding

intellectual abilities. Anybody who

doubts that should go look at the

copies of the Federal Reporter which

contain his legal opinions. As a scholar

and a judge, he has made many contributions to our jurisprudence on administrative law, separation of powers,

libel and slander law, and many other

areas. Judge Scalia, by all accounts, is

well respected by his colleagues on the

bench. He is a legal scholar with few

equals and has served very capably on

the court of appeals.

In sum, Judge Scalia is eminently

qualified for the position for which he

has been nominated. He has had a distinguished career so far, and now he is

properly poised to proceed to the pinnacle of his profession.

I know that some Members of this

body have strong ideological differences with Judge Scalia. I respect

them for that. It is heartening to see,

however, that the Members of this

body realize that the vote on this nomination should rest on whether Judge

Scalia is qualified, not whether a majority of this body agrees or disagrees

with his personal philosophy.

Under the Constitution, the Senate

has the duty to offer "advice and consent" on judicial nominees. Congress

must scrutinize the nominee to determine whether he or she possesses the

qualities that the people have a right

to expect in judges. Congress, however, must respect a President's right to

appoint qualified persons to the judiciary.

There is an important reason for the

Senate to respect the President's

choices of qualified judicial nominees.

Our constitutional system is a marvelous set of checks and balances. One of

the checks on the power of the judiciary is power of the President to appoint men and women who share his

vision of the nature of our society and

the role of Government.

As long as a nominee is otherwise

qualified, the nominee's personal philosophy should not be a consideration

unless that philosophy undermines

the fundamental principles of our constitutional system or the nominee's

dedication to his or her ideological

principles is so strong that he or she

cannot be an impartial judge. In the

absence of such concerns, the Senate

must respect the right of a President

to nominate qualified candidates of his

choosing.

The evidence of Judge Scalia's commitment to our constitutional system

and his ability to judge impartially is

abundantly clear from his tenure on

the court of appeals. His personal ideology, therefore, should play no role in

our decision on whether to confirm

him.

I would also like to add that it is a

distinct pleasure for me to speak on

Judge Scalia's behalf because he is a

personal friend. I'm sure my colleagues have read the wonderful tributes to Judge Scalia. Every time you

read one of these, you see terms such

as articulate, energetic, gregarious, intelligent, and quick-witted. I can

assure you that these descriptions are

100 percent accurate.

Judge Scalia's nomination is meaningful to me for another reason, as he

is the first American of Italian extraction to be nominated to serve on the

Supreme Court. This is a magnificent

symbol to the Italian-Americans of

this Nation that they truly can share

in all that this great country has to

offer.

President Reagan has repeatedly

said that he will pick the very best

men and women he can find to serve

on our Nation's courts. In this case, he

has fulfilled that promise. Judge

Scalia is the very best.

In this case, the best also happens to

be of Italian extraction. Judge Scalia's

father came here from Italy as a

young man. His mother also was the

daughter of immigrants from Italy.

There are millions of Italian-Americans in this country, many of whom

started with nothing, many of whom

started with immigrant parents who

may not have been able to read or

write English, such as mine.

Obviously, it is with great pride that

we witness one who shares our history

and our traditions nominated to serve

on the highest court of the Nation. Of

course, Italian-Americans are Americans first and last. It is because we are

Americans that we applaud a fellow

Italian-American's achievement of the

American dream. This is truly a success for Italian-Americans and obviously a magnificent success for the

American tradition. I have no doubt

that Judge Scalia will serve with distinction on the Supreme Court and

will make all Americans proud to call

him one of their own.

Mr. President, a nominee for Supreme Court Justice of the United

States must possess the highest standards of integrity, ethics, and commitment to the cause of justice. He or she

must be an individual of proven ability

and judgment. Judge Scalia has been

thoroughly examined to determine

whether he possesses these qualities,

and he has not been found wanting. I,

therefore, wholeheartedly support this

nomination and urge my colleagues to

do the same.

I thank the Chair.

Mr. DOLE. This will be the last vote

this evening.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are

there any other Senators desiring to

be heard on this matter?

If not, the question is, "Shall the

Senate advise and consent to the nomination of Antonin Scalia to be Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of

the United States?"

The yeas and nays have been ordered and the clerk will call the roll.

The assistant legislative clerk called

the roll.

Mr. SIMPSON. I announce that the

Senator from Utah [Mr. GARN] and

the Senator from Arizona [Mr. GOLDWATER] are necessarily absent.

I further announce that, if present

and voting, the Senator from Utah

[Mr. GARN] would each vote "yea".

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are

there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?

The result was announced—yeas 98,

nays 0, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 267 Ex.]

YEAS—98

Abdnor

Andrews

Armstrong

Baucus

Bentsen

Biden

Bingaman

Boren

Boschwitz

Bradley

Broyhill

Bumpers

Burdick

Byrd

Chafee

Chiles

Cochran

Cohen

Cranston

D'Amato

Danforth

DeConcini

Denton

Dixon

Dodd

Dole

Domenici

Durenberger

Eagleton

Evans

Exon

Ford

Glenn

Garn

Gore

Gorton

Gramm

Grassley

Harkin

Hart

Hatch

Hatfield

Hawkins

Hecht

Heflin

Heinz

Helms

Hollings

Humphrey

Inouye

Johnston

Kassebaum

Kasten

Kennedy

Kerry

Lautenberg

Laxalt

Leahy

Levin

Long

Lugar

Mathias

Matsunaga

Mattingly

McClure

McConnell

Melcher

Metzenbaum

Mitchell

Moynihan

Murkowski

Nickles

Nunn

Packwood

Pell

Pressler

Proxmire

Pryor

Quayle

Riegle

Rockefeller

Roth

Rudman

Sarbanes

Sasser

Simon

Simpson

Specter

Stafford

Stennis

Stevens

Symms

Thurmond

Trible

Wallop

Warner

Weicker

Wilson

Zorinsky

NOT VOTING—2

Goldwater

So the nomination was confirmed.

• 2220

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I

move to reconsider the vote by which

the nomination was confirmed.

Mr. DOLE. I move to lay that

motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was

JlCTGGd to

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I

ask unanimous consent that the President be immediately notified that the

Senate has confirmed the nominations

of Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice

Scalia.

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