-9999

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. RICKETTS. Mr. President, I rise today in opposition to the nomination of Nancy Abudu to the U.S. Court of Appeals.

I served as Governor for 8 years, and, in that time, I had the great privilege of appointing dozens of judicial appointments to Nebraska courts. I appointed four of the current Nebraska Supreme Court justices and many more to lower courts.

When I considered a prospective nominee, I was often reminded of our State's motto: ``Equality Before the law.'' That motto reflects a commonsense American principle that all people should receive equal treatment and equal opportunity, regardless of one's race or background. The women and men who serve in our courts should reflect this motto.

When I considered nominees, I looked at a few things. I looked at whether they were leaders with high integrity and character. I looked at their experience, and I looked at how they understood their role as a judge. Did they think the job of a judge was to make the law or to interpret the law?

I looked at if they had a respect for the law and whether they had the temperament to bring a thoughtful and fairminded approach to each case they would have at hand. I looked at whether they were respected by their peers. And I am proud of the appointments that I made.

Nancy Abudu is not someone I would have considered for a judgeship. Ms. Abudu is the kind of soft-on-crime, anti-police, activist we actually must keep off of the bench. And I want to take a moment to go over her record.

Ms. Abudu has argued publicly and repeatedly that American voting laws and the criminal justice system are racist and discriminatory. She has specifically maligned the three States that comprise the Eleventh Circuit that she is being considered for. In Alabama, she said that Jim Crow continues to cast a long shadow on the State's elections.

She said that Florida is engaged in a ``war to strip poor and low- income people of all political power.'' And she accused Georgia State legislators of ``punishing voters and undermining democracy'' and said that the State is a ``bad actor'' and ``simply cannot be trusted to protect the rights of voters.''

At a time when Americans require certainty and security of our elections, Ms. Abudu has consistently argued dangerous and misleading positions, trying to undermine the public's trust of our elections and our voting rights. She has argued that prohibiting felons from voting is ``practically the same system as during slavery.'' She argued that requiring voters to present identification is voter suppression.

My colleague, Ranking Member Grassley, described Abudu as one of the ``most activist judicial nominees we've ever seen.'' During her confirmation hearing, the Judiciary Committee heard Abudu double down in defense of her work in 2018 to challenge a Miami ordinance that banned sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of a school.

Senator Grassley questioned Abudu about a 2016 article where she advocated for laws that ``would allow noncitizens to vote in local elections'' and suggested that opponents of such legislation are ``trying to incite hysteria that undocumented immigrants are also taking over the ballot box in addition to our country.''

When asked which election she thought noncitizens should be permitted to vote in, Abudu declined to substantively respond, saying:

In the article, I noted that some cities allow noncitizens to vote in local elections.

Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee questioned Abudu about numerous partisan and inflammatory statements she has also made, including:

Systemic racism [is] embedded in the criminal justice system and other parts of our society.

That the ``problem'' with southern States when it comes to voting laws ``is they're not always doing the right thing and the resentment they feel is that historically, the Federal Government has not allowed them to get away with it.''

Governor DeSantis is digging his heels in to ensure poor people in his State are blocked from voting.

With respect to the privatization of schools, she said:

[W]e are not in an environment or a culture where we want to rely on our State legislators to do the right thing by our children, especially if they are Black or Brown.

Nancy Abudu's work at the Southern Poverty Law Center, SPLC, since 2019 and currently as the Strategic Litigation Director are also extremely concerning positions. For those unfamiliar, the Southern Poverty Law Center is a far-left activist organization that only targets conservatives whom they disagree with politically. The SPLC is well-known for, unapologetically and often without any justification, labeling conservative and religious organizations and individuals as ``hate groups'' or ``extremists.''

As a Federal judge recently found that the SPLC hate list does not ``depend upon objective data or evidence'' and its application of the ``hate group'' designation is ``entirely subjective.''

Another Federal judge ruled that SPLC's ``representation or description'' of a nonprofit organization as a hate group ``is not one `of fact.'''

SPLC's Hate Map, as they call it, is ``outright fraud'' and ``a willful deception designed to scare older liberals into writing checks to the SPLC.''

Their misinformation has real-world implications ranging from careless to incendiary and deadly. Floyd Lee Corkins entered the Family Research Council's headquarters with a 9-millimeter pistol, multiple ammunition clips, and a box of extra rounds, and the intent to ``kill as many people as possible.'' Fortunately, Corkins was stopped by the building manager from carrying out this mass shooting.

Under FBI interrogation, Corkins said he chose to carry out the attack on FRC after it was labeled a ``hate group'' on the Southern Poverty Law Center's website.

In 2018, the SPLC paid $3.375 million in damages after brandishing British Muslim reformer Maajid Nawaz as an anti-Muslim extremist.

Similarly, the SPLC was compelled to issue an official apology for placing Dr. Ben Carson under their extremist watchlist back in 2014.

In 2021, in Nebraska, we saw the Southern Poverty Law Center's reckless and misguided definition of ``hate groups'' used against University of Nebraska-Lincoln students. A Christian student organization called Ratio Christi filed a lawsuit alleging the University discriminated against the organization's conservative and Christian views when it denied funds for a speaker.

I spoke out at the time urging the University to support speakers from a wide variety of viewpoints on campus, including Christian speakers. The group of students had secured legal defense from the Alliance Defending Freedom, a religious freedom organization. The Southern Poverty Law Center's designation of ADF as a hate group was then used against the students in media reports across the State.

Fortunately, justice prevailed; and in a victory for free speech at public universities, a Federal court entered a partial judgment against the University of Nebraska-Lincoln officials who discriminated against Christian student organizations. The University revised its funding policies to provide transparency and accountability in the process.

In 2023, an FBI whistleblower revealed the Bureau issued an internal memo--now rescinded--on ``radical-traditionalist Christian ideology,'' citing the SPLC. The memo characterized radical traditionalist Catholics primarily by their rejection of church developments since the Second Vatican Council--Vatican II--and opposition to homosexuality. The memo suggests the FBI should monitor these Catholics through ``the development of sources with access,'' including in places of worship. It presents a list of hate groups published by the SPLC as a place to start with this work.

The SPLC's hate label destroys civil discourse and breeds contempt for those with different views.

Americans want judges that understand their role to interpret our laws, not make them. Americans want judges who want to give every litigant a fair shake. Americans want judges that believe in our Founding documents.

Ms. Abudu has failed to demonstrate she understands the critical role that a judge should play in our legal system. Her record proves that she is far outside the mainstream. Far-left activists do not belong on the Federal bench. I call on my colleagues to join me in opposing this radical nominee.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source