Here & Now

U.S. Senate Candidate Russ Feingold On High Court Nomination

ZAC SCHULTZ:

WE CAUGHT UP WITH FORMER SENATOR RUSS FEINGOLD AFTER A SPEECH TO UNION LEADERS IN MADISON EARLIER THIS WEEK. WE ASKED HIM WHY THE COMMON PRACTICE OF HOLDING UP JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS TO LOWER FEDERAL COURTS IS DIFFERENT FROM HOLDING UP A SUPREME COURT NOMINATION.

RUSS FEINGOLD:

SUPREME COURT IS THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND. WE ALREADY HAVE ONE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT THAT’S DEADLOCKED AND GRIDLOCKED. THAT’S THE CONGRESS. WE CAN’T AFFORD TO HAVE ANOTHER BRANCH OF OUR GOVERNMENT DEADLOCKED. AND THAT’S WHAT YOU’RE GOING TO HAVE. NOT JUST FOR A YEAR. IT WILL TAKE ANOTHER SIX MONTHS IF WE WAIT FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENT. YOU’RE GOING TO HAVE A NONFUNCTIONING SUPREME COURT ON INCREDIBLEY IMPORTANT ISSUES FROM ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES, CLIMATE CHANGE ISSUES, IMMIGRATION ISSUES, VOTING RIGHTS ISSUES. WE CAN’T AFFORD THAT. IT’S PERFECTLY REASONABLE TO EXPECT THAT THE PRESIDENT WOULD APPOINT AND THAT CONGRESS WOULD TAKE ACTION ON AN APPOINTMENT TO THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT. OTHERWISE IT’S A FAILURE OF GOVERNMENT.

ZAC SCHULTZ:

DO YOU THINK DEMOCRATS WOULD BE SAYING THE SAME THING IF THERE WAS A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT RIGHT NOW?

RUSS FEINGOLD:

I KNOW I WOULD HAVE BEEN. THE WHOLE TIME I WAS IN THE SENATE I NEVER SAID “HEY WE SHOULDN’T TAKE UP NOMINATIONS.” WHEN I WAS A MEMBER OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, WE HAD EXTENSIVE REVIEW. WE’D SPENT SEVERAL WEEKS REVIEWING AND THEN ULTIMATELY THERE WOULD BE CONSIDERATION ON THE FLOOR OF SOME KIND. SO THIS IS IRRESPONSIBLE.

ZAC SCHULTZ:

THERE’S A LOT OF ATTENTION BEING PAID TO SENATOR CHUCK SCHUMER’S COMMENTS FROM 2007 IN WHICH AT THE END OF THE BUSH ERA HE SAID THE DEMOCRATS SHOULDN’T ALLOW ANY POTENTIAL SUPREME COURT NOMINEES TO GO FORWARD FROM PRESIDENT BUSH. DID YOU HAVE A SIMILAR ACTION?

RUSS FEINGOLD:

NO. I DID NOT TAKE THAT ATTITUDE. I DID NOT AGREE WITH THAT ATTITUDE. I MEET WITH JUDGE ALITO AND JUDGE ROBERTS. I VOTED FOR JUDGE ROBERTS EVEN THOUGH HE WAS A CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN. I VOTED AGAINST JUDGE ALITO. I DID NOT TAKE THE VIEW THAT WE SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERING THE NOMINATION. THAT’S A COMPLETELY IRRESPONSIBLE VIEW AND I THINK IT’S BEING REJECTED ALL ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

ZAC SCHULTZ:

IF YOU WIN THIS RACE AND IF A DEMOCRAT WINS THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENCY, DEMOCRATS STAND TO BE IN A MUCH BETTER POSITION TO GET A MUCH MORE LIBERAL NOMINEE OR SOMEONE OF THEIR LIKING AND CHOOSING AT THAT TIME. WHY NOT WAIT?

RUSS FEINGOLD:

BECAUSE IT’S IRRESPONSIBLE. BECAUSE THIS ISN’T ABOUT DEMOCRAT VERSUS REPUBLICAN. IT’S ABOUT HAVING A FUNCTIONING SUPREME COURT. IT’S JUST WRONG WHETHER IT’S A DEMOCRAT ADVANTAGE OR REPUBLICAN ADVANTAGE NOT TO DO THE JOB. THESE GUYS NEED TO DO THEIR JOB. THE UNITED STATES SENATE NEEDS TO DO ITS JOB AND PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCESS.

ZAC SCHULTZ:

HOW MUCH OF AN ISSUE WILL THIS BE WITH VOTERS THIS FALL, ESPECIALLY IF ANY POTENTIAL NOMINEE GETS STALLED OUT?

RUSS FEINGOLD:

EVEN BEFORE THE TRAGEDY OF THE DEATH OF JUSTICE SCALIA, I CONSIDERED THIS TO BE ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES – THE FUTURE OF THE SUPREME COURT. VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN HAS SAID HE EXPECTS THE NEXT PRESIDENT TO HAVE FOUR APPOINTMENTS. NOW HED’ PROBABLY SAY THREE. I ALREADY CONSIDERED IT TO BE REAL IMPORTANT. NOW IT’S REAL OBVIOUS. YOU CAN SEE THE CASES THAT ARE PENDING. THE CASES ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE RULE. THE CASES ABOUT THE PRESIDENT’S IMMIGRATION ORDER. THESE THINGS ARE THERE. AND UNLESS SOMEBODY IS APPOINTED, THEY’RE GOING TO BE DEADLOCKED AND JUST GO BACK TO WHAT THE LOWER COURT SAID. SO IT HAS TO BE DONE THIS YEAR.

ZAC SCHULTZ:

DO YOU THINK THAT FAVORS YOU THIS FALL?

RUSS FEINGOLD:

I DON’T CARE IF IT FAVORS ME. THIS IS BEYOND POLITICS. IT SHOULDN’T BE ABOUT POLITICS. IT’S ABOUT WHETHER THE HIGHEST COURT OF THE LAND IS FUNCTIONING. AND PEOPLE SHOULDN’T GAME THIS FOR THEIR POLITICAL ADVANTAGE. I THINK IT’S A SHAME THAT SOME PEOPLE ARE DOING THAT.