Remark | Remarks | THE NEWSROOM | Republican LeaderSkip to primary navigation Skip to content×Close THE NEWSROOMRemarks Press Releases The Leader Board Op-Eds Videos SENATE RESOURCESRepublican Senators Committees Congressional Record Congress.gov Senate Floor Webcast ABOUT LEADER McCONNELL×Close THE NEWSROOMRemarks Press Releases The Leader Board Op-Eds Videos SENATE RESOURCESRepublican Senators Committees Congressional Record Congress.gov Senate Floor Webcast ABOUT LEADER McCONNELLxxsearchxMENUFacebookTwitterInstagramFacebookTwitterInstagramVisit Senator McConnell's site here THE NEWSROOMRemarks Press Releases The Leader Board Op-Eds Videos SENATE RESOURCESRepublican Senators Committees Congressional Record Congress.gov Senate Floor Webcast ABOUT LEADER McCONNELLxxsearchxMENUHomeTHE NEWSROOMRemarks07.08.24SCOTUS Ends Term Reinforcing Government Accountability, Shattering Bureaucratic Impunity‘As I have explained before, Republicans want government that is accountable to the people - as the Constitution prescribes. Democrats, on the other hand, want government that is insulated from the democratic process. Here’s the Democratic ideal of how to govern: If Congress has not spoken on an issue, let unelected bureaucrats manipulate statutes, fill in the blanks, and make new law.’ WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) delivered the following remarks today on the Senate floor regarding the Supreme Court:“Last week, the Supreme Court concluded its term with a number of consequential decisions. Three of these rulings, and the reactions they triggered on the Left, illustrated just how differently Republicans and Democrats view the Court’s role.“As I have explained before, Republicans want government that is accountable to the people – as the Constitution prescribes. Democrats, on the other hand, want government that is insulated from the democratic process.“Here’s the Democratic ideal of how to govern: If Congress has not spoken on an issue, let unelected bureaucrats manipulate statutes, fill in the blanks, and make new law.“Then, if anyone violates these new bureaucrat-made laws, let the bureaucrats take them to bureaucrat court. Not to a jury or a real judge, but to a kangaroo court of other bureaucrats who answer to still more bureaucrats.“And finally, if the President – the one actor in the executive branch who answers to the people – dares to interfere in this process in ways the bureaucrats don’t like, let him face criminal charges from yet another group of bureaucrats.“It’s dystopian. It’s something you’d find in the ‘law’ books of the old Soviet Union.“And the Supreme Court said they’d have none of it. In what might be the most consequential decision in my time here, the Supreme Court held that bureaucrats do not get the benefit of the doubt when they write new laws.“Congress writes laws. And the ways bureaucrats apply those laws are subject to full judicial review. There’s no get-out-of-legislation-free card. No Chevron deference. Period.“The Court also held that when the Constitution says you have the right to a jury trial, it means just that. Just because bureaucrats decide to pursue someone for ruinous fines, they don’t get to try the case themselves.“When bureaucrats go after someone – potentially for violating rules that Congress never even contemplated – the case has to go to a real, Senate-confirmed judge and a jury of one’s peers.“Lastly, the Court clarified something that careful readers of the Constitution have known forever: bureaucrats can’t criminally charge a President for his official actions.“The Constitution vests in the President executive powers that cannot be circumscribed. Not by Congress, and not by inventive prosecutors.“Democrats seem to want to turn Washington into the Hague. Their problem with the Supreme Court isn’t that they won’t be able to prosecute a President for unofficial criminal activity – because they still can. Their problem is that they won’t be able to prosecute official actions that they don’t like.“Prominent Democrats seem to look at the successful criminalization of political disagreement in places like Europe and South America and think, they might just be on to something.“It’s not hard to imagine what’s coming. We’ve already seen hints in the reports of the Inspector General investigating entirely appropriate conduct by Attorney General Barr that Democrats disagree with.“But why should Democrats stop there?“As the Chief Justice explained, quote: ‘Without immunity … prosecutions of ex-Presidents could quickly become routine. The enfeebling of the Presidency and our Government that would result from such a cycle of factional strife is exactly what the Framers intended to avoid.’“I certainly agree. The people elect the President. He is responsible to them for his official conduct, not to bureaucrats with law licenses.“So Madam President, we’re not just talking about two sorts of reaction to the Supreme Court’s latest rulings. We’re talking about two very different visions of America:“A Democratic vision in which bureaucrats decide our policy disputes and have the power to punish those elected officials who dare to disagree…“And a Constitutional vision in which policy is entrusted broadly to the people through representative democracy.“Suffice it to say that Republicans prefer the latter.”###Related Issues: Supreme CourtPrintEmailTweetPreviousTHE NEWSROOMSENATE RESOURCESABOUT LEADER McCONNELLFacebookTwitterInstagram
