Edward J. Markey
Senator for Massachusetts · Democratic · United States
“Nationals who have their Principal Residence in the United States, its territories, or possessions.'' Furthermore, the Procedural Notice updated the definition of ``Ineligible Person'' to include LPRs, ``including individuals with permanent (Unconditional) LPR status, and Conditional LPR status.'' An applicant borrower with any percentage…”
“Nationals who have their Principal Residence in the United States, its territories, or possessions.'' Furthermore, the Procedural Notice updated the definition of ``Ineligible Person'' to include LPRs, ``including individuals with permanent (Unconditional) LPR status, and Conditional LPR status.'' An applicant borrower with any percentage…”
“For example, prior to the 2026 Notices, LPRs who had their principal residence in the United States, its territories, or possessions could be 100 percent direct and/or indirect owners of applicant borrowers. Additionally, U.S. citizens, U.S.”
“For example, prior to the 2026 Notices, LPRs who had their principal residence in the United States, its territories, or possessions could be 100 percent direct and/or indirect owners of applicant borrowers. Additionally, U.S. citizens, U.S.”
“The 2026 Notices modified SBA's standard operating procedure (SOP) 50 10, Lender and Development Company Loan Programs, which contains SBA's loan origination policies and procedures governing its 7(a) and 504 loan programs.”
“The 2026 Notices modified SBA's standard operating procedure (SOP) 50 10, Lender and Development Company Loan Programs, which contains SBA's loan origination policies and procedures governing its 7(a) and 504 loan programs.”
The complete record
Every one of 160 lines we hold for Edward J. Markey, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 4.
“41, tried to rename the Gulf of Mexico. No. 42, illegally rescinded $80 million in congressionally appropriated FEMA funding for New York City bank accounts. No. 43, fired--and then rehired--over 300 staffers at the National Nuclear Security Administration, jeopardizing [[Page S2721]] the security of the U.S. nuclear stockpile. No. 44, threatened to take over Canada. No. 45, weakened NATO by cozying up to Russia and alienating our allies. No. 46, cut Alzheimer's research, delaying breakthroughs that could find a cure for this tragic and deadly disease. No. 47, terminated the American Climate Corps. No. 48, cut hundreds of employees from the FAA. No. 49, fired more than 200 probationary FEMA workers. And No.”
“29, froze $10 billion in disaster funding as part of a bogus investigation into nonprofit support for undocumented immigrants. No. 30, cut cancer research funding. No. 31, cut diabetes research funding. No. 32, cut HIV-AIDS research funding. No. 33, cut heart disease research funding. No. 34, cut mental health research funding. No. 35, cut family caregiving research funding. No. 36, cut funding to recruit the next generation of health researchers, putting years of innovation at risk. No. 37, withdrew grant opportunities with the Office on Violence Against Women. No. 38, threatened providers, hospitals, and community health centers because of the type of care which they provide. No. 39, froze funding for community health centers in our country. No. 40, ordered the suspension of EV charging funding. No.”
“20, he froze the Clean School Bus Rebate funding, standing in the way of keeping our air clean for kids on buses in our country. No. 21, spread misinformation about vaccines and risked the health of millions of Americans. No. 22, he blamed a plane crash on DEI--irresponsible. No. 23, eliminated the public records office at the Centers for Disease Control. No. 24, scrubbed health data related to HIV from the CDC website. No. 25, allowed DOGE access to sensitive Treasury Department information about all Americans. No. 26, fired the Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau because he favors the interests of his billionaire buddies over those of American consumers. No. 27, gutted Federal protections for worker safety. No. 28, scrubbed the mention of climate change from any Federal Agency in our country. No.”
“10, disbanded the Office of Gun Violence Prevention, which championed the first Federal gun safety legislation in more than 30 years. No. 11, repealed the Biden administration's AI protections for minority communities in our country. No. 12, he helped States refuse abortion care in life-threatening emergencies. No. 13, threatened to take over the Panama Canal. No. 14, he fired 18 inspectors general who work to eliminate government waste and fraud and abuse. No. 15, threatened to hold California wildlife aid hostage. No. 16, threatened to use military action against Greenland to take it by force and violate its sovereignty. No. 17, illegally fired two National Labor Relations Board officials. No. 18, banned transgender Americans from serving in the U.S. military. No. 19, restricted access to gender-affirming care. No.”
“3, pulled the United States out of the Paris climate agreement to save our planet. No. 4, created DOGE. No. 5, called to end birthright citizenship through an Executive order, which is unlawful because it cannot override the Constitution of the United States. No. 6, canceled nearly $400 million in funding to support communities' efforts to eliminate or reduce flood damage. No. 7, eliminated the Office of Climate Change and Health Equity, which addresses greenhouse gas emissions from the health sector and facilitates interagency coordination to address climate change impacts on the public health of all 330 million Americans. No. 8, he attacked clean car regulations that save drivers money at the pump. No. 9, unleashed ICE at schools and hospitals and churches to threaten children and families. No.”
“He is hoping you don't notice that, every day, costs are rising, retirement savings are sinking, and families are living paycheck to paycheck and they are bearing the burden of the Trump world. He is relying on all of us to roll over, accept his absolute rule, and let him and his caviar Cabinet enjoy the circus while they pass a massive tax break for their billionaire buddies out of all of the programs that would serve every family in our country. So to help us all keep track here on the 100th day of the Trump Presidency, here are the 100 damages from Trump's 100 days: In his first 100 days, Donald Trump, No. 1, propped up Big Tech billionaires at his inauguration, right here in this building. No. 2, withdrew the United States from the World Health Organization. No.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 171 Issue 72 (Wednesday, April 30, 2025) [Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 72 (Wednesday, April 30, 2025)] [Senate] [Pages S2720-S2721] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] TRUMP ADMINISTRATION FIRST 100 DAYS Mr. MARKEY. Mr. President, 100 days ago, Donald Trump proclaimed ``the golden age of America begins now.'' But in 100 days, since Inauguration Day, ``King'' Donald has shown us that he sits on a throne of fool's gold--one built on empty votes, unfulfilled promises, and lie after lie after lie. In just over 3 months, ``King'' Donald's reign has rained down chaos and corruption and cuts and crisis on the American people. And he is counting on you not to pay attention.”
“It begins with small concessions, subtle pressures, and self-censorship born of fear. But it always ends the same way: with a citizenry less informed, a democracy less vibrant, and a government less accountable. We cannot allow that to happen in the United States of America. We must remember that freedom of the press is not a partisan issue; it is an American issue. And we must have--and always have to have--the courage to stand up, to speak out, and to say: In this country, no President will dictate the truth. That is the promise of the First Amendment. That is the promise of our democracy. And that is the promise that we must keep. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.”
“This is how modern censorship creeps into newsrooms. It doesn't require book burning or secret raids. It requires weaponizing existing government authority to pressure the multinational corporations with diverse financial interests that run storied programs like ``60 Minutes.'' This is a five-alarm fire for democracy. The free press is not just another stakeholder in our public discourse; it is the check on power. And when government officials use their power to intimidate the press, to manipulate newsrooms, and silence dissent, they are not just committing an ethical breach; they are committing an assault upon the First Amendment. So let me be absolutely clear: The FCC should never condition a merger on favorable news coverage. History teaches us that censorship rarely begins with overt tyranny.”
“This is regulatory blackmail, and it places Paramount and CBS in a difficult spot: Succumb to Trump's wishes and compromise CBS's journalism or stand strong and face the wrath of the ``Federal Censorship Commission.'' This position is already leading to upheaval within the companies. Last week, executive producer Bill Owens, who had worked at ``60 Minutes'' for over two decades, resigned, citing concerns about his ability to make independent decisions. On Sunday night, just 2 nights ago, in a closing 1-minute statement, ``60 [[Page S2619]] Minutes'' journalist Scott Pelley reported on Owens' resignation and called out Paramount directly. The full story inside Paramount, CBS, and ``60 Minutes'' remains unclear, and Pelley made clear that Paramount has not killed any ``60 Minutes'' stories. But it is difficult to ignore the timing.”
“Most notably, Chairman Carr has made clear that a frivolous, politically motivated complaint against CBS over its editorial decision-making would be a consideration in the Paramount merger review. In fact, just yesterday, Chairman Carr said, cryptically, that ``all options are on the table'' in its investigation into that frivolous complaint. It is not hard to read between the lines. CBS's news reporting--and its reporting on Donald Trump--would impact the FCC review of the Paramount merger. It is a message intended to reverberate far beyond CBS and far beyond ``60 Minutes.'' The FCC has become the ``Federal Censorship Commission,'' and ``Federal Censorship Commission'' Chairman Carr is ready, eager, and willing to carry out Trump's crusade against the news media. This is not regulatory oversight.”
“They send a signal: Criticize us, and you will face not just public smears but potential legal jeopardy. The goal is clear. Trump and his allies want to turn the hard- hitting, fact-intensive journalism at ``60 Minutes'' into ``FOX and Friends,'' and at the same time, as Trump and his allies have unleashed a torrent of attacks against ``60 Minutes,'' CBS's parent company, Paramount, has been seeking regulatory approval from the FCC for an $8 billion merger. Although this deal has serious implications for the entertainment industry, Trump and his right-wing allies instead viewed it as a point of leverage against the news media. For months, the Trump FCC has made clear that favorable merger treatment will come at a cost: favorable coverage or, more precisely, less critical coverage of Donald Trump.”
“He then told FCC Chairman Brendan Carr to ``impose the maximum fines and punishment on CBS.'' Earlier in February, Trump called for ``60 Minutes'' to be ``terminated.'' Around the same time, Elon Musk got in on the action. Just a few days before Vice President Vance traveled to Germany to accuse Europe of censoring conservatives, Musk called ``60 Minutes'' the ``biggest liars in the world'' and said its journalists ``deserve a long prison sentence.'' So let me repeat that. The richest man in the world, with limitless authority over the Federal Government, said that ``60 Minutes'' journalists ``deserve a long prison sentence'' over their editorial decision making. That is a terrifying statement. These comments aren't idle threats. They create an environment of intimidation and fear.”
“He has called journalists the ``enemy of the people.'' He has used his platform, Truth Social, to attack reporters, to smear respected news organizations, and to incite harassment and threats against those who dare to report the truth. But recently, we have witnessed something even more dangerous, the merging of Trump's personal vendettas with the official powers of the government. So let's start with the facts. Trump and his allies' hatred for CBS and ``60 Minutes'' is no secret. Trump has repeatedly attacked ``60 Minutes'' on his Truth Social account. Just 2 weeks ago, for example, he said that CBS should lose its license over its reporting--even though CBS, as a network, doesn't have a license.”
“Mr. President, I rise today to talk about a regime of censorship that is increasing by the day. It is the story of Donald Trump's relentless attacks on CBS and its flagship news program, ``60 Minutes.'' It is the story of how the Federal Communications Commission, an Agency with a storied history of protecting free speech--how it has been weaponized to pressure journalists to soften their coverage of President Trump. It is a story of a campaign to turn our free press into a State-run media echo chamber, and make no mistake, it is a story that should alarm every single American, Democrat, and Republican alike. Since leaving office and even before, Donald Trump has waged a nonstop war on the free press.”
“Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The Senator from Massachusetts.”
“And we must have--and always have to have--the courage to stand up, to speak out, and to say: In this country, no President will dictate the truth. That is the promise of the First Amendment. That is the promise of our democracy. And that is the promise that we must keep. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.”
“And when government officials use their power to intimidate the press, to manipulate newsrooms, and silence dissent, they are not just committing an ethical breach; they are committing an assault upon the First Amendment. So let me be absolutely clear: The FCC should never condition a merger on favorable news coverage. History teaches us that censorship rarely begins with overt tyranny. It begins with small concessions, subtle pressures, and self-censorship born of fear. But it always ends the same way: with a citizenry less informed, a democracy less vibrant, and a government less accountable. We cannot allow that to happen in the United States of America. We must remember that freedom of the press is not a partisan issue; it is an American issue.”
“On Sunday night, just 2 nights ago, in a closing 1-minute statement, ``60 [[Page S2619]] Minutes'' journalist Scott Pelley reported on Owens' resignation and called out Paramount directly. The full story inside Paramount, CBS, and ``60 Minutes'' remains unclear, and Pelley made clear that Paramount has not killed any ``60 Minutes'' stories. But it is difficult to ignore the timing. This is how modern censorship creeps into newsrooms. It doesn't require book burning or secret raids. It requires weaponizing existing government authority to pressure the multinational corporations with diverse financial interests that run storied programs like ``60 Minutes.'' This is a five-alarm fire for democracy. The free press is not just another stakeholder in our public discourse; it is the check on power.”
“It is a message intended to reverberate far beyond CBS and far beyond ``60 Minutes.'' The FCC has become the ``Federal Censorship Commission,'' and ``Federal Censorship Commission'' Chairman Carr is ready, eager, and willing to carry out Trump's crusade against the news media. This is not regulatory oversight. This is regulatory blackmail, and it places Paramount and CBS in a difficult spot: Succumb to Trump's wishes and compromise CBS's journalism or stand strong and face the wrath of the ``Federal Censorship Commission.'' This position is already leading to upheaval within the companies. Last week, executive producer Bill Owens, who had worked at ``60 Minutes'' for over two decades, resigned, citing concerns about his ability to make independent decisions.”
“For months, the Trump FCC has made clear that favorable merger treatment will come at a cost: favorable coverage or, more precisely, less critical coverage of Donald Trump. Most notably, Chairman Carr has made clear that a frivolous, politically motivated complaint against CBS over its editorial decision-making would be a consideration in the Paramount merger review. In fact, just yesterday, Chairman Carr said, cryptically, that ``all options are on the table'' in its investigation into that frivolous complaint. It is not hard to read between the lines. CBS's news reporting--and its reporting on Donald Trump--would impact the FCC review of the Paramount merger.”
“These comments aren't idle threats. They create an environment of intimidation and fear. They send a signal: Criticize us, and you will face not just public smears but potential legal jeopardy. The goal is clear. Trump and his allies want to turn the hard- hitting, fact-intensive journalism at ``60 Minutes'' into ``FOX and Friends,'' and at the same time, as Trump and his allies have unleashed a torrent of attacks against ``60 Minutes,'' CBS's parent company, Paramount, has been seeking regulatory approval from the FCC for an $8 billion merger. Although this deal has serious implications for the entertainment industry, Trump and his right-wing allies instead viewed it as a point of leverage against the news media.”
“Just 2 weeks ago, for example, he said that CBS should lose its license over its reporting--even though CBS, as a network, doesn't have a license. He then told FCC Chairman Brendan Carr to ``impose the maximum fines and punishment on CBS.'' Earlier in February, Trump called for ``60 Minutes'' to be ``terminated.'' Around the same time, Elon Musk got in on the action. Just a few days before Vice President Vance traveled to Germany to accuse Europe of censoring conservatives, Musk called ``60 Minutes'' the ``biggest liars in the world'' and said its journalists ``deserve a long prison sentence.'' So let me repeat that. The richest man in the world, with limitless authority over the Federal Government, said that ``60 Minutes'' journalists ``deserve a long prison sentence'' over their editorial decision making. That is a terrifying statement.”
“It is a story of a campaign to turn our free press into a State-run media echo chamber, and make no mistake, it is a story that should alarm every single American, Democrat, and Republican alike. Since leaving office and even before, Donald Trump has waged a nonstop war on the free press. He has called journalists the ``enemy of the people.'' He has used his platform, Truth Social, to attack reporters, to smear respected news organizations, and to incite harassment and threats against those who dare to report the truth. But recently, we have witnessed something even more dangerous, the merging of Trump's personal vendettas with the official powers of the government. So let's start with the facts. Trump and his allies' hatred for CBS and ``60 Minutes'' is no secret. Trump has repeatedly attacked ``60 Minutes'' on his Truth Social account.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 171 Issue 71 (Tuesday, April 29, 2025) [Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 71 (Tuesday, April 29, 2025)] [Senate] [Pages S2618-S2619] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] Federal Communications Commission Mr. MARKEY. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about a regime of censorship that is increasing by the day. It is the story of Donald Trump's relentless attacks on CBS and its flagship news program, ``60 Minutes.'' It is the story of how the Federal Communications Commission, an Agency with a storied history of protecting free speech--how it has been weaponized to pressure journalists to soften their coverage of President Trump.”
“But the next issue arises immediately because even if there is a divestment, that TikTok that is then American-owned, theoretically, is going to be targeting teenagers and children just the same way that every other American social media company does. Where is the concern about that? I hear it, but I don't hear any legislation coming out here on the floor from the Republican leadership to deal with the crisis, which everyone knows is front and center in our society right now. So I think this debate really gives us a great opportunity to have a wider conversation about all of the impact social media is having upon our society. With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.”
“Let's pass that law on the Senate floor, not just for TikTok but for the American companies as well, which invented this targeting of children. That was invented here, the targeting of children, exploiting of teenagers, causing this mental health crisis in our Nation. So it is time for us to, in my opinion, pass the legislation that has been objected to by my colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle so that the President has the time to negotiate with the Chinese, with TikTok, about the national security issues, so that there is a divestment that does work and provides real security for Americans.”
“I would also add that I do agree with my colleague when he says that TikTok does prey upon young people, does contribute to mental health issues, especially amongst the teenagers and children in our society. But so does YouTube and so does Facebook and so does every one of the American sites. So if we want to deal with the problem of social media creating problems for young people in our society, let's pass a law. Let's pass a tough law. That is the law that I have been able to get out of the Senate Commerce Committee. It is a tough law. It is the Child Online Privacy Protection Act, up to the age of 16, and it says to companies: If the parents want this, you have to delete any information you have gathered about the child. It says: You can't target a teenager or a child with ads.”
“What the President is doing right now is illegally extending the time, creating a cloud of legal jeopardy over all of the American companies which deal with TikTok right now. So I think what I heard my colleague say was that they want to allow President Trump to negotiate, and that is what I am saying, except I am saying let's do it with the Senate having passed the legislation that gives him the time to do it in a very deliberate way so that the answer is not half-baked and that ultimately we can get to a resolution of this issue. I will also note, by the way, that in a filing at the U.S. circuit court of appeals, that the intelligence community did, in fact, say that they have no information that the Chinese Government has, in fact, compromised this information that can be used against the United States at this point in time.”
“Mr. President, I just want to reiterate what I said in my remarks--that ByteDance ownership in TikTok does create national security risks--but I also agree with my colleague. We just spoke. My colleague who just spoke said: Let's allow the President to continue to negotiate. Well, that is what my legislation does. It says that the President has out until October to negotiate a resolution that solves the national security-related issues. That time is needed because, in response to my colleague who said that he doesn't want a half-baked solution--well, that is what would happen if there was a rush to try to negotiate. So we need to give the President the legal space, passed by the Senate and the House, to be able to negotiate. That is all I am asking for.”
“103, and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there an objection? The Senator from Arkansas.”
“I want national security issues to be the central part of this negotiation, and I believe such a solution is possible. But unlawful, ad hoc extensions only sow chaos for the tech companies facing ruinous penalties and for the millions of Americans who rely on TikTok as a vital communications platform. Instead, Congress should pass my legislation, the Extend the TikTok Deadline Act, to lawfully extend the divestment deadline until October, creating legal certainty for TikTok's users and creators and giving all parties a longer period to reach a solution. So, Mr. President, as if in legislative session and notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be discharged from further consideration of S.”
“It wasn't TikTok or anyone else's fault that it took all the way up until to 2 days before the deadline to have TikTok get an answer as to whether or not what was happening was constitutional. So we needed more time to have a negotiation over whether or not those national security issues and other issues could be resolved. It is now, ultimately, again, a decision that has to be made as to whether or not TikTok should have gone dark last week as rumors swirled about potential new investors in TikTok's U.S. business. We don't need to find a lawful solution; it is imperative that we find a lawful solution. That is why I am bringing my legislation out here. That will protect free speech rights of TikTok's 170 million users and will also give us some time to be able to negotiate an end.”
“But we all know that President Trump's promises aren't worth a whole lot. The President could reverse course at any moment or threaten to rescind his Executive order to coerce these companies into supporting unrelated political objectives. No good comes from giving any President that kind of leverage. So while TikTok remains online today, these unilateral illegal extensions are unfair to TikTok's users and dangerous for our country. So here is the thing: I actually agree with the President on extending the TikTok divestment deadline. There was no reason that TikTok should have gone dark in January, just a couple of days after the Supreme Court ruled on the law. Clearly, the Supreme Court had only 2 days left to resolve all of the national security issues, all of the other issues that were surrounding this issue.”
“By lawlessly extending the TikTok divestment deadline, Trump has effectively put the fate of TikTok in the hands of risk-averse corporate shareholders at major technology companies like Oracle and Apple and Google. That is because the TikTok ban imposes up to $800 billion in fines for companies like Oracle and Apple and Google that help keep TikTok online and distribute the app through their app stores. Trump's lawless extension puts these companies in a difficult spot. They can comply with the law--take TikTok offline and face the wrath of Trump and the public--or they can violate the law--leave TikTok up and risk ruinous legal liability. So far, the tech companies have been willing to risk that liability based on promises from President Trump that he won't punish them.”
“Although the statute permits the President to extend the TikTok deadline by 90 days if certain conditions are met, President Trump never triggered that provision in the statute. Instead, he twice issued Executive orders that directed the Department of Justice to not enforce the law for 75 days. Nothing in the statute permits President Trump to simply not enforce Federal law. By Trump's logic, he could negate any statute enacted by Congress by simply directing his administration to not enforce it. That is not how our system of government actually works. It is lawless, and it is dangerous. Beyond being an affront to the rule of law, these Executive orders are also unfair to TikTok's 170 million creators and users and the 7 million small businesses that rely on the platform to reach their customers.”
“Mr. President, I rise today to lawfully extend the deadline by which ByteDance must either divest TikTok or face a ban in the United States. In a few moments, I will ask unanimous consent to pass my legislation with Senator Wyden, Senator Van Hollen, and Senator Booker, the Extend the TikTok Deadline Act, to extend the divestment deadline until October. My colleagues may be wondering: Didn't President Trump just extend the TikTok deadline last week by 75 days? Why are we passing legislation to do the same thing? Well, it is because we need legislation because President Trump's move was illegal, both the first time he extended the deadline in January and his second extension last Friday.”
“The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution, and make adjustments to the pay-as-you-go ledger, for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments, amendments between the Houses, motions, or conference reports relating to preserving Social Security benefits, which may include prohibiting DOGE from limiting access to the Social Security phone service, by the amounts provided in such legislation for those purposes, provided that such legislation would not increase the deficit over the period of the total of fiscal years 2025 through 2034. ______”
“Congressional Record, Volume 171 Issue 60 (Thursday, April 3, 2025) [Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 60 (Thursday, April 3, 2025)] [Senate] [Page S2224] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] SA 1529. Mr. MARKEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the concurrent resolution H. Con. Res. 14, establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2025 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2026 through 2034; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the appropriate place, insert the following: SEC. ___. DEFICIT-NEUTRAL RESERVE FUND RELATING TO ENSURING SENIORS CAN ACCESS SOCIAL SECURITY OVER THE PHONE.”
“If my colleagues truly believe that it is all in jest, then let's put this to the test. Let's pass the resolution now because if they won't, the cost will be nothing less than the future of our Republic. And that is not a joke. With that, as if in legislative session and notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 154, which is at the desk; further I ask that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? The Senator from Florida.”
“[T]he Twenty-second amendment . . . states that `No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once.' '' So, therefore, President ``Trump is ineligible in any future elections to be elected Vice-President or President, or to serve as President beyond the conclusion of his current term.'' That is it. That is the totality of what it says. This is not a partisan statement; it is a constitutional one. Every Member of this Chamber, regardless of party, should be able to agree: No President is above the law. No President is entitled to more than two terms.”
“There is nothing humorous about Members of Congress excusing, enabling, and covering for a man who has already demonstrated his willingness to subvert democracy for his own personal gain. So, at this moment, I will ask the Senate to take up and pass by unanimous consent my resolution making clear what should already be obvious: That under the 22nd and 12th Amendments to the Constitution, Donald Trump is ineligible in any future election to be elected as Vice President or President of the United States or to serve as President beyond the conclusion of his current term. This resolution is incredibly simple. It says that ``the Twelfth amendment to the Constitution States that `No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States'. . . .”
“What we are witnessing is the continued erosion of constitutional order, met not with outrage from Republicans but with shrugs and chuckles and excuses. And those who claimed he was joking before now claim he is joking still after he says he is not. That is in violation of his own explicit statement that he is telling the truth. They are not just enabling a man's delusions of infinite power; they are setting the stage for something far more dangerous: The normalization of sedition. Let me say this plainly: There is nothing funny about sedition. There is nothing amusing about a former President who incited an attack on this Capitol now openly fantasizing about defying the Constitution to remain in office.”
“The 12th Amendment makes clear that no one who is constitutionally ineligible to serve as President may be elected as Vice President, closing the door on any scheme where a President resigns to elevate an unelected successor. The law is settled. The case is closed. The reason we have these protections is simple: America is a republic, not a monarchy. The people's power is enshrined in the peaceful transition of leadership. George Washington set the precedent of serving only two terms, and after Franklin Roosevelt's unprecedented four terms, both parties, Democrat and Republican, came together to enshrine term limits into law--the George Washington tradition into law. Every President since, Democrats and Republicans alike, has respected this safeguard until right now.”
“He has floated the notion of repealing the 22nd Amendment. His supporters have worn T-shirts reading ``Trump 2028.'' His allies have spread the baseless notion that he was ``owed'' extra years because of supposed injustices against him. Each time, when confronted, his defenders--Members of this very body--have dismissed it as a big joke. But the man himself has now made it clear: He was not joking. So why are congressional Republicans still pretending that he was joking? Let's review what the Constitution actually says. The 22nd Amendment, ratified in 1951, states unequivocally: No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice. No exceptions. No loopholes.”
“Mr. President, I rise today to speak on a matter that should not require clarification. In the United States of America, no President, Republican or Democrat, serves more than two terms. That is not a suggestion; that is not a tradition; that is the law of the United States, enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. Yet, once again, President Donald Trump is openly suggesting that he should have a third term. In an interview with NBC News, he was asked directly about his repeated comments on seeking a third term. This time, he left no room for doubt. He said he was ``not joking'' about a third term--``not joking.'' So let's be clear. This is not the first time Donald Trump has toyed with the idea of clinging to power beyond what the Constitution allows. He has mused [[Page S2150]] about serving 10 or 12 or even 16 years.”
“It is time all of us as a nation to rise above partisan interests and defend what makes us strong; our commitment to the Constitution, to the independence of the judiciary, and to the rule of law. I urge my colleagues--all of my colleagues--and every American to stand with me in defending these sacred institutions, not for our political health but for the health of our democracy itself. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island. S.J. Res. 37”
“I will conclude with this: The attacks on our judiciary, the calls for the impeachment of judges, and the attempts to intimidate and retaliate against lawyers who dare to stand in defense of the Constitution are not just an assault on individuals, they are an assault on the very foundations of our democracy. The courts are not pawns in a political game. The rule of law is not up for negotiation. If we allow this dangerous precedent to take root, if we tolerate threats against judges and lawyers fulfilling their constitutional duties, we set the stage for the erosion of the checks and balances that have safeguarded our Nation for over two centuries. This is not about protecting one man. This is about protecting the principles that ensure justice and fairness for all Americans.”
“So with Donald Trump coming after lawyers and law firms, it is gut- check time for law firms in our country, especially the big law firms that the President has targeted for revenge and retribution because of their lawyers daring to do their jobs and representing clients in cases against him. I commend those firms like WilmerHale, like Jenner & Block, who are standing up, who are fighting back. And we need all law firms to stand up to this administration and to continue to stand up for the rule of law. And those that don't, especially those that seek to appease and accommodate the President out of fear their bottom line will suffer-- grave risk, grave harm to our liberties will, in fact, depend upon the lawyers who take difficult and unpopular cases, often against the government, and zealously represent their clients in those matters.”
“Instead, my Republican colleagues have been awfully quiet, fearful of upsetting President Trump, who has followed the ``Godfather,'' part 1, playbook and made them an offer they can't refuse--a primary opponent if they just don't go along. Finally, I have a few words about Donald Trump's unprecedented Executive orders targeting law firms and individual lawyers who have litigated against him. These orders have suspended security clearances, canceled [[Page S2135]] government contracts, barred employees from Federal buildings, and erected other obstacles that prevent lawyers from representing their clients. Trump has even directed the Department of Justice to seek sanctions against attorneys who file frivolous lawsuits or engage in vexatious litigation against him.”