Durbin Questions Judicial Nominees During Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing
Durbin’s questions provided the nominees a chance to clarify their controversial positions and past remarks before the Committee
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today questioned witnesses during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the nominations of Joshua Dale Dunlap, nominated to be a United States Circuit Judge for the First Circuit; Eric Chunyee Tung, nominated to be a United States Circuit Judge for the Ninth Circuit; William Walter Mercer, nominated to be a United States District Judge for the District of Montana; and Stephen Chad Meredith, nominated to be a United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Kentucky.
Durbin first asked Mr. Tung to clarify his commentary on gender roles and LGBTQ+ rights. Just months ago, in remarks for a Federalist Society event, Mr. Tung defended originalism and wrote, “Whether there’s a constitutional right to abortion, same-sex marriage, sodomy, pornography, transgender procedures — the answer for the originalist is simple: No.”
“You seem to be questioning landmark Supreme Court decisions like Lawrence v. Texas and Obergefell [v. Hodges.] Let me ask you point blank: do you believe there’s a constitutional right formarriage for same-sex couples?” Durbin asked.
Mr. Tung responded only that if confirmed as a circuit judge, he would “be bound” by the precedent in the Supreme Court’s ruling.
“What do you believe now [in regard to gender roles?]” Durbin asked.
Mr. Tung dodged the question by stating that he could not comment on “live issues” as a judicial nominee.”
Durbin responded, “See that is where we run into problems. When we get down to basic values and positions, we know what he [wrote] years ago. I asked him what he believes today, and he tells me he can’t tell me the answer because he is possibly going to be on the bench. So, it’s very difficult to really understand where you stand on this situation.”
Durbin then asked Mr. Dunlap about minors’ abortion rights. In March 2015, Mr. Dunlap submitted written testimony to the Maine Legislature in support of a bill that would have made it more difficult forminors and incapacitated people to access abortions. The bill he supported sought to change Maine law which does not require minors to obtain the consent of a parent or guardian before having an abortion.
“Should a minor who is sexually assaulted or a victim of incest be forced to give birth if her parents do not consent to her having an abortion? Durbin asked.
Mr. Dunlap would not directly answer but claimed that his own views would not be relevant if he is confirmed to the bench and that he would “faithfully” abide by binding precedent.
“Let me ask you: are you saying what you said [in] March 2015 is the same position you hold today or a different one?” Durbin asked.
Mr. Dunlap again said his personal views are not applicable if confirmed as a judge.
What about Obergefell? Durbin asked.
Mr. Dunlap responded, “that would be binding precedent should I be confirmed.”
Durbin then asked Mr. Tung about his affiliation with Mike Davis, the president of the right-wing Article III Project. According to public reporting, Mr. Davis has played a key role in advising President Trump on judicial nominations during his second term.
“Is he [Mike Davis] your friend?” Durbin asked.
To which Mr. Tung replied that they are friends.
“Have you had any conversations regarding your nomination before President Trump announced it on July 2? Durbin asked.
“Just simply that it happened, Senator,” Mr. Tung responded.
Durbin then asked about Mr. Davis’s overtly racist remarks. In an October 2023 social media post, Mr. Davis wrote “[t]he violent Black underclass is a danger to America” and “[t]hese monsters will kill.”
“Do you condemn this offensive statement by Mr. Davis?” Durbin asked.
Mr. Tung refused to fully condemn the statement and instead said only that Mr. Davis’s comments “are not necessarily my views.”
Video of Durbin’s first round of questions in Committee is available here.
Audio of Durbin’s first round of questions in Committee is available here.
Footage of Durbin’s first round of questions in Committee is available here for TV Stations.
During the second round of questions, Durbin asked Mr. Mercer about his views of January 6 defendants.
“What is your reaction to the full and unconditional pardon of the January 6 defendants by President Trump?” Durbin asked.
Mr. Mercer refused to answer the question and instead said the judiciary has no involvement with the pardon power.
Durbin then asked Mr. Meredith about his anti-choice record. Beginning in 2017, Mr. Meredith defended Kentucky law that required doctors to present certain information to patients before performing an abortion procedure. As part of his defense of that law, he stated, “not every patient understands the consequences of an abortion procedure.”
“Do you believe that female patients are less likely or less able to understand medical advice than male patients? Durbin asked.
Mr. Meredith asked Durbin to clarify.
“Well, you said not every patient understands the consequences and we know we’re talking about primarily of women of childbearing status. You went onto say there are a ‘number of patients who don’t understand the nature of the fetus [within them].’ Do you believe that female patients are less likely to understand this?” Durbin asked.
Mr. Meredith claimed that he was summarizing the evidence in the record for the court.
“If you want to clarify what you said in light of what I quoted, please do so. At this point, I think there really is serious question as to what you’re trying to say,” Durbin responded.
Video of Durbin’s second round of questions in Committee is available here.
Audio of Durbin’s second round of questions in Committee is available here.
Footage of Durbin’s second round of questions in Committee is available here for TV Stations.
-30-