and i yield back. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. coons: mr. president, having just viewed a video of my friend and colleague, senator alex padilla, being manhandled, thrown to the ground and handcuffed after identifying himself as senator alex padilla and attempting to ask a question of the secretary of homeland security, kristi noem, in los

angeles, i am shaken. i am angry. and i am gravely concerned about our path forward in this body and our nation. democracy is a gift hard won and hard-earned by the sacrifice of millions who have served, fought, and died, some in moments of tumult and challenge on the beaches of normandey, on the fields of gettysburg. from the very beginning of our nation to this moment, millions of americans have stepped forward and said, i will risk it all so that my children and those i do not know can live free lives knowing the burdens of tyranny, knowing what it meant to live under the heel of a king, our forefathers risked everything. in nations around the world that i have visited on your behalf as a senator, people yearning for

freedom and people recently free have come and spoken about how much the american example means to them. earlier this year, i was at a global security conference concerned about what was happening in our nation about our division and the dialogue, and i heard three young parliamentarians from other countries talk about how hard they were working. part of our job, mr. speaker, as senators, is to ask hard questions, to pose challenges, is to test the cabinet of the president, to visit federal facilities, to ask questions that are sometimes uncomfortable or unwelcome. just this week i was at three committee hearings and had three members of the cabinet in front of me. did they want to answer my questions? probably not but they did. if a senator of the united

states who identifies himself as a senator in at least the video i just saw gets handled this way, gets thrown to the ground and handcuffed, what is happening to those who have no such title or voice? if this gentle and decent and caring man is treated this way, what is happening along the margins and the dark spaces in the places we cannot see? so, mr. president, i call on my republican friends and colleagues to look hard at this moment and say what comes next, what comes next? are we to be at risk of arrest if we threaten to ask a question or interrupt. our very service as senators -- is the very service as senators hanging in the balance at the

moment as we all learn more of the facts of what happened in los angeles, the future of what will happen here in our country and in the world will wait on your answer. was this an overresponse? was this a misuse of force? was this a disrespect of the very senate itself? is this a moment when as our founders who wrote "the federalist papers" dreamed? my colleagues in the senate will show their loyalty to the role, to the check and balance, to the independence of the senate more than they'll show their loyalty to their party and their president and demand an answer, an apology, and a different path forward? or is this a moment when all of us will watch this video of our friend, a member of the judiciary committee, a representative, a senator of los angeles in the state of california being roughly mishandled and say too bad.

at least it wasn't me. if we answer this moment with silence, we will be damned. and our children and the word will -- and the world will say they really didn't mean it. the members of my family who served in the u.s. military knew that typing on that line -- that signing on that line meant being willing to give everything. and i believe and have been told that they understood that service to be in service of freedom, not in service of any particular president or party, any particular state or moment, but in service of democracy. democracy is a fragile flower. and around the world people look to what we do to know what they should do. there are petty tin-pot dictators, authoritarians and strong men around the world who will watch this video and be

encouraged and think this is the way to silence their critics. i can't imagine a member of this chamber who knows alex padilla, who's had the blessing of sitting with him in moments when he's asked questions or engaged in discourse who thinks of him as anything other than a reasoned, reasonable, mild mannered senator. but even if he were not, even if he were outspoken, loud, aggressive, annoying, the title senator and the role that we have should entitle him to ask a question at a press conference. if the result is this mistreatment, heaven help us all and heaven help our democracy. with that i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the chair

recognizes the senator from new jersey. mr. booker: i want to thank the chair. clearly the voices of my colleagues and i are calling this what it is, which is a crossroads for this body. one of our members, it matters not what their party, who was in their state was forcibly removed when he was asking for accountability from the executive branch. he was taken out of that room forcibly by multiple men who then even when he identified himself, even when he was pulled out of that room, he was then forced to the ground, pushed upon his face, his hands wrenched behind his back, and he was put in restraints. this is a crossroads for this

body. this is not a partisan issue. it is one about who we are as a body. will we let the abuses of the executive branch physically take a member of this body and drive them to the ground and put them in restraints? and why? why? well, we are starting to get answers already. here is tricia mcloughlin, who is the assistant secretary of the department of homeland security. this is her statement. senator padilla chose disrespectful political theater and interrupted a live press conference without identifying himself or having his senate security pin on as he, quote,

lunged toward secretary noem. he was told repeatedly to back away and did not comply with officers' repeated commands. secret service thought he was an attacker and officers acted appropriately. the statement concludes that secretary noem met with senator padilla afterward and held a 15-minute meeting. we know this is not true because we hear with our own ears on the tape senator padilla identifying himself. further, disrespectful political theater is not a justification to remove a united states senator in their own state at a public press conference and violently push them out of the room, drive them to the ground, put them on their stomach and handcuff them. disrespectful behavior? this is our democracy.

you have a right to speak up. you have a right to free speech. you have a right to stand and do the job that you swore an oath in this chamber to do, to uphold the constitution of the united states of america. and one of your jobs is to provide a check and a balance to the administration. one of your jobs is to give accountability to the administration. now, i know the 100 members -- the other 99 members of this body, and if disrespectful behavior is a justification for violent reprisal from the administration, how many members of this body, how many members of this body would be subjected to that? this is a farce of a justification, and, therefore, we are at a crossroads.

will my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, will my republican colleagues justify the treatment of one of the members of this body, justify the violence against one of the members of this body, justify a member of this body being thrown upon the ground and putting handcuffs for what? for disrespectful behavior. if you think it stops with one, you are inviting it for all because it does not. you are inviting it for every member of this body. if the obama administration or the biden administration said that a senator on the other side of the aisle was being disrespectful and threw that senator violently onto the ground and put him into handcuffs, this body would be full of my colleagues on the other said of the aisle condemning what the biden justice department or the obama justice department did. this should not be about tribalism. it should be standing up and being a leader in this moment.

this is wrong, this violence is wrong. but let me be more personal. i try to understand why this particularly upset me. and i think my colleague from delaware spoke to that because of alex padilla's reputation in this body of being a kind and gentle person. we all know him, the goodness and the decency that he has. he is not one of the louder senators. he is not one of the performative senators. he has a reputation, as my colleague from delaware said is on both sides of the aisle for being a gentleman. but i think what was really hard for me to see was that a member of this body was driven to his knees and made to kneel before authorities. that's -- that's what got me.

i think when i saw him driven to his knees, forcibly something there got me. you see, we know alex padilla's story. it is an unusual story for this body. his family came here as mexican immigrants. his father was a short-order cook. his mother cleaned homes. they did those jobs that don't always come with esteem or respect. they did those jobs and which when people see them, they sometimes look down on them. they did those jobs that are often margealized despite -- margealized despite -- marginalized despite their dignity. they raised their son to serve. he went to mit. they raised their son to show grit, to work, to rise. they got to watch their son become a city council person.

they got to watch their son ascend to be a secretary of state for california. they got to watch their son come to this body. and this son of mexican immigrants, who cleaned homes and served food, this man with equal dignity in this body today was driven violently to his knees, as if made to kneel before the authority of the executive. because he was so-called disrespectful. that should offend the consciousness not just of the other 99 members of this body. it should offend the conscience of this country because if you can make alex padilla forcibly kneel before this executive, when does it stop? he's a united states senator. and if you can force him to kneel to his knees violently,

when does it stop? what did it say to other americans who want to speak up? what does it sty other americans that -- what does it say to other americans who want to exercise their constitutional duel? what does it say to americans who want to peacefully protest? what does it sty other americans from -- say to other americans from humble backgrounds, who know poverty? the when a united states senator who stand up to do his job can be made to heel, driven to his knees, what message does it send? every body in this body should see that this is a crossroads. they treated a member of the united states senate violently after he identified himself, dragged him out of a room, threw him upon the ground, and put him in handcuffs. every member of this body should object to that. why? because the statement was that

he was disrespectful. that is unacceptable. that is offensive. that is un-american. and so why is there silence right now? why aren't my colleagues saying, i don't care if it's a republican, a dearths or an independent -- 0 democrat, or an independent. when you drive man to his knees in the united states of america, that is wrong, that is wrong, that is wrong. this is a test, this is a crossroads, this is a day in which the character of this body will be defined. alex padilla, a man of infinite deanscy, general ross -- decency, generosity of circuit who if you disagree with him or not, is so well-liked in this body. today in a time of understandable outrage in los

angeles went to be with his constituents to get answers. and when he walked into a room, saw a cabinet secretary and raised his voice to ask questions, he was met with violence and heaped upon him indignities. they drove him to his knees and then to his face and they put him in cuffs. well, they didn't assault -- didn't just assault the physical cattle of alex padilla, they did not succeed in assaulting his dignity. i know you rose off that ground with the same dignity before they threw him upon it. what is in question now is the truth of who we are and what we stand for. this is an abuse of power.

this is a violent act, unjustifiably taken on a member of this body. the question is, who will we be as a senate? the question is, how will we respond? will we defend this institution or will we yield to the tactics of authoritarian, violent leaders? i see my colleague here from maryland. i -- mr. president, i'd yield the floor. mr. van hollen: mr. president. the presiding officer: the chair recognizes the senator from maryland. mr. van hollen: mr. president, i thank my friend and colleague from new jersey, and it's hard to contain our emotion appropriately on the senate floor. this is a moment that every american should be outraged about and every american should be angry, and not only angry about what happened to senator padilla but fearful for our

democracy because we are at a crossroads when it comes to the rule of law. -- and respect for our democracy and our constitution in the united states of america. i felt compelled to cancel the rest of my meetings this evening to come right here to the floor to join my colleagues in speaking out, not just for a fellow senator but for the future of the rule of law and due process in the united states of america. i had to rewind that video, like, three or four times to see if this was really happening. and i saw the earlier video come out of him being essentially dragged out of the room, roughed up, and then the other video of him lying on his stomach,

handcuffed, with people standing around him. mr. president, then the lies went out. the senator from new jersey just mentioned -- i'm reading this statement from the department of homeland security. senator padilla chose disrespectful political theater, interrupt add live press conference without identifying himself. that's a lifetime -- that's a life. just look at the video. you can see him coming in and saying, i'm senator padilla, the senior senator from california. he wanted to ask a question. we all have a lot of questions. he's a united states senator. he should be able to ask a question about what's happening in his state of california. you know, we had the president of the united states just a few weeks ago in response to a question say he wasn't sure if he had to comply with the

constitution of the united states. the president of the united states, who is sworn to take an oath to uphold the constitution, said he wasn't sure he had to comply with the constitution. you have senior administration officials like steve miller talking about suspending habeas corpus in the united states of america. habeas corpus is the of due process to make sure that people cannot be deprived of their liberty without a fair trial and a fair hearing. and here we have alex padilla going in to ask a question, and he's tackled, he's roughed up, he's dragged out of the room, he's put on the floor and handcuffed. this is a president who also the other day when asked if he would arrest the governor of california or whether his people

should arrest the governor of california, he said, yeah, i think maybe she should'd they should. -- i think maybe they should. think about that. this is an administration that arrested the mayor of a major city. this is lawless behavior from this administration. this is what a dictatorship looks like. this is what happens when one person tries to grab all the power, when they say, i don't know if i have to comply with the constitution of the united states. the constitution of the united states is designed to have checks and balances. it's designed to make sure that our liberties are protected. the bill of rights protects all of us. and yet you see the president of the united states and his henchmen and his henchwomen

trampling over due process, trampling over due process in the country, and trampling on a united states from california who said, madam president, i have a question. i'm looking forward to hearing about what question senator padilla wanted to ask. because i know senator pa deyaks i know he had a -- because i know senator padilla. i know he had a good question to ask the secretary of homeland security. but he didn't get a chance. this was a press conference. secretary of homeland security is taking questions. the united states senator representing the people that have state, elected to represent the people of that state, he had a question. he ask didn't -- he didn't get to ask it because he was dragged out of room, thrown on the floor and arrested. i want to know what that question is going to be. and i know senator padilla will

tell us. we'll probably find out then why the secretary of homeland security didn't want to hear the question. because this administration wants to shut down questions except for from the journalists that they like. they belittle journalists who ask them any question that they see as critical. that's also what authoritarian leaders do. they push aside the people who ask hard but meaningful questions and just call on the people that will ask them the s slowball question. you've already seen this at play in the oval office, during press conferences that the president has. he goes, oh, i like that reporter. oh, that's a terrible question. what he means is it's a question that he doesn't like usually the

questions he doesn't like are questions that are right on target and go to the heart of what's happening in our country. and so, senator padilla had a question. he just didn't get a chance to answer it. i want to build on another point my colleagues have made, and that is a real appeal to our senate republican colleagues. because in these first months, four, five months of the trump admini administration, we've seen the actions of a lawless president. you know, it's unprecedented in the united states to have over 260 lawsuits filed in federal courts. right? this doesn't happen normally. it's because of the massive law breaking that we've seen going on, attacks on civil liberties,

attacks on due process is part of that, attacks on the first amendment, the illegal withholding of funds that have been appropriated by the congress. the courts can't do it alone, colleagues. every member of this body is sworn to uphold the constitution, the constitution the president of the united states now says he's not sure if he has to comply with. i believe senators here want to take those constitutional responsibilities seriously. but if we're going to do that we have to stand up at moment like this, not democratic senators alone, but republican senators too. because if you let the executive do this to senator alex padilla to today, some other executive, some other president can do it to somebody else tomorrow. if you can do this to senator

alex padilla, imagine how vulnerable other citizens and others in this country are to this kind of tyranny and abuse. so, i hope this will be a moment, mr. president, where people come together and stand up and say regardless of policy differences on different issues, we're all here to debate those issues and disagree, but there are some things we should consider fundamental and sacrosanct, and that is the idea of rule of law and due process, and what we witnessed here was the outrage that he we come to see in countries with authoritarian leaders. that's what we witnessed. and it's a pattern. but today was the most graphic example to date where a united states senator was essentially taken down as he introduced himself, and said, i have a

question. so, i have a question for all of our colleagues -- what are we going to do about it? who are we? what do we stand for? are we going to uphold the constitution? so i'm looking forward to hearing the question senator padilla wanted to ask, but i also ask all of us a question, and that is, are we going to use this moment to stand up for decency and to stand up for the fair treatment of every american? and i yield the floor. mr. murphy: mr. president. the presiding officer: the chair recognizes the senator from connecticut. mr. murphy: thank you, mr. president. i agree with my friend from maryland. this has to be a moment where we drop our political affiliations, where we decide we are americans, that the constitution matters, that dissent defines america, and we say and do the

right thing. i think there is still time for our republican colleagues here to speak out. i understand they may still want to collect more facts, but as each minute and each hour passes, it's becoming clear that the main justification seems to be simply that senator padilla was showing some level of disrespect. and the first comments from our republican colleagues, i think if you're an american who cares about free speech, are really concerning. one of our colleagues in the senate said this, senator padilla has a responsibility to his constituents to show up at work, not to try to make a spectacle of himself. well, that is certainly a legitimate opinion.

right? you can criticize any of us for engaging in spectacle, but spectacle is not illegal. raising your voice is not a crime in this country. protesting your government does not, cannot, and should not result in you being delivered to the ground by law enforcement and handcuffed. another of our colleagues says, was he disruptive? well, he got what he wanted. once again, the standard here seems to be disruption, that if you are speaking truth to power, then you are going to be met by violence. the definition of this country, the fundamental nature of america, is that protest is not met with violence, protest is

celebrated in this nation, that what defines america against the rest of the world, against the totality of previous human history is that we protect the right of human beings living in the united states of america to raise protest, loud protests, sometimes disruptive protest against their government. and frankly, we protect that right equally, if it is a united states senator or an ordinary citizen with no formal power. and so, we can say today, well, this is really dangerous, that a united states senator got thrown to the ground and handcuffed, simply because they spoke up at a press conference, but it is no more concerning that it is happening to a united states citizen than what is happening to many other citizens and residents of this country right now who are being met with equal physical force.

we don't expect any different treatment of united states senators than of ordinary citizens. but many ordinary citizens in los angeles right now are being treated with the same kind of force that alex padilla was met with today. and so there is still time for us to come together and say, in this country, speaking truth to power, even in a disruptive way is never rationalization for violence. but i will tell you, the first couple statements from my republican colleagues are deeply worrying. they misread the fundamental nature of this country. and if we now live in a world where simple disagreement, vocal disag disagreement, where protest with this administration becomes justification for violence, i

don't know how you can define that as america any longer. and as someone who was sitting in this chamber, i think this very same desk, on january 6, it shouldn't be lost on us that there are forms of political protest that are protected by this administration, celebrated even, and then there are forms of political protest, as you saw today, that are met with violence. there are individuals out on the street today in america who just a few years ago were in this building or on the outskirts of this building, beating the hell out of police officers, viciously, savagely attacking

police officers, tasers to the throat rendering those police officers unconscious, metal poles being hammered onto the heads of police officers. in an exceptional moment, the president of the united states, in celebration of their violence, pardoned them, put them back out on the street, sending the unequivocal message that if you engage in violent protest on behalf of the white house, you get out of jail free. pair that together with the message that is being received by the american public, now on a daily basis, most prominently and visibly today, that if you engage in peaceful protest -- senator padilla was asking a question, he identified himself as a united states senator --

of the administration, you will be met by violence. you carry out violence on behalf of the white house, you're excused. you lodge normal, protected protest against this white house, you are thrown to the ground and handcuffed, even if you're a united states senator, though it should not matter. and so, the early reaction here, it should be chilling. because once this becomes normalized, i don't know how you put it back in the bottle. we shouldn't assume that this democracy survives forever. this is a revolutionary experiment, 250 years in. it's fragile. this idea that we govern ourselves, this idea that we

res respect through rule and force of law people who disagree with us. .0001% of humans ever lived under a system like that, in which they decide for themselves the law, their protest, even against the most powerful people in the country, is protected by law. that idea is unnatural, it is in some ways almost destined to fall apart. yet, for 250 years, we have not let it fall apart. we have decided that our fealty to that idea, of free speech, of protected free speech, even if it rubs up against the ruling elites, the ruling class, the white house, the most powerful people in the country, in an uncomfortable way, will be prot protected. and so, for 250 years we have

together, republicans and democrats, decided that that principle of free speech was more important than our political stripes, than loyalty to our party's leader or our party's ideas. and so, at some point tonight a republican has to come down to this floor. at some point this weekend, some of our republican colleagues have to speak out. on behalf of this fundamental american idea, on behalf of the united states senate, on behalf of our colleague. we can still fight on tax policy and immigration policy. we can have big disagreements about the reconciliation bill. it will not harm my republican colleagues' ability to render arran argument on the things that matter to them. it's okay for us to agree that

what happened to alex padilla two hours ago crosses a line. it doesn't compromise my republican colleagues' integrity as republicans to decide that there is still right our wrong, that -- still right or wrong, that not everything is black or white, that two plus two sometimes has to still equal four. what happened to senator padilla should not have happeneded. he identified himself. it's not true that he did not identify himself. what happened to him in the room is not justifiable, but certainly what happened to him outside the room isn't justifiable. once he was removed from the room, being thrown to the ground as he is identifying himself has a senator, being handcuffed, canned be justified. so we're going to hang around on this floor in the hopes that at

some point, somehow -- and i nope not all of our -- and i know not all of our republican colleagues are still in town -- speak up on behalf of this basic premise, this basic idea of america. that even when protest rubs you the wrong way, even when you don't like the form or substance of it, we are no longer the country that we love, the country that we teach our kids about if we don't find a way to come together to object to protests being met with this kind of violence. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the chair recognizes the senator from california. mr. schiff: mr. president, a little more than a couple hours ago my friend and colleague, senator alex padilla, attended a press conference in a federal building in los angeles, being held by the secretary of

homeland security kristi noem. instead of treating him with respect, instead of answering his questions, he was grabbed by her security detail. he was physically forced from the room, forced to the ground, his arms pinned behind his back. this assault is unlike anything i have ever seen, perhaps unlike anyone in this chamber has ever seen and it crystallizes the threat to our country and its democracy. if the administration can so mistreat a member of this body, what can it do to every other american? what can it do to every other resident of the united states of america? what can it do to you? what can it do to your neighbor and to your community? the abusive treatment of senator alex padilla, however, did not take place in isolation. it took place at a time of heightened tension in los angeles and around the nation. earlier this week i returned

from my home in los angeles, a city in which thousands have peacefully protested the administration's harsh immigration policies, and at which the president has ordered the mobilizeization of thousands of national guardsmen and hundreds of marines in order to deal with a few vandals and miscreants that law enforcement was capable of subduing. the question is why. why order in the military if they are not necessary? why order in the military over the objection much local and state officials? why go to the expense? why go to the trouble? why undertake such an obvious provocation? why in a city of under # 500 scare miles did donald trump -- square miles did donald trump feel it was necessary over the face of a few blocks? these are some of the questions i imagine that alex padilla

wanted to ask the secretary of homeland security. but now today we must add one more question. why would they treat senator alex padilla with such forceful and disgraceful disregard, forcing him to the ground? why? and the answer involves failure and distraction and disrespect and disregard. failure of the president's immigration policy, failure of his economic policy, a desire to distract from these failures, disrespect of our military and its role in civil society and disregard of our democracy and the principles upon which our nation was founded. let's start with failure, the failure of donald trump's immigration policy, the failure in particular of his promise to deport massive numbers of violent criminals, a failure

that was inevitable because it was based on a lie, a foundational lie, foundational to his campaign and to his presidency, the original lie of the trump campaign, the one he spoke as he descended the golden escalator in 2015 and suggested to the american people that most of the folks coming to this country as immigrants and migrants were murderers and rapists and violent criminals bent on doing harm to the american people. that nations opened their prisons and let out their worst offenders so they could come to the united states and wreck our way of life. it was a vindictive lie but a lie that the president hoped he could ride a wave of fear that he could in turn ride into office. the truth of course is the vast number of people coming to this country are peaceful, hardworking people who want nothing more than an opportunity to get ahead, to enjoy a good

life and to provide for themselves and for their family. the american people understood this, but they also understood that our border was broken, that our system was chaotic, that the immigration system was itself broken, that asylum places took too long to adjudicate and people waiting lawfully to emigrate should be given priority over those who do not. as president trump promised, his focus would be on the deportation of violent criminals. but he also promised mass deportations, and the only way to square that conflict between the very specific and the very broad was to go back to that original lie, that all immigrants are violent criminals who mean us harm. if you can make the country believe that, you don't have to be targeted in your immigration raids. you don't have to go through the painstaking work of tracking

down people with criminal records who don't want to be found. if you believe that lie that all immigrants are violent criminals, then you can do broad immigration sweeps at restaurants or on farms, in garment factories or high school graduations, in random neighborhoods, and homes, or at the home depot. just go out there and arrest illegal aliens, the president's deputy chief of staff, a frustrated steven miller, demanded. after berating department officials for the slow pace of their operations. 3,000 arrests a day, the administration insisted on as a new quota, and gone was any pretense of looking for violent offenders. and so the indiscriminate raids and indiscriminate cruelty began to multiply. people picking up, picking up people who show up for immigration appointments or take the oath of citizenship or to

take that oath only to deport them. separating fathers from their sons and daughters, mothers from their children, husbands from their wives. a farm worker who worked in the fields for decades, hard work, backbreaking work, work in the heat and the cold, work during a deadly pandemic while others stayed home, work that most u.s. citizens don't want to do and don't want to do, chased through the fields they harvested to be taken away from their families. a mother chased down the street by hooded i.c.e. agents away from her terrified and screaming teenage daughter. americans did not vote for this, do not want this, and in the midst of this, the american people started to speak out at first in small weighs, in private -- in small ways in private conversations after the deportingations of their

nations. then at town halls and in gatherings at their schools. and then as the raids increased in their scope and the scope of their cruelty by taking to the street as is our god-given right and also a right given by our constitution. some of those protests have taken place in los angeles, where angelinos gathered to speak out against these actions, against the separation of families and the injury to our communities and our economy. and in the midst of these protests, some number of agitators were attracted by the conflict and saw it as an opportunity to vandalize, assault law enforcement and engage in other reprehensible conduct. like moths to a flame, every city has these miscreants, and so does los angeles. they care not about immigration policy or immigrants or migrants who are affected, and our state

and local law enforcement are more than capable of dealing with them, and they did. but amidst his failure of economic policies and backlash donald trump saw an opportunity. his tariff wars were not improving our trade with other nations and instead we're prompting the boycott of american goods by close allies like canada and causing layoffs at american ports. higher prices at target and walmart and elsewhere. he had to fend off amazon plants to include a line item for the trump tariff tax on each transaction, which would have made it even more obvious to the american people that he was betraying the central promise of his campaign to bring prices down when they are going up. and his big, beautiful bill was in trouble. over a big, ugly price tag far from reducing the debt or deficit, the bill was revealed

to cost taxpayers a whopping $2.4 trillion added to the national debt. he was borrowing the money from our kids and our grandkids to fund a tax cut for himself and his rich friends. even the world's richest man and heretofore the president's biggest benefactor, elon musk, called the bill a disgusting abomination and made it clear that republicans should be ashamed of voting for it. and the opportunity donald trump saw in all this will failure was this, call in a distraction, call in the troops, call in the marines not to save a city, but to save himself from drowning in failure. and so he did. 4,000 troops from california's national guard and 700 from the marines, and the reaction in los angeles of course was the one that he desired -- escalation, not de-escalation. more conflict, not less.

more chaos and the kind of chaos he thrives on, the kind of chaos where the insurrectionists come president, the man who on his first day pardoned hundreds of criminals who beat police officers, could somehow try to reclaim the the mantle of a law and order president. it has not worked. it will not work. americans have a long memory and will not soon forget the images of january 6, when the president sat calmly in the white house dining room, dining on burgers and fries while our capitol police were under assault. and the same man who called in the guard to handle a comparatively small number of criminals and vandals in l.a. refused to call in the guard to stop thousands of them from ransacking this capitol. the last time a president called in the national guard over the objection of the governor of a state was in 1965, when the

segregationist governor of arkansas ignored a ruling of the supreme court and refused to integrate the schools in that state. lyndon johnson did so to avoid violence and to protect the students trying to attend. those circumstances could not be more different than today, when our president has called in the guard knowing it is more likely to provoke violence than to stop it. we must reject any thinking of our cities as a battle space, that our uniformed military is called upon to dominate a secretary of defense one said. at home he said we should use our military only when requested to do so on very rare occasions by state governors. those are the words of donald trump's secretary of defense. not pete hegseth of course, not the fox news version of a defense secretary, and not the

trump defense secretary before him or the one before that. those were the words of first trump defense secretary james mattis, perhaps the only trump cabinet member in his first term or the present term to leave his office with a stronger reputation than before he arrived. militarizing our response, mattis said, sets up a conflict, a false conflict between the military and civilian society. it erodes the moral ground that ensures a trusted bond between men and women in uniform and the society they are sworn to protect and of which they themselves are a part. keeping public order, he said, rests with civilian, state and local leaders who best understand their communities and are answerable to them. in california, we love our national guard. we revere them as we do the marines. the guard is always there when

we need them, during fires and floods, after devastating earthquakes. they serve us at home and abroad. always protecting our interests, our lives, our homes, and our freedom. there is a bond between us, a bond of respect, affection, and trust that must not be broken. donald trump does not understand this. he cannot understand it. any more than he can understand why people choose a life of military service. the man who once called soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen who fight and die on our nation's behalf of suckers and losers could not possibly understand. nor nor does he care about misusing them. his partisan and disrespectful and inflammatory speech at fort

bragg makes clear and the come dearing of -- commandeering of a costly parade. the 250th anniversary of the army, an army my father was proud to serve in. we should honor the army. but the celebration of the vanity of a president who does not celebrate the military, but his control over it, that is not a reason. -- from the raucous and often die have issive nature -- divisive nature. this congress has prohibited the use for domestic law enforcement purposes except for narrow

circumstances of rebellion and insurrection. this is vital not only for the protection of the country from a man who would abuse the military to become a king, but also to protect the military from a lack of trust that would accompany its subversion to a partisan end. our country is approaching its 250th birthday. it is worth remembering why we chose to separate ourselves from our british masters. the preamble of the declaration of independence is familiar to us all and its poetic restoration of truths that are self-evident. but what has been lost to us over time were the long list of grievances set out in that document. grievances that drove the impe thank yous for -- impe thank yous for revolution. it is a history of injuries and

usurpations. this is what they wrote. all to have an establishment of a tyranny over these states. the declaration provides in its list of grooechss, quote, he has obstructed the administration of justice. he has erected a multitude of new offices and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, they ee enough. rated. he has made -- tenumerated, cutting off trade to all parts of the world they objected, and they declared for transporting us from beyond seas, they cited in words all to prescient for today. he has kept among us in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislatures,

he has effected to render the military independent of and superior to the civil power all of these grievances so vivid at the time of revolution, our revolution are so vivid today. today they can be instilled into a single image, that of senator alex padilla on the ground, face to the ground and in handcuffs. if you are looking for an image of our democracy in handcuffs, look no further. america, we have a choice. we can rededicate ourselves to the vision of our founders, one born of struggle against autocracy, which elevated the people over the powerful, that believed we possessed the

ability to be self-governored. we can rededicate ourselves to that vision or we can continue to travel down that prescient path of incivility, of division, of right not making right, but of making wrong, a celebration not of self-governance but of destruction. i believe we are a great country. i believe we are a great country because we have strived to be a great country. i believe in this country because of people like alex padilla, wonderful people, courageous people, patriotic people. the story of alex padilla is a story of all of us. he is a good and decent man. he is a great and capable

senator. he deserved better than what he got in that federal building in los angeles. the american people deserve better than what he got in the federal building in los angeles. let us remember ourselves, let us remember who we are. we're the country of jefferson and of lincoln and of washington. we are the country of john lewis been we are the country of giants. we stand on their shoulders. we owe our life, our liberty, the opportunity to pursue happiness to their brilliant legacy. we have come to the rescue and liberation of other worlds, of other parts of this globe. we have fought for democracy, we have championed democracy and

human rights. we believed in treating others as we would treat ourselves. this is who we are. alex padilla face down in a federal building, forced to the ground by -- by agents of the secretary of homeland security. this is not who we are. i can't help but think of the words of my latin wonderful colleague elijah cummings because they are a potent reminder. we are better than this. we are better than this. we are not a country that sends the marines into a city, not to restore order but to create disorder. we are a better country than that. we are not a country that needs to have a parade honoring our

president, to showcase our military might on his birthday. we are a better country than this. there have been giants who have served in our military. there have been giants who served in this body, great people from all different backgrounds. and the strength of this country is that it is still so possible. if you can come from any beginning and end up here, and we have been a country that has welcomed people from around the world because we have understood. they bring their genius and their work ethic, and their striving with them, and it has

lifted our country forward. we have that beautiful statue of liberty not because we disdain immigrants, not because we view them as a threat, but because we celebrate what they have brought to this country. and i think in the last several years we have forgotten who we are. and every now and then we just need to step back from the abyss and remind ourselves of where we came from and that in this -- in this greatest nation on earth what is possible. i didn't serve with alex padilla in the state legislature and didn't get to serve with him or get to know him well until i came to this body. and i told my colleagues when i got here, you're all wonderful

people but nobody -- nobody did better than i did in who i got as my seat mate. and i mean that with all my heart. he is a good and genuine and decent and capable and brilliant man. i'll never forget that image i saw today. because, to me, it's a -- it's the image of what's best in this country being brought to the ground. and so, mr. president, i ask every member of this body to think about the legacy we've been charged with protecting and what we're going to do from this day forward to make sure that this -- this incredible experiment in self-governance

continues than we never see an act like we saw two hours ago take place again in the united states of america. mr. president, i yield back. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey. mr. booker: i just want to first thank my colleague from california for stating it so plain about the character of the individual we have talked about. we have justifiable disagreements in this body, we have real debates and arguments in this body, but it has been generations and generations since there's been violence in this body. i stand with my back towards the chamber where there was a containing sumptner. we have a decorum where we understand that violence is absolutely unacceptable. if there is anybody who is a man

who shows that kind of disedis -- decency, alex padilla is one of the people of true character here. i think that's why this has hurt so many of us personally is because of what this breach of this body actually means to all of us. we know the dangers of violence in a democracy, and the insidiousness that violence presents or that fear of violent reprisal presents. jefferson it so eloquently, when people fear their government, there is tierney, when the -- tyranny, when the government fears its people, there is liberty. what is so disturbing when you see a member of this body thrown

to the floor, a knee on his shoulder, arms being wrenched behind him, after he's identified himself as a united states senator, is literally what alex padilla said. i'm going to pull from what i know he's already said publicly, but this is what he also has written privately. alex padilla says, if this is what they do to a senator with a question, imagine what they're doing to farm workers, day laborers, cooks, and so many other of the nonviolent immigrants they're targeting. you see, alex padilla knows something about this country, which is that we are all, as martin luther king so eloquently wrote in those letters from the birmingham jail, when he was jailed for his nonviolent civil

disobedience, what alex padilla knows is what king said so eloquently, that we are all caught in an inhe's sxabl -- that injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. that when you have a president that so exceeds his constitutional thoert that he begins to do things to infringe upon the fundamental rights and ste securities of other americans, it's a threat to all americans. this is why right across the way, i can almost see it looking through these windows, why the supreme court, with nominees from both parties, with three donald trump appointees ruled 1-0 in support of the -- 9-0 in support of the due process rights of someone in our country that was not even a citizen of this nation because of the constitution using the word any

persons knowing that if you erode the due process rights of anybody in this nation, it is a threat to the due process rights of everyone in this nation. and justice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. understand what we saw today, a united states senator forcibly removed from a room in a federal building, a federal official forcibly removed from a federal building after he identified himself as a united states senator. but after he was out of that building, they did not stop there. they drove our colleague to his knees and then forcibly shoved him upon his face, wrenched his arms behind him. and alex padilla writes if they do that to me, what are they doing to farm workers and cooks?

what are they doing to other people? what does that mean if they're using the violent force of government unjustly against him? this is a breach. this body has not seen such a breach in my lifetime or longer where the executive has treated an honorable member of this body in this way. that should be enough. but our colleague correctly points out that if we are in an environment where that is happening to a united states senator, what does it say if the government of the united states is unjustly taking violent action against a united states senator, dear god what does it mean for other americans? that's what alex padilla asked today. now, i will tell you this.

this is not an isolated incident. that is the challenge. we have already seen the actions taken against a mayor, a local government official who himself was forcibly handcuffed, dragged into a police vehicle, held for hours as a prisoner and then when he finally got before a judge, that judge reprimanded this administration for an abuse of their power. the violation of the due process rights of individuals going on in this country. seen this with a mayor in america unjustly incarcerated, handcuffed, held. this is the challenge we have in

this moment. i love this quote. by my favorite author james baldwin who wrote this letter the night that authorities came and arrested angela davis. he said if they come for you in the morning, then they will come for me at night. if they come for you in the morning, then they will come for me at night. this administration and its abuse of power and the audacity of handcuffing a violent ly -- assaulting, pushing to his knees and on to his stomach a united states senator, what does that say? we all gather right there as senators to raise our hand and swear our oath to uphold the

constitution. but we're not the only ones. members of the supreme court do that. they're not the only ones with members of this body. administrative officials do that as well. we are bound by the laws of this land. and the terrifying thing for every american should be a government that is not restrained by the law, by a government that misuses its power and not just its power, it's power to -- its power to use violence, unjustly against its citizenry. that's when we slip away if our democratic ideals, from our constitutional principles, and slide towards an authoritarian government that wants to make its people heel before them, kneel before them. that's what i physically saw with my own eyes, a member of

this body being driven to his kn knees for asking a question, for standing up to speak truth to power. what was the response? the response was violence. being dragged out of that room. being forced to his nees, being thrown prostrate and being handcuffed. and here is the thing that frustrates me the most. this is another day where the lead stories will be about the actions of this administration. we've seen a week where it is violating a tradition that's gone back before i was born where the federal government should activate federal troops in a community goes through. in fact, i know the statute,

article 10, section 12, 406, that they should go through the governors, work in coordination with them. but, no, this was a provocative incident of moving military troops at the expense of taxpayers into a community where even the leader of the police department says this is wrong. all of this from the beginning of our week to this unprecedented action of violently removing a united states senator from a federal building, from a room, thrown upon the ground, driven to his knees, and handcuffed. this is all purposefully being done in our country. by a president that has a different view of his authorities as president. that if a judge criticizes him, he believes it is wrong.

he drew reprimand from the supreme court for his calling out justices whose opinions he disagrees with. this is a president that doesn't believe in the checks and balances of our constitution, but the frustrating thing about all of this is it is distracting us. this dangerous, violent distraction from the bill that we should be discussing on this floor about the ripping away of health care from millions of americans, the cutting of food stamps for millions of children, the cutting of services for disabled americans, the cutting of supports for our senior citizens. this monumental moment, the biggest transfer of wealth from working people in america to millionaires and billionaires, this moment that should be dominating our attention and our

focus, this imminent bill that's being debated and discussed here in the senate right now that has such an incredible consequence, putting $2.4 trillion more of debt in our country, raising the energy costs on the average american by hundreds of dollars, this bill that would raise the premiums of people in our nation by hundreds of dollars, this bill that merits debate and discussion because it is so violative of our common values, this bill that takes food away from the hungry, health care away from the sick, that takes working people and makes their challenges harder all to give more tax cuts to billionaires and drives up our deficit by the trillions. that should be the central conversation in our country. but this president almost as if he knows the unpopularity of his bill, the betrayal of his bill

is misusing, abusing his powers and trying to change the conversation in the most despicable of ways. abusing his authority, treading on our traditions, violating our constitution, and now perhaps one of the greatest violent assaults on a member of this body by the executive. this is not metaphorical. this is literal. a member of this body after identifying himself physically and forcibly dragged out of a room in a federal building. then when the doors were closed, you can see it on the camera. the federal government, the executive branch taking a member of this body, a member of the united states senate, a coequal branch of our government and driving that man to his knees,

slamming him upon his face, wrenching his arms behind his back. that's what we're talking about in this body right now. this is a dangerous time in america. when the president if the oval office -- from the oval office says almost daringly, do not protest my parade, warns people about protests, and this is the thing that the president of the united states doesn't understand about this country. when a president is violating norms and traditions, violating our constitution, dissent is not unpatriotic. protest is not un-american. silence is unpatriotic. this is a time where protest is justified. peaceful protest is necessary and vital.

this is a time we're speaking up and exercising your constitutional principles like freedom of speech, like freedom of assembly, like the right to petition your government, is demanded by our democracy. when you have a president that so flagrantly violates the checks and balances so much so that there are authorities today kept a senator from stepping forward and asking questions to an executive official and is met by violence. this is exactly the time that our founders saw that we must stand up and speak up and protest peacefully and let our voices be heard. because silence at a time like this is complicity. and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have to see

t this. it doesn't take that much men al acute to understand -- acuity to understand that if this was the biden administration or obama administration, and an official used their security detail to put another person in this body, to put a senator from the other side of the aisle on their knees and in handcuffs, we would see out outrage. this is not about left or right. this is about right or wrong. and today we saw a deep, grave wrong heaped upon not just this body but as alex padilla wrote so eloquently upon the ideals. because if you could do this to a united states senator, then you can do it to another ame american. mr. president, i yield the floor.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: i recognize the senator from connecticut mr. murphy: thank you, mr. president. senator booker and i have now spoken several times on the floor. the senator from california has been here multiple times. we are doing so because we saw the look in our colleagues' eye -- colleague's eyes as he was being violently thrown out of that room. we lost contact with his eyes. in the hallway he was being pushed stomach down on to the ground and handcuffed. one of our colleagues suggested that senator padilla got what he wanted. if you saw in senator padilla's eyes, if you saw in alex' eyes as he was being pulled out of that room, he was coming to register his dissent, his objection to something deeply

serious and illegal that was happening in his state. he had a responsibility as a senator to speak truth to power. and so we are here on this floor speaking repeatedly in hopes that at some point some of our republican colleagues, whether here or in other public statements will register some degree of concern for what happened to their colleague. we lose our democracy if we lose our ability to dissent. in 1722, in a newspaper started in boston by the name of the new england currant, one of the country's first newspapers, a series of essays began to appear that were speaking to some really radical eyes for 1722. this was 20 years before thomas

jefferson was born. 50 years before thomas payne wrote common sense. this is 1722. and the author's name is silence dogood. silence dogood writes in the new england courant, whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freedom of speech. a thing terrible to public traders. silence goes on to say, this sacred privilege of free speech is so essential to free government that the security and prosperity and the freedom of speech always go together. and in those receipt wretched countries where a man cannot call his tongue his own, he can

-- this idea that a tyrant must control the freedom of thought, with violence in order to maintain control of the people. the "new england current" was owned by a man named james kirkland. he probably didn't know that silence dogood. that's benjamin franklin writing in 1722, 16 years old. whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subdoing the freedom of speech. what happened to senator padilla today, it does stand in context. i say again it does matter that on that day in which violence

was used against the united states capitol as a means to try to upset our democracy was cheered on by a president who then pardoned those violent rioters. it stands in the context of the arrest of a mayor in new jersey and a congressperson seeking to do normal and regular oversight. it stands in context with the use of the fcc to try to intimidate and harass news stations that carry coverage unfavorable to the president and stan stands in this context in outlets not having access to the white house because they don't write things that are favorable to the president or use terms that are not favorable to the president. if we lose our democracy, it's not likely that there's going to

be this one moment, this one day, this one fight. it won't be like other revolutions where the parliament building gets burned down or a coup occurs. no, it will be that over time the message has been sent that if you speak up against the government, there is a price to be paid, and that price involves violence. but if you use violence on behalf of the government, it will be excused. and so why we are still on this floor tonight is, sure, we have immense respect for our colleague. and i believe he has respect across the aisle. senator padilla is a descent human servant who doesn't

deserve to be treated that way. we're here because he's our friend and our colleague. we are also here because too many in this body take for granted that this democracy is natural, that it is just going to hang around no matter the threats. the effort that this administration is undergoing to excuse and norm l. -- normalize violence when it happens in advancement of the administration's political priorities and then to suppress nonviolent speech in a multitude of ways when it objects to this administration's priorities, it sends a message to the public about what you can get away with and what you can't get away with. now, i don't think this will be the result. i don't think the american people will be bullied into silence. i do not believe they will watch

that clip of alex padilla being forced to the ground and handcuffed and decide to stay home. no, i think, in fact, the opposite will likely happen. i think more americans will be out there protesting this government. i think more americans will decide to be present this weekend, to stand up for the right of free speech. but if that were to be the case, it would be the exception to the historical rule. because in most countries when a ruler uses violence in order to suppress dissent, it works. people decide that they don't want to risk the fate of alex padilla. they don't want to be on the ground with their hands forced behind them and put into handcuffs. they stay home.

and they just let the tyranny wash over their community and their country. we're not there yet. i don't mean to exercise hyperbole. what i seek to say is that we should not take this democracy for granted and that there can be -- history tells us there often is a deep impact when violence is used against those who are protesting the regime. it becomes normalized. and it ends up scaring many people into a dissent away from civic participation, and that is where our democracy dies. this sacred privilege, the privilege of free speech, the privilege to protest your government, says 16-year-old benjamin franklin, is so essential to free government that the security of prosperity and the freedom of speech always

go together. men cannot be prosperous, he says, without having access to the freedom of expression. senator padilla was doing his job. sure, you can decide that he was being disrespectful. that's not illegal. you could decide that he, in the alternative, should have waited until the press conference was over. but nothing he did warranted the treatment he got. and when you stand it side by side with the pardoning of the january 6 protesters, the attempt to bully the free press into towing the administration's line, the deployment of the national guard and the marines to a protest in california that

was largely peaceful and basically just encompassed one or two square blocks, nobody mistakes what that agenda is about. that agenda is about trying to bully the american people into silence. and once again the first several comments from our colleagues justifying the hand cuffing and violence to senator padilla simply because they believe he was disrespecting paints a really dangerous picture of where we're heading. senator booker is right. the focus should be on the violence that's being done to the american people's health care right now. we're debating a bill right now as we speak to rip health care away from upwards of 15 million americans. that's extraordinary.

that's a health care catastrophe. that's not just 15 million people losing their health care. that's hospitals, drug treatment centers, health care clinics shutting down when you pull almost a trillion dollars out of the medicaid system. there's a new budget analysis today that shows that the poorest 30% of the country, 40% of the country will be poorer after this bill passes, just so that the richest 10% or 20% can get a massive new tax cut, in fact, the richest people in this country will get an average $270,000 tax cut, literally a transfer of wealth were the poorest -- from the poorest people in this country, people wor working minimum-wage jobs are going to be poorer after having passed this bill in order to enrich the people who are doing super-wellcome and we're going to add $3 trillion too the deficit. put it on our kids' credit

cards. that's maybe the most unpopular major piece of legislation that has ever come before the united states senate. that's an agenda that you probably can only impose on the nation by force, by force, because if people had the right to protest, if they have the ability to stand up to the most massive transfer of wealth from the poor and the middle class to the rich in the history of the country, it might not pass. that protest movement might be big enough in order to change the minds of enough members of this body so that that agenda might pass. it may be that that bill is so unpopular that the only way you can get it the to pass is by using violence and the threat of violence to suppress protest and free speech.

so we are still here hours after this incident because we care about our colleague, because we believe this is ultimately going to do immense damage to this institution that we love. i've done hard work with many of my republican colleagues. i deeply care about many of my republican colleagues. i don't know all of them well, but i know enough of them to know that there are patriots, there are people who believe that america matters more than our party. i showed that video to several of my republican colleagues as we were leaving the chamber today. i saw their jaws drop. i know their human reaction to what they saw, but i also know that there is a tendency in this version of the republican party to circle the wagons around one message, that if democrats say "x", then republicans have to

say "y." that doesn't have to be the case every time. it just doesn't. there can be true things, and a true thing is this -- that was an excessive, impermissible amount of force that was used on senator padilla today. we can say that together. even if you agree with the president on his decision to deploy the national guard, even if you hate every single one of those protesters, even if you don't like senator padilla, which is hard -- he's a freaking hard guy not to like -- but even if you believe all those things, you can say that what happened today is not all right. and that the white house should admit that, that there should be an apology, and that there should be protocols set in place to make sure that if a united states senator shows up to a public event -- he didn't bust into a private meeting; this

was, like, a press conference designed to be public, to transmit public information. he wanted to transmit public simplifying. maybe you don't like how he did it. but what he did was not illegal. we can decide that those wrong. -- that that's wrong. we can recognize the danger to this concept of free speech, defended in 1722 by a 16-year-old benjamin franklin is serious enough for us to speak together with one voice. so my republican colleagues may think that we are belaboring the point, but this is an important moment for the senate and for the nation. i yield the floor.