▶ 0:01:01Test test test test test test test test
▶ 0:01:35Test test test test test test. Test test test. Test test test.
▶ 0:02:08Test test test. Test test test.
▶ 0:02:38Test test test. Test test test.
▶ 0:03:11Test test test. Test test test.
▶ 0:04:04Test test test. Test test test.
▶ 0:04:34Test test test. Test test test. Test test test.
▶ 0:05:12Test test test. Test test test. Test test test. Test test test. Test test test. Test test test. Test test test. Test test test. Test test test.
▶ 0:05:46Test test test. Test test test.
▶ 0:06:20Test test test. Test test test.
▶ 0:06:55Test test test. Test test test.
▶ 0:07:37Test test test. Test test test.
▶ 0:15:23Chair Grassley: Good morning, everybody. We welcome you to this hearing considering the nomination of john sauer as solicitor general, harmeet dhillon to serve as assistant attorney general for civil rights, aaron reitz to serve as assistant attorney general in the office of legal policy.
▶ 0:15:53Chair Grassley: We are going to call on -- we're going to call on senator lee, cruz, hawley, and schmitt j introduce the nominees. The nominees will have a chance to give an opening statement following that. We will proceed to a single five minute round of questions. I asked members to do their best to adhere to that limit.
▶ 0:16:23Chair Grassley: Our three nominees have been tapped to serve important roles in the justice department. We congratulate all of you on your nomination. If confirmed, your work will impact the lives of millions of americans. Each of you has impressive qualifications and we are looking forward to hearing from you. We thank your family and friends for coming today to be with you and I'm sure they are proud of you.
▶ 0:16:52Chair Grassley: I have said many times the department of justice is at an inflection point over the last four years. Public trust in the department has declined. Any americans feel like the justice system is not working for them. If confirmed, we expect you to work with attorney general pam bondi to fulfill her promise to turn things around. Mr. sauer, you are particularly well qualified to serve as chief appellate lawyer.
▶ 0:17:24Chair Grassley: You started your career clerking for justice scalia, a legal giant as we know. Justice scalia spent his life teaching lawyers to faithfully interpret the constitution, according to original meaning. I have no doubt you will learn this lesson well. After clerking in private practice, you left D.C. behind to go home and serve as assistant united states attorney in missouri.
▶ 0:17:55Chair Grassley: You worked diligently to prosecute criminals and keep the community safe. In 2017, you joined the missouri attorney general's office as a solicitor general,, where you served under two members of this committee.
▶ 0:18:10Chair Grassley: Serving as the state chief appellate officer during the covid pandemic and across two presidential administrations, you undoubtedly prepared well for the role that you will walk into after confirmation. There is a lot of work to be done defending our nation's laws and it seems like you are prepared. Ms.
▶ 0:18:38Chair Grassley: Dillon, you are one of the foremost experts on civil rights. Your journey started a long ways from here, when your family immigrated from india. He went to dartmouth at the young age of 16 and then went to law school at the university of virginia. Throughout your career, you never shied away from unpopular but just causes.
▶ 0:19:08Chair Grassley: You served as director of an aclu chapter after 9/11, a group many on my side are often skeptical of. You also started your own law firm and founded a nonprofit. You have litigated some of the most important cases of free speech, religious liberty, voting rights, and discrimination. Discrimination is wrong. Common sense ought to tell us that.
▶ 0:19:39Chair Grassley: Our constitution and civil rights laws do not tolerate determination on the basis of race, as the supreme court recently said in students for fair admissions. Unfortunately my the previous administration not only allow discrimination to take place but openly encouraged it under the name of diversity, equity, and inclusion.
▶ 0:20:03Chair Grassley: That administration imposed nationwide regime of discrimination that the civil rights division failed to enforce our nation of laws. President trump has put an end to this. If confirmed, I know that you will work to help him execute his promise. Americans do not pick winners and losers based on color of skin, sex, or the name of their god. You fought for everyone to be treated equally.
▶ 0:20:35Chair Grassley: You fought against colleges shutting down free speech for political reasons, against states restricting freedom of religion, and against big tech companies engaged in censorship. You won many victories defending freedom and our constitutional rights and if confirmed you'll need your continued -- we will need your continued leadership to protect the civil rights of all americans.
▶ 0:21:08Chair Grassley: We care about character and merit. In addition to your qualifications, your particularly suited to return the justice department to its proper role of enforcing our civil rights laws and ending discrimination. You are a woman cut business owner -- a woman, business lawyer, and I have learned to do a lot of knitting.
▶ 0:21:38Chair Grassley: You are an example of what is great about america. Mr. reitz, you have an impressive career of service to our country. You served our country as a marine, including a tour in afghanistan. You attended the university texas.
▶ 0:22:11Chair Grassley: You decided to serve your country again and clerked for the now chief justice of the texas supreme court and ran for the texas house of representatives and campaigned a non-she is -- and campaigned on issues you believed in.
▶ 0:22:31Chair Grassley: Eventually joined the office of the attorney general of texas and you were involved in some of the office's most impactful litigation. You fought to secure the border, to hold big tech accountable, to promote conservative social values.
▶ 0:23:00Chair Grassley: Your currently senator cruz's chief of staff and I think a lot of mike rawlings when I say that this is no easy job. You continue -- my colleagues when I say that this is no easy job. You continue to hold the rank of major appear in's work ethic and love of country are obvious.
▶ 0:23:33Chair Grassley: These nominees have impressive careers and life stories and I look forward to hearing from them today. Senator durbin.
▶ 0:23:38Sen. Durbin: Thanks, chairman grassley. I will make a brief opening statement which relates to an issue which is personal to me and some embers on the dais. You are gathered in this room today for an important hearing of the senate judiciary committee. When you enter this complex, you are protected from the first step you took until this moment by the capitol police.
▶ 0:24:02Sen. Durbin: These are men and women, some in uniform, some not, that are risking their lives to keep you and be safe. We should never take that for granted. Those of us who were witness to the january 6 riot here in the capital have experience we will never forget you have seen it. You cannot miss the videos that have been played over and over again. As a of that riot on january 6, four police officers died. Over 140 were assaulted.
▶ 0:24:33Sen. Durbin: 1600 people were arrested and convicted of crimes that day. For those of us who witnessed that occurrence, you know what was at the heart of it, an attempt by the mop to take control of the capital while we went through the constitutional exercise of counting electoral votes. It could have been worse, but to think that we had that happen in the united states capital is almost unthinkable.
▶ 0:24:59Sen. Durbin: Imagine if you just heard that the house of commons in parliament in london had the door broken down and been overrun by a mob. He would have said to yourself, that is impossible. Not in london. Not in england. It happened here. And we lived it. We ended up postponing the session of the senate and house to complete the constitutional duty until later in the evening and cleared these rioters out of the capital.
▶ 0:25:26Sen. Durbin: I tell you that because the president really announced that they were not in fact guilty of any crime. They were being assaulted by whom? By the capitol police? By the national guard that was here? That is an incredible statement and on its face falls and insulting to the men and women who protect us every day. The bottom line is they are not stopping now they have been released by the president trump pardon. They are not stopping in their assault on the capitol.
▶ 0:25:57Sen. Durbin: They are now revisiting the capitol, calling press conferences, harassing men and women in uniform who protect us here every day. This has to come to an end. Democrats and republicans have to stand up for the men and women who are risking their lives to keep us safe every day and is say to these people who are pardoned by president trump, please take your press conferences somewhere else. We do not want them here. I think it is essential we move in that direction quickly.
▶ 0:26:25Sen. Durbin: If we care for these men and women, it is time we speak up against this harassing and insulting conduct. Let me also say that I'm concerned that we are seeing transformation of law enforcement in this country that most people do not imagine. There was a time when the federal government investigation had one political appointee. For 50 years the director was the only political appointee.
▶ 0:26:50Sen. Durbin: Given a 10 year term and expected to be their responsible to under the constitution. Mr. patel is proceeding with his effort to clear the rings of the fbi for anyone who is shown any conduct disloyal to donald trump.
▶ 0:27:20Sen. Durbin: That is the first time in history we have gone through that. It is an embarrassment to this nation and really is hard to imagine. We are saying the same thing happen in the military. Those ranks should be apolitical top to bottom and I think we have to work hard to make that happen.
▶ 0:27:49Sen. Durbin: I will be asking these witnesses what their responsibilities are and their reactions to my statement.
▶ 0:27:53Chair Grassley: Now we go to senator lee for an introduction. Separately --
▶ 0:28:02Sen. Lee: Is an honor to introduce her me to dhillon -- harmeet dhillon. If confirmed, she will serve every american with integrity and dedication. Harmeet is a fearless, long-time defender of constitutional rights, with decades of litigation experience in civil rights advocacy.
▶ 0:28:30Sen. Lee: She has taken on some of the toughest cases, those many others feared, standing up for the forgotten and holding power to account at every step. Her journey is one of perseverance. When harmeet was two years old, her family immigrated from india. By the age of 16, she was attending dartmouth college, followed by law school at the university virginia. After clerking on the U.S.
▶ 0:28:58Sen. Lee: Court of appeals, she gained experience at law firms before going on to found her own successful practice. As the founder of the dhillon law group, she is one of the nation's most respected attorneys, known for her unwavering commitment to justice, free-speech, and election integrity. She litigates complex cases and takes on powerful institutions with a fearless dedication to her clients.
▶ 0:29:27Sen. Lee: Harmeet has championed election integrity and civil liberties for three years on the aclu board, dedicating her commitment to principle over partisanship. Judges commend her for her meticulous courtroom strategy. Even adversaries cannot help but admire her resolve and professionalism.
▶ 0:29:53Sen. Lee: She has been a beacon of hope for a number of persecuted communities. As a true leader she has fought against post-9/11 discrimination and religious intolerance, ensuring no one is denied their basic rights based on faith, background, appearance.
▶ 0:30:12Sen. Lee: Her career embodies principle over politics, whether challenging unconstitutional laws or fighting for fair elections she leads with integrity, fearlessness, and belief in the rule of law and importance of sticking with the constitution. She truly is an inspiration. She embodies the traits and characteristics needed to help her succeed in this new role to which she has been appointed.
▶ 0:30:40Sen. Lee: Her career reflect conviction and relet this pursuit of justice, no matter the cost. I urge every member of this committee to support her and look forward to voting for her enthusiastically on the senate. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 0:30:57Chair Grassley: Now we go to senator cruz.
▶ 0:31:00Sen. Cruz: I am proud to introduce to this committee my friend aaron reitz. He has been nominated to be assistant attorney general at the apartment of justice. As chairman grassley observed, he is currently my chief of staff and has the virtually impossible job of keeping me out of trouble.
▶ 0:31:25Sen. Cruz: In that regard, he has failed spectacularly, but it may not be possible to succeed and so he is fleeing instead to the department of justice, where I have absolute confidence that he will diligently and vigilantly defend the rule of law.
▶ 0:31:47Sen. Cruz: Before I get into his professional background, I want to note that he is here with his beautiful wife meredith, with two of his four kids. William and caroline are both sitting behind their dad. At home, cecilia and georgia, the younger ones, I am sure are watching on tv, unless they have fallen asleep or are doing something else that has distracted them.
▶ 0:32:14Sen. Cruz: I want to take a minute to walk through aaron's career because he has excelled at everything he has put his hand to. He went to texas a&m. He is a proud aggie. His wife -- both he and meredith are from san antonio.
▶ 0:32:33Sen. Cruz: She went to the university of texas, so they are a divided household and yet a happy one and somehow they managed to work through the return to the a&m -texas football game that occurred this year. He went on to serve as an officer in the marine corps.
▶ 0:32:53Sen. Cruz: He spent five years in active duty, deployed to afghanistan where he was embedded with the afghan national army, leading logistical operations in one of the most dangerous regions of the world. To this day, he remains in the marine corps reserve, where he holds the rank of major. He left active duty and went to the university of texas at austin, where he served as president of the federalist society and editor-in-chief of the texas review of law and politics.
▶ 0:33:24Sen. Cruz: After that, he went into private practice and clerked on the texas supreme court. Then he returned to public service, where he was deputy attorney legal strategy and in that role he was the driving force in many of the most consequential legal battles for my home state.
▶ 0:33:45Sen. Cruz: For the last two years, he has been my chief of staff and demonstrated terrific ability to fight for my legislative agenda, including efforts to secure the border and protect children from online harm and grow our economy and to bring justice to victims of violent crime. He also has earned the respect of his colleagues, the chiefs of staff of each of us around the sias -- this dais. He has worked well with republicans and democrats.
▶ 0:34:16Sen. Cruz: He has brought people together behind a shared mission and he now has been nominated to lead olp at the department of justice. I have confidence that he will do that job with great distinction. He will serve as a critical right hand to attorney general pam bondi and I am proud introduce aaron and I would encourage all of you to vote to confirm him.
▶ 0:34:44Chair Grassley: Senator hawley.
▶ 0:34:47Sen. Hawley: Is my privilege to introduce john sauer, who has been nominated for the position of solicitor general of the united states. I have known him for years now. He is a proud missourian. His career has already been incredibly distinguished and the trim and mentioned some of his accolades. Let me walk through a few of them, beginning with his education. He was a rhodes scholar.
▶ 0:35:16Sen. Hawley: He has an ma from the university of notre dame and a jd from senator cruz's law school. We will try not to hold that against him. After graduating and completing his education, he clerked on the fourth circuit and then, as the chairman mentioned, for antonin scalia, who I continue to believe is the most influential associate justice of the supreme court. He then came back to his native st.
▶ 0:35:45Sen. Hawley: Louis and was for five years a federal prosecutor, where he prosecuted violent crimes, white-collar crimes, and more. He briefly founded a small litigation firm where he represented all manner of clients. Then our paths began to intersect in 2017. I was elected attorney general of the state of missouri and at that time they did not have an office of the solicitor general.
▶ 0:36:14Sen. Hawley: I thought it was important to create one given the volume of appellate cases we were facing. I could not think of anybody better than john, so I went to john. This may say something about my recruiting habits. We met at a cracker barrel and over chicken fried steak I said to him, you have the ability and record to be solicitor general of the united states.
▶ 0:36:43Sen. Hawley: Would you consider coming to be solicitor general of the state of missouri? My delight and the benefit of the state of missouri, he said yes and served as my solicitor general for two years and as my first assistant in the office, overseeing criminal and civil litigation, including an astounding win rate in the appellate courts. He has argued in the federal courts and handled all of that with the greatest professionalism.
▶ 0:37:12Sen. Hawley: He went on to serve for another four years with my successor and now my good friend and colleague senator schmitt. That reminds me, here's an opportunity to prepare for your first question. Which of the attorneys general on this dais was your favorite and why is it me? Think on that. He has served his state with the greatest distinction. He has served his country with distinction.
▶ 0:37:42Sen. Hawley: I do not know a better lawyer in private or public practice. Go down the line. I do not know a better lawyer in this country than john sauer. I am delighted to see him here today and to support your nomination. I urge my colleagues to do the same.
▶ 0:38:00Sen. Schmitt: Only because of seniority did you get to ask that first. It is a privilege to introduce the smartest lawyer I have ever met and my former solicitor general of missouri, john sauer. He is a man of deep personal faith, a fellow catholic and devoted husband.
▶ 0:38:24Sen. Schmitt: As a young man, he ventured east to attend duke, notre dame, harvard law school, after graduating he clerked for judge mike alluded -- michael luttig and antonin scalia. He worked at one of the nation's most influential law firms and started his own law firm. During my time as attorney general of missouri, he was my solicitor general.
▶ 0:38:57Sen. Schmitt: His performance was nothing short of exemplary. He demonstrated the ability to win on behalf of the american people. He is a homerun choice and possesses a rare, nation of brilliance, work ethic, and humility. I do not know of many people who combine all three of those traits, but he does.
▶ 0:39:20Sen. Schmitt: He defended the god-given rights of not just missourians but all americans, helping the office beat back the authoritarian forces who were seeking to shut down the united states of america and impose mask mandates on young children and make americans choose whether to take a vaccine or their livelihoods.
▶ 0:39:40Sen. Schmitt: He helped uphold -- he helped hold the people's republic of for their actions and took on giants who colluded to silence dissent in our country. Missouri versus biden stands as one of the most important first amendment cases. We brought the student loan debt forgiveness case.
▶ 0:40:06Sen. Schmitt: He has defended the unborn, our constitution, and been president trump's legal champion while the president to himself from the most politicized prosecutorial onslaughts, so now and again he is called to venture back east, this time by president trump to be our solicitor general of the united states.
▶ 0:40:29Sen. Schmitt: As solicitor general, he will be the chief courtroom advocate for the high-stakes, high-profile cases that will arise over the years to come in that courtroom. He will be the man in the legal arena arguing before the supreme court on the most important cases that come before it. He will be the people and the constitution's legal champion. He demonstrates the skill and aptitude to win these cases.
▶ 0:40:59Sen. Schmitt: On a personal note, I can think of no one I trust more to do the right thing every single time. He is a man of great virtue. I can attest to his prudence, fortitude, and temperament. He is honest, hard-working, and the smartest lawyer I have ever known. I can think of no one better suited to fight for justice on behalf of the people of the united states in the biggest courtroom in the country.
▶ 0:41:28Sen. Schmitt: I urge my colleagues to support his nomination.
▶ 0:41:30Chair Grassley: The three of you stand and take this oath? Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give before this committee will be the truth , the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? Let the record show that they all responded. Now be seated and then you can give your opening statements.
▶ 0:42:01Chair Grassley: You have an opportunity here to introduce family and friends if you want to. Please go ahead, Mr. sauer.
▶ 0:42:10Mr. Sauer: Thank you for those kind introductions, which I am not sure I fully deserve. Chairman grassley and raking member durbin, thank you for the opportunity to address this committee. Thank you to the committee members for taking the time to meet with me to discuss the thoughts and concerns about the challenges facing our nation. If I'm confirmed, I will look forward to working with you and attorney general bondi to address these challenges.
▶ 0:42:41Mr. Sauer: Today I have so many other people to think. First and foremost, I offer my thanks to president trump for this nomination and the great vote of confidence it reflects. This nomination and the privilege of representing president trump over the past two years have been the greatest honors of my professional life.
▶ 0:42:59Mr. Sauer: Next I expressed gratitude to my former bosses, both of whom I love and adore equally, forgiving me the opportunity to serve as solicitor general of missouri. Her leadership and mentorship in that office has meant the world to me. I thank my family and friends, many present here today, for their love and support through this process. Without that support, I could never have arrived at this moment today.
▶ 0:43:32Mr. Sauer: As I sit here today, I marvel at how the american dream can take a kid from the midwest and give him the opportunity to sit before this committee and address some of the greatest legal challenges facing our nation. In my legal career, I have been blessed with amazing opportunities. In of these drove home to me in a unique way the importance of fidelity to the constitution and rule of law.
▶ 0:43:58Mr. Sauer: For example, as the chairman mentioned, after law school I had the privilege of clerking for justice scalia of the united states supreme court. He was one of the greatest defenders of the constitution and rule of law in our nation's history and his example has inspired my career. His insistence on fidelity to the original public meaning of the constitution and plain and ordinary meaning of statutes have provided guideposts to my approach to legal analysis ever since.
▶ 0:44:29Mr. Sauer: Not long after that, I received the opportunity to serve in the U.S. department of justice as assistant U.S. attorney for the eastern district of missouri, where I prosecuted violent crimes and white-collar crimes, among other matters. In this role, I was inspired by the department of justice commitment to the principle of equal justice under law. I will always remember the presentation I received from a gray-haired veteran of the department displaying the motto on doj's seal.
▶ 0:45:01Mr. Sauer: Those who sue on behalf of lady justice. A few years later, I was blessed with opportunity to serve as solicitor general of missouri under the leadership of two great public servants. I was called upon to resist the overreaches of the federal government that trampled the rights of ordinary american citizens. I began to see the fidelity to the constitution and rule of law require constant vigilance and struggle.
▶ 0:45:32Mr. Sauer: Then I have had the honor to represent president trump in fighting back against politically motivated prosecutions against him. To me, these cases reflected a profound and dangerous perversion of the ideals of the department of justice. Where I had proudly served as a young prosecutor.
▶ 0:45:56Mr. Sauer: They manifested weaponization of the federal government at its worst in an inch -- in an attempt to interfere with the presidential election by trying to prosecute and imprison the sitting president's main political opponent. I learned fighting for the constitution and rule of law requires courage, perseverance, and sacrifice. Fortunately, that campaign failed and president trump was reelected in a historic landslide.
▶ 0:46:26Mr. Sauer: In his inaugural address, he promised the scales of justice will be rebalanced. The vicious, violent, and unfair weaponization of the justice department will end and never again will the power of the state be weaponized to persecute political opponents. Instead, president trump pledged that we will restore fair, equal, and impartial justice under the constitutional rule of law.
▶ 0:46:54Mr. Sauer: If I'm confirmed by the senate, I pledge to work with attorney general bondi to support and achieve his vision of fair, equal, and impartial justice under the constitutional rule of law.
▶ 0:47:09Chair Grassley: Mr. reitz.
▶ 0:47:12Mr. Reitz: Thank you for convening this hearing and for providing my fellow nominees and me opportunity to participate in the essential and time-honored advice and consent role under the constitution. The predominant feeling I have sitting here today is gratitude. Because of that, I want to say thank you to several people.
▶ 0:47:35Mr. Reitz: Thank you to each of the individual members of this committee, republican and democrat, as well as their staff, for taking time to visit with me over the past couple weeks. As I hope I made clear during those meetings, it is my goal to earn your support. Thank you to my boss, senator cruz, not only for your kind introduction but for the past two years of mentorship while I have served as were chief of staff.
▶ 0:48:02Mr. Reitz: You have shown may not only how to be a fierce defender of the constitution and rule of law but also how to work with a wide diversity of people with different perspectives on both sides of the aisle to serve the american people. Thank you to my family for supporting me and having my back. Today we have with us my wife of 16 years, meredith. We have known each other since we were 12 and I was reminded while comparing -- preparing the paperwork for this hearing how much we have been through together.
▶ 0:48:31Mr. Reitz: Moves, careers, deployments, kids, one public service pay cut after another, and now a hopeful opportunity to serve at the justice department. I love and appreciate you. We also have two of our four children here. My oldest, who was born while I was in afghanistan and his younger sister.
▶ 0:48:55Mr. Reitz: At home in texas are our two little ones, who we decided would be a bit too squirmy for a judiciary committee hearing. Also at home are my parents. My father is undergoing surgery on friday for kidney cancer and we lift them up in prayer. Thank you to those who have had an outsized influence in developing me professionally over the years.
▶ 0:49:21Mr. Reitz: My first marine corps battalion commander and company commander, law school deans, the now chief justice of the supreme court who I clerked for, texas attorney general ken paxton, and senator cruz. Thank you to attorney general pam bondi for answering the call to serve as attorney general.
▶ 0:49:46Mr. Reitz: She has been in office only a few weeks and yet is making historic strides to increase the american people's confidence in our justice system. I'm honored to be considered to serve under her. Thank you to president trump for entrusting me to lead the office of legal policy. President trump cast a vision for integrity and devotion to the constitution that inspired millions of americans to overwhelmingly vote him into the white house.
▶ 0:50:13Mr. Reitz: I look forward to doing my small part to carry out that vision at olp under his an attorney general bonding's -- attorney general bondi's leadership. The office of legal policy plays a role in coordinating regulatory review and assisting the white house and senate with judicial nominees. In each mission, I commit to the senate the following.
▶ 0:50:40Mr. Reitz: With respect to legal policy, you can expect me to pursue the president's and attorney general's agenda with energy, independent thinking and faithfulness to the constitution and federal law.
▶ 0:50:54Mr. Reitz: With respect to regulatory law, you can expect me to closely coordinate with executive branch rulemaking authorities to ensure the department is effectively and efficiently pursuing justice for all and with respect to judges, you can expect me to faithfully assist the president and identifying come of that income and processing his judicial nominees. This means working collaboratively with you -- the judiciary committee as well as individual senators.
▶ 0:51:23Mr. Reitz: In all things, the senate, president, and american people have my absolute commitment to excellence, fairness, integrity, blind justice, observance of the best legal practices, and adherence to the highest standards of conduct and ethics. Thank you to the committee for considering my nomination. I look forward to answering your questions and earning your support.
▶ 0:51:51Ms. Dhillon: Chairman grassley, ranking member durbin, and members of the judiciary committee, I would like to thank all of you for the opportunity to respond to your questions. Thank you to senator lee for his kind introduction. I am grateful for the time many committee members have taken to meet or speak with me before this hearing and I have valued hearing their concerns and ideas about the civil rights division.
▶ 0:52:16Ms. Dhillon: I think president trump for nominating me -- thank president trump for nominating me to this position. He knows all too well how the department of justice may be weaponized for political persecution, payback, punishing protected speech and ideas. As his lawyer for several years, I am keenly aware how quickly justice may become unjust. I want to thank attorney general pam bondi for her inspiring leadership and trust in me.
▶ 0:52:45Ms. Dhillon: I'm honored to be joined by members of my immediate family today. My mother, her mother, my brother, and two of his children. And other dear family members. With me in spirit as well is my husband, who passed away last summer and who supported me in every way. Many friends have come from around the country to support me as well and I am grateful.
▶ 0:53:14Ms. Dhillon: I/o everything I have in this world to god and my family. My parents brought us to the bronx, where dad finished his medical residency and then to rural north carolina or his goal was to raise his family in a small town with traditional values, practice orthopedics, play tennis, and enjoy the american dream. When we moved to smithfield, there was a sign on the highway as you entered town that said the united clans of america welcome visitors to smithfield.
▶ 0:53:46Ms. Dhillon: My parents did not know what the klan was when we moved to smithfield. We did find out. Thankfully, the sign came down in 1977 and the klan did not affect me directly. I was bullied as a child for my unusual name and was not easy. What I learned for my parents was in america anybody could be anything with hard work and determination.
▶ 0:54:16Ms. Dhillon: I am before you today because of these life experiences. My faith teaches me it is a duty to stand up for the rights of the defenseless. Throughout my legal career, I have honored this teaching through my legal work here and in law school, I have been an advocate for victims of domestic violence. I have advocated in the courts for asylum-seekers facing religious and political persecution. My clients have included muslims, buddhists, hindus, and christians.
▶ 0:54:46Ms. Dhillon: This is tommy compassion for the oppressed and -- taught me compassion for the oppressed. I was in silicon valley when the 9/11 terror attacks struck. I pivoted through writing legal memos to help understand rights in the face of attacks from fellow americans ranging from murders and assaults to casual slurs shouted at my brother in san francisco, calling him osama
▶ 0:55:19Ms. Dhillon: And telling him to go back to his country. This is our country, senators, and it is the greatest country on god's earth. The promise of equal opportunity that my family taught me, which I fought for my entire career in the courtroom, is being robbed from millions of americans in the workplace by dangers and oppressive ideology enabled by corrosive government dictates.
▶ 0:55:42Ms. Dhillon: Young girls and women are seeing dreams of hard-fought equal access to sports opportunities and even basic privacy and dignity in private spaces sacrificed on the altar of political correctness. Generations of young people have been denied educational opportunities because of immutable characteristics. Instead of marriage that bands such policies.
▶ 0:56:08Ms. Dhillon: Our elections are at risk of being ad hoc coronations where government officials in power put a thumb on the scale to achieve preferred outcomes. Our democracy is the lifeblood of our republic. Insecurity in this process breeds mistrust. Mistrust reads anxiety and anarchy. We must room in vigilant in ensuring the results of the ballot box reflects the will of the people, not preferences of elites. It is 2020 five in america.
▶ 0:56:39Ms. Dhillon: President trump was just elected with support from african-americans and americans without college degrees. There is no greater time to be alive and an american than today. If I am confirmed, this is my promise. I will bring my decades of experience fighting for the rights of the defenseless to work every day. I will start every analysis with the constitution.
▶ 0:57:05Ms. Dhillon: I will respect the teachings of the courts even if I disagree, though I will act within the law to challenge legal rulings I believe are wrong or statutes I believe are unconstitutional. I will never use the doj civil rights division as a partisan tool to push a political agenda. The department of justice stance for justice for all americans. My parents across true oceans to bring me to america.
▶ 0:57:32Ms. Dhillon: We are americans by choice and I can think of no higher honor as a lawyer than to be charged with defending and advancing civil rights for all american citizens.
▶ 0:57:42Chair Grassley: We have five-minute rounds of questions. I will start and then go to senator durbin. I apologize to the three of you because when I'm done asking my questions other members will take over chairing because I have to hold the agriculture committee. Mr.
▶ 0:58:01Chair Grassley: Reitz, being a major in the marines and your service in afghanistan, how do you think your military service has informed your legal career and what lesson will you take from the marine corps to your role at doj?
▶ 0:58:20Mr. Reitz: Thank you for that question. I first raised my hand and swore an oath to defend the constitution when I was 22 years old. I take that oath deadly seriously.
▶ 0:58:36Mr. Reitz: That not only structures my philosophy of how I would approach my job at the justice department but that commitment shapes how I work and execute that mission with integrity, excellence, high standards, and treating everybody with dignity the way they deserve to be treated. So not only do I bring a commitment to the U.S.
▶ 0:59:00Mr. Reitz: Constitution but I bring a way of acting that I think adheres to the best that our nation has to offer.
▶ 0:59:10Chair Grassley: Mr. sauer, you clerked for justice scalia, a champion of interpreting doctrine of originalism. Through his career, promoting the concept of federalism. What was your most important lesson you learned from justice scalia?
▶ 0:59:33Mr. Sauer: It would be hard to reduce it to just one, but I would echo the personal characteristics of justice scalia that I emphasized when I had the privilege of giving a eulogy for him after his death.
▶ 0:59:49Mr. Sauer: Not just his influence on develop it of law in the united states and advancing originalism but he exemplified characteristics of a teacher and mentor, a man of great personal devotion and courage, and a person of deep humility.
▶ 1:00:07Mr. Sauer: I think you see the humility of justice scalia reflected in his attraction to the legal theories he espoused, which are humble legal theories of limited role of courts in interpretation of congressional statutes in the constitution.
▶ 1:00:23Chair Grassley: Ms. dhillon, you will have to protect the civil rights of all. The previous administration imposed a regime that discriminated against some people. The civil rights division failed to enforce civil rights laws, so how will you approach enforcing civil rights laws different from the previous administration?
▶ 1:00:51Ms. Dhillon: Thank you for that question. The civil rights division has 11 sections and each of them is charged with an important duty under the constitution. And the statutes, of course. My approach is going to be to meet with section heads in each of those sections, understand the present work they are doing, and assess the extent to which that work is consistent with my view of the civil rights statutes and priorities of the department of justice.
▶ 1:01:22Ms. Dhillon: The president and attorney general bondi have made clear that diversity, equity, and inclusion as applied to use racial quotas to deny people equal access to education, employment, potentially housing and other aspects of civil life that are covered by civil rights statutes are inappropriate, so we will take a close look at all of those and enforce the law equally.
▶ 1:01:47Chair Grassley: Would you approach title vii discrimination civil rights laws and use it against companies that discriminate on the basis of race?
▶ 1:02:00Ms. Dhillon: If the fact support such a prosecution or a civil litigation, I certainly would do that. It is inappropriate in my view and I think the title vii lying -- language is clear that racial discrimination is inappropriate in hiring, so that is a priority I would undertake and when I have undertaken in private practice.
▶ 1:02:23Chair Grassley: The same question as it relates to title vi against universities that receive federal funds but who discriminate on basis of race.
▶ 1:02:34Ms. Dhillon: We have a problem through the united states not just on the basis of race in universities but also religion. We have seen antisemitism sweep the nation and it is problematic that many people of the jewish faith are barred by professors and fellow students from access to the classroom. In addition to race, I would see religious discrimination and other forms of discrimination on campuses as an appropriate target for the civil rights division.
▶ 1:03:04Sen. Durbin: Congratulations to each of you and your family and friends for this historic opportunity. Ms. dhillon, I thank you for coming by the office. We may not agree on many issues but I certainly respect and exchange.
▶ 1:03:23Sen. Durbin: I'm still proud that the sikh community came to me after 9/11 and asked for a resolution that said there should not be discrimination against those who follow your religion as a result of 9/11. It passed on a bipartisan basis. George w. Bush as president showed real leadership on that and other issues.
▶ 1:03:44Sen. Durbin: I held a hearing in this committee when we had the terrible incident in wisconsin where a white to premises killed innocent people of the sikh community. We had a hearing on that that packed the room to make sure it never happens again. I would like to go to specific questions of the nominees. Mr. reitz, have you ever expressed support for the idea that an elected official should defy a federal court order?
▶ 1:04:14Mr. Reitz: Thank you, ranking member durbin. I am not aware of any instances at this time of having made such an assertion.
▶ 1:04:25Sen. Durbin: Let me remind you a statement you made on march 31, 2020. A U.S. district judge temporarily blocked texas from closing abortion clinics as a response to the state covid-19 outbreak. You commented on this and wrote, looking for some andrew jackson level leadership on this one. Judge yeakel has made his decision. Now let him enforce it.
▶ 1:04:52Sen. Durbin: This is a reference to a fictitious story about language supposedly used by andrew jackson suggesting he would defy a supreme court ruling. Do you stand by your tweet?
▶ 1:05:04Mr. Reitz: Thank you for reminding me of this tweet, ranking member durbin. What this tweet reflects is a conservative view of article three and the role of courts and their ability to bind parties that are not litigants to the case before it. Which is a mainstream view within jurisprudential debates but captured within 140 characters on a tweet.
▶ 1:05:34Chair Grassley: Should an elected official be allowed to defy a federal court order?
▶ 1:05:41Mr. Reitz: It would be too case specific for me to make a blank it statement about that, ranking member durbin.
▶ 1:05:50Sen. Durbin: So you're saying a legal court order from a federal court should not be followed under some circumstances? What would those circumstances be?
▶ 1:05:58Mr. Reitz: What I'm saying is that there are some instances in which a public official is lawfully bound by the holding of a particular court, in which case that official would in fact lawfully be required to be bound by it. I cannot speak for all instances in which that dynamic may or may not be a play given a certain lawsuit.
▶ 1:06:25Sen. Durbin: That is an incredible statement by someone who wants to be part of the department of justice. Mr. sauer, what is your take on this?
▶ 1:06:33Mr. Sauer: Thank you for the question. Like Mr. reitz, I didn't want to speak to hypotheticals, especially hypotheticals that might come before me in an official capacity of confirmed by the senate. Generally if there is a direct court order, that binds a federal or state official, they should follow it.
▶ 1:06:54Sen. Durbin: Why do you say generally? Give me an exception that would be acceptable to you.
▶ 1:07:00Mr. Sauer: I cannot think of a hypothetical one way or the other. I suppose one could imagine hypotheticals in extreme cases like the dred scott decision.
▶ 1:07:12Sen. Durbin: Describe for me that circumstance that you think relieved and official from obeying a court order. >> there was a court order that upheld cut which has now been correctly reputed by virtually everyone, that upheld the internment of japanese civilians.
▶ 1:07:30Sen. Durbin: As bad as it was that court order was followed for years, was not?
▶ 1:07:36Mr. Sauer: I just wonder whether some historians might think we would be better off if it had not been followed.
▶ 1:07:43Sen. Durbin: I want to go into it because I think it goes to the heart of the question for future constitutional challenges we face as a nation. There is a fear among many people, academics and people in the legal profession as to whether this president would defy a court order, which basically would put him above the law at least in his own eyes and I want to know in what circumstances Mr. reitz and Mr. sauer believe justify that conclusion.
▶ 1:08:14Mr. Sauer: I have represented president trump for the better part of two years and I think that is not a plausible scenario. >> you have run out of time, ranking member. Senator hawley.
▶ 1:08:28Sen. Hawley: I think maybe I misunderstood this last line of questioning. I thought it sounded to me like my friend senator durbin was defending the korematsu decision, which I think is one of the worst and most abhorrent decisions in the history of the united states, so I want to be clear on this. Let me give you all a chance to weigh in on this.
▶ 1:08:53Sen. Hawley: When we have a decision that is absolutely morally abhorrent, korematsu, dred scott, we can go down the line, should officials who disagree with a morally abhorrent decision blindly follow it or do they register their disagreements? I suppose if they have to they resign in protest. There is a system for this and pattern for this. Is the united states of america better off if our public officials in the face of grievous moral wrongs say and do nothing?
▶ 1:09:24Mr. Sauer: I strongly agree with your reaction to that and the only point I was trying to make in my exchange with the ranking member was it is hard to make a very blanket, sweeping statement about something without being presented with the facts and the law applied in that scenario. Those historical examples are designed to illustrate the difficulty of doing that.
▶ 1:09:47Mr. Reitz: Thank you for your background and for that question. I stand by my earlier comments, which is to say there is no hard and fast rule about whether in every instance a public official is bound by a court decision. There are some instances in which he or she may lawfully be bound and others in which he or she may not lawfully be bound.
▶ 1:10:12Sen. Hawley: I know everybody sitting on this panel in front of me is a believer in the rule of law. It seems to me we can multiply these instances. The fugitive slave act, for example. We had judges and other public officials say the fugitive slave law, and a pour into law, had to be enforced in the north. You had judges who said I cannot in good conscious force this.
▶ 1:10:40Sen. Hawley: United states might be a better place of more of them had done so and taken a stand against such injustice so I cannot believe it is a position of anybody on this committee that in the face of decisions like korematsu and dred scott and the fugitive slave act that we should say it just do not say anything and enforce the law. Ms.
▶ 1:11:00Sen. Hawley: Dhillon, you spoke movingly about religious liberty and it made me think of that line that america did not invent religious liberty. Religious liberty invented america and your family's story is a testimony to that. I mindful of the fact that we have seen unprecedented attacks on religious liberty in this country, abhorrent attacks on people of faith.
▶ 1:11:26Sen. Hawley: To take one example, after the supreme court dobbs decision, 100 pregnancy care centers more than that were vandalized, criminally assaulted, firebombed, over 300 churches, many of them catholic churches, were targeted in the same manner . The biden justice department did nothing to defend these institutions. They let them twist in the wind.
▶ 1:11:47Sen. Hawley: They allow the violence to go on virtually unchecked and members of this body encourage that violence with outrageous rhetoric on the floor of the united states senate and house of representatives. Will you commit to stopping the disparate treatment of americans on basis of religious faith that we have seen in the last four years? Will you make sure people of faith are protected in religious expression?
▶ 1:12:14Ms. Dhillon: Thank you for that question. I believe my career and disclosures made to the senate would back up the fact that my entire career has included religious liberty litigation on the side of people of faith of minority and majority fates and I am proud of that and I have won cases at the united states supreme court defending people of faith from government obstruction.
▶ 1:12:38Ms. Dhillon: I would absolutely be committed as a top priority in the civil rights division to defending people of faith equally.
▶ 1:12:45Sen. Hawley: Will you investigate and prosecute those who carry out attacks on pregnancy care centers, places of worship, those with antireligious motivation targeting people of faith in their houses of worship and other places where they are vulnerable?
▶ 1:13:07Ms. Dhillon: Absolutely.
▶ 1:13:08Sen. Hawley: Let me ask you about anti-semitism on america's campuses. We have seen the most horrific explosion of anti-semitic violence. Yesterday, I met in my office with a young man, and rotc member and jewish american peer his arm was in a sling because he had been physically assaulted on his campus. What was his offense? He had been in support of the state of israel.
▶ 1:13:35Sen. Hawley: Will you commit to enforcing title vi violations related to antisemitism to make sure we root out the scourge on american campuses?
▶ 1:13:44Ms. Dhillon: I would commit to that. >> Mr. sauer, thank you for your service as a federal prosecutor and to the people of missouri, Mr. reitz for your service to this body and your military service and Ms. dhillon I appreciate your willingness to step forward and raise your hand to serve. You are all seeking critical leadership positions in a department of justice that is reeling and questioning the department it is being taken.
▶ 1:14:16Ms. Dhillon: Career prosecutors were fired for working on cases that president trump did not approve of or like. At the southern district of new york and in the public integrity unit, a half-dozen prosecutors resigned earlier this month rather than carry out what they believed to be unlawful or unethical orders in the eric adams case. If president trump were to ask you to do something you illegalo you to do something you illegalr unconstitutional, what would you do?
▶ 1:14:46Ms. Dhillon: First of all, I represented president trump for four years in different cases and actually represent him as a private attorney. In all those years and multiple cases and jurisdictions, the president has never asked me to do anything that I found to be objectionable, immoral, unlawful, or illegal so I really can't fathom the circumstance that you're describing.
▶ 1:15:14Sen. Coons: I don't think it is hypothetical. You folks in the integrity unit and the southern district resigning over what they believed to be in unethical and inappropriate order. I put that exact question to your predecessor in the first trump administration. He did not call it hypothetical.
▶ 1:15:32Sen. Coons: He answered directly sing every department of justice to effectively defend the constitution and laws would be appropriate to refuse to follow a directive of the president illegal or unconstitutional. He did the same and answer the same question. Is there any reason you can't?
▶ 1:15:52Ms. Dhillon: He did not have four years representing president trump as his lawyer. I will give him the grace of not knowing for that experience that I have had. I think it is a hypothetical to me.
▶ 1:16:09Sen. Coons: Sadly, it is Dr. currently serving members of the department of justice. If I might, Mr. reitz, in the exchange has held both between senator durbin and senator hawley and yourself, dozens of president trump's executive orders have been blocked by federal courts in recent weeks. I never have been reviewed on appeal read to her knowledge come is the administration complied with these federal court orders? Mr. reitz: thank you, senator coons.
▶ 1:16:38Sen. Coons: I have not been following the procedural posture of those cases very closely. I intend to do so should I be confirmed once I am in the justice department.
▶ 1:16:50Sen. Coons: You will be part of what my colleague was trying to focus on was the tweet you apparently posted in response to a decision you did not like. He too said, looking for some andrew jackson level leadership. The judge has made his decision. Now let him enforce it.
▶ 1:17:13Sen. Coons: My colleague from missouri suggested that somehow senator durbin was standing up for the korematsu decision or the dred scott decision. I think varied in what he said and what my colleagues that is clarity. What are the avenues appropriately available to a litigant, which can include the president or the department secretary -- what are the avenues available to properly challenge a duly issued federal circuit or district court order?
▶ 1:17:42Sen. Coons: And is it ever proper to simply refuse to obey that order? Mr. reitz thank you. I'll answer your second question first. Which is what I referenced earlier. There is no hard and fast rule in all instances in which a litigant must comply with all or some or various parts of a judicial decision.
▶ 1:18:12Sen. Coons: It is so fact law and case specific that one cannot speak generally.
▶ 1:18:17Sen. Coons: In your view come to litigants before a federal court get to choose whether or not to obey a federal court order?
▶ 1:18:23Mr. Reitz: If --.
▶ 1:18:29Sen. Coons: I can speak out but can the president of the united states refuse as a litigant before a federal court, refuse to follow that order which was the key implication of your tweet?
▶ 1:18:40Mr. Reitz: Generally speaking, senator, parties to a case are bound by a lawful court holding from that court. As you rightly pointed out, there are many different avenues to right perceived wrong.
▶ 1:19:02Sen. Coons: I recognize I am nearing the end of my time. Thank you for the answer. I think all of us are holding our breath to see whether or not president trump and those who will be advising him correctly understand what is a foundational principle of the rule of law. >> thank you.
▶ 1:19:22Sen. Coons: For question and challenge but may not ignore --. >> we will move to senator blackburn.
▶ 1:19:29Sen. Blackburn: Thank you. Congratulations to each of you. We are really pleased your families are here, that you have this nomination. We are so looking forward to having you serve president trump in -- and the american people in your position. So congratulations to you. I want to come to you first, Ms. dhillon.
▶ 1:19:56Sen. Blackburn: In tennessee, we follow the motto "let's make it easier to vote and harder to cheat." it is important for each person to know their vote is counted. And that votes -- that the process is going to be a process that is true, transparent, and honest.
▶ 1:20:19Sen. Blackburn: Our counties have been busy cleaning up voter rolls and it is why tennessee has been ranked number one in the country for election integrity. I know that you're going to follow those same premises at the department of justice. I would like for you to talk about what you can do at the civil rights division to make certain we restore election integrity.
▶ 1:20:45Ms. Dhillon: I appreciate how tennessee has taken a lead in cleaning up the voter rolls. The federal law provides under the national voter registration act that states do maintain their voter rolls in an up-to-date way to stop most states are woefully behind in doing so which creates confusion and distress among citizens who are concerned their votes are not being equally cast.
▶ 1:21:12Ms. Dhillon: I think there are limited enforcement mechanisms for the department of justice to necessarily take the lead on this particular issue, but there have been many cases in which private organizations or state parties have been granted standing to challenge and the department of justice has the opportunity in those cases where the facts have been developed to come in and take a position as well. The position in my opinion in the department of justice should be 100% in favor of clean voter rolls.
▶ 1:21:42Ms. Dhillon: Any states have evolved excellent methods for doing that in a fair way, giving citizens notice, giving them notice and multiple election cycles. I think there are many ways states can stay up-to-date like tennessee has done.
▶ 1:21:59Sen. Blackburn: Mr. sauer, I appreciated the opportunity to visit with you prior to the hearing. I want to drill down on one comment you made, justice without fear or favor. I appreciated that because so many people that have reached out to us, members of this committee, have noted that it seemed we were in the season under the last administration where there were two tears of justice.
▶ 1:22:30Sen. Blackburn: And two tears of access and two tiers of treatment. The american people have spoken against this loudly. They want equal justice for all. I would like for you to comment on what you mean and how that concept, justice without fear or favor, is essential to your role as the solicitor general.
▶ 1:22:56Mr. Sauer: Thank you very much for the opportunity to meet and speak with you. I greatly appreciated that opportunity. I greatly appreciate the question as well. I think you have asked about something that goes to the heart of the role of the department of justice. As I mentioned in my opening statement, the principle of equal justice under law, which is the same as justice without fear or favor essential to the department of justice's mission.
▶ 1:23:25Mr. Sauer: Senator hawley received -- refer to examples where that was not fully upheld in the most recent administration. In my opening statement referred -- to me are the most compelling and really astonishing experiences that I have had with respect to that that certainly involved many of the cases that I had the privilege of litigating under senator schmitt when he was attorney general of missouri but also representing president trump in the recent
▶ 1:23:55Mr. Sauer: Law for weaponize prosecutions that he experienced. We have a number of unfortunate examples in recent history in the department of justice. That is why what was kind of a ringing call to me and president trump's inaugural address was his statements that I quoted about restoring equal justice under law and the constitutional rule of law.
▶ 1:24:16Sen. Blackburn: Mr. reitz, in your role at doj, you will be responsible for initiating policy initiatives. This is something important to addressing violent crime that is just raging across the country. I want to get from you in writing what you can do -- the previous trump administration had programs like operation legend, which was very effective in memphis, tennessee.
▶ 1:24:48Sen. Blackburn: I know my time has expired. But if you will submit that went to me in writing.
▶ 1:24:54Chair: We will hear from senator hirono.
▶ 1:24:58Sen. Hirono: Thank you. I asked the following initial questions of all nominees before any of my committee so I will ask you starting with Mr. sauer and we will go down the line. Since you became a legal adult have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?
▶ 1:25:20Mr. Sauer: No.
▶ 1:25:22Mr. Reitz: No.
▶ 1:25:24Ms. Dhillon: No.
▶ 1:25:33Sen. Hirono: I would like to state with regard to Mr. reitz, for the record, in 2023 during a speech meant against texas attorney general ken paxton a texas ranger testified that there were "many complaints of sexual harassment by female employees "about Mr. reitz when he worked in the texas attorney general's office.
▶ 1:26:01Sen. Hirono: I will have further questions for the record regarding these complaints. For Ms. dhillon, section two of the voting rights act, I think your position is section two of the voting rights act requires actual discrimination. Basically, discriminatory intent before it will be deemed unconstitutional under section two. Is that correct? Is that your view?
▶ 1:26:35Sen. Hirono: Of the voting rights act?
▶ 1:26:36Ms. Dhillon: To generalize, yes, it is.
▶ 1:26:40Sen. Hirono: That means unless there is discriminatory intent to commit state legislature says, yes, we are to enact legislation that would discriminate against a group, you do not think that section two applies?
▶ 1:26:51Ms. Dhillon: I disagree with your characterization, senator. There are many ways to prove intent other than a blanket statement from a state legislature.
▶ 1:27:03Sen. Hirono: Let me mention under president trump's attorney general merrick garland, they found a number of lawsuits under section two, for example, law prohibiting civil groups from providing food or water to people who are standing in line to vote. There was no discriminatory intent. Would you have filed that lawsuit against that wall? Ms.
▶ 1:27:32Dhillon: I haven't had the opportunity to study all of the facts underlying this prosecutions by the biden department of justice.
▶ 1:27:44Sen. Hirono: Merrick garland also filed a lawsuit under section two state law limiting counties use of absentee ballot drop boxes. There are a number of these kinds of voting rights laws that the states enacted after shelby county. Has all kinds of laws that made it tougher to vote. I am wondering how you're going to decide which was to go after?
▶ 1:28:13Sen. Hirono: These obviously have the effect of discrimination against certain groups, making it harder for them to vote. How would you decide? Which of these kinds of voting rights laws enacted by states without the obvious smoking gun?
▶ 1:28:30Ms. Dhillon: Senator, I have to disagree with the premise of your question that all of these measures that georgia and other states took to improve confidence of all citizens in voting in fact had any discriminatory --.
▶ 1:28:48Sen. Hirono: Obviously, of disagreement. That is the crux to whether or not these laws have an antidiscriminatory fit. You obviously do not think so. For Mr. reitz, you stated in one of your many tweets -- there are thousands of tweets that you deleted before your nomination. We could go over some of them. They're quite astounding. One of them said, birthright citizenship is not a thing.
▶ 1:29:21Sen. Hirono: Is birthright citizenship in the constitution, yes or no? Yes or no?
▶ 1:29:26Mr. Reitz: I think there are reasonable debates to be had about the meaning and application and scope of what is commonly called birthright citizenship and the 14th amendment.
▶ 1:29:40Sen. Hirono: Actually, it has been 130 years where this particular provision has been deemed to confirm birthright citizenship and not in the way that president trump use it and apparently not you. So when we start talking about the rule of law and that you all would follow the rule of law, I do wonder what constitutes rule of law in your mind.
▶ 1:30:08Sen. Hirono: Some of lawsuits have been filed challenging the legality of his executive orders. Legality is often in the minds and eyes of the beholder. Thank you.
▶ 1:30:18Chair: Senator britt.
▶ 1:30:21Sen. Britt: Thank you. I just want to say congratulations to each and every one of you for being nominated and to our families. I know this is a big moment and you are proud of the work they have done to get here and what an honor it is. I think all of us know when you serve, it is not just you it is your entire family that does. So we say thank you. I especially want to say something to Mr. reitz. It is been an honor and privilege to work with you over the last years.
▶ 1:30:49Sen. Britt: I'm not only grateful for your service to the station and the U.S. marine corps, that what I've seen you do for senator cruz first. As a former chief myself, I know what it takes to make it all work and to make sure your boss and state in the nation are in the best place possible. You have done that in a manner that is second to none and I am excited to see each and everyone of you serve our nation at a higher level. Thank you. I'm going to start with Ms. dhillon.
▶ 1:31:17Sen. Britt: To follow-up on senator blackburn's comments come alabama feels strongly about making sure every single person has access to vote, that we make that easier whether that is providing free voter id, whether that is coming to your house to allow you to register, we want to make sure evident -- every citizen does that and that vote is protected. Part of the work of the civil rights division relates to protecting that right to vote.
▶ 1:31:41Sen. Britt: In my view, it is an important part of protecting the right of american citizens to vote and it is to ensure the votes are not diluted by those who have actually no right to vote. I know you have done some work on this issue during our time in private practice. It is an issue I have also worked to address in congress.
▶ 1:31:58Sen. Britt: During this congress, I will be in reintroducing the citizens valid protection act which emmons federal law to explicitly allow states to put in place proof of citizenship to require that for federal mail in voter registration forms and any state mail voter registration forms they might develop.
▶ 1:32:18Sen. Britt: I think many people across the nation would be shocked to know states are currently hamstrung when it comes to requiring proof of citizenship as part of starting the voter registration processes. It is common sense to ensure only american citizens are registering to vote in our elections.
▶ 1:32:35Sen. Britt: Based on your experience, can you explain why it is important and necessary to take steps to ensure that noncitizens are not voting in our election and the role you think doj and in particular the civil rights division can or should play in ensuring the votes of american citizens are not diluted?
▶ 1:32:52Ms. Dhillon: Thank you for your question. I actually want to particularly thank you for introducing the legislation you just described because while nvra itself does not bar states from requiring proof of citizenship, courts have done that and laid that prohibition that was in fact the subject of some conversations I had was some of your fellow senators while we met.
▶ 1:33:19Ms. Dhillon: I do think it would be a tremendous boost to voter confidence and the integrity of elections in the states if there was assurance that only citizens were voting. Similarly, that their only voting ones. I think that is also very important.
▶ 1:33:37Ms. Dhillon: In the current self certification system has not only allowed people to maliciously vote when they were not entitled to, it has led many illegal immigrants to unknowingly cast a vote and thereby putting their own ability to become united states citizens in peril. We have seen this happen in pennsylvania and other states. I think it would be a tremendous boost to voter integrity and competence. That intern turn would cause more americans to come out to vote which I think all of us want to vote both sides of the aisle.
▶ 1:34:06Sen. Britt: Could not agree more. As you are aware, president trump signed an executive order in january related to the measures to combat anti-semitism. Senator hawley touched on this earlier. Pursuant to that order come attorney general barr bonnie earlier this month announced the formation of a multiagency task force to do this, to make sure we doing this. The task force will be coordinated through the civil rights division.
▶ 1:34:29Sen. Britt: I have long been concerned about this issue and did not think the biden administration acted aggressively enough to address it, particularly on college campuses. Once confirmed as the head of the civil rights division, can you ensure me that you will take aggressive action via this task force to ensure that your students are protected from abuse and harassment and that those who engage in such behavior will be subject to the full force of the law?
▶ 1:34:53Ms. Dhillon: This is a high priority for me. I have several orthodox jews who worked at my law firm and personally have given me a story about their family circumstances and instances of discrimination on campuses and in other settings.
▶ 1:35:11Ms. Dhillon: Coming from a religious minority myself, I think it is very important and crucial the civil rights step up to defend students on campus because it is a blow not just of those individual students but to the entire community when they see campus administrators refuse to protect them.
▶ 1:35:27Sen. Britt: Thank you.
▶ 1:35:28Madam Chair: You are so timely. Senator booker.
▶ 1:35:32Sen. Booker: Thank you. I want to pick up with the discussion that I got a little troubling and I would like to go into more with you. It just sounds like you have been suggesting the government officials can ignore court order if they disagree with it. You're pointing to some of the worst case and test cases in our nation. -- you are pointing to some of the worst cases in our nation.
▶ 1:36:02Sen. Booker: Crisis if our courts restrict or compel government action and the government officials go against that. To me that is the very nature of what a constitutional crisis is. My staff pulled a tweet of yours that you compared the dred scott decision to the court's decision in same-sex marriages.
▶ 1:36:23Sen. Booker: I want to know do you think public officials have it within their right if they find it morally wrong and the burger fell decision to violate that court order or that court's conclusions?
▶ 1:36:36Mr. Reitz: Thank you, senator. My position I have been consistent on, which is parties to the litigation are bound to the lawful holdings of their respective court. I understand there is genuine disagreement about the scope of certain holdings, whether they can apply nationally or other litigants.
▶ 1:37:02Mr. Reitz: But I think it is a fair discussion for attorneys in good faith to discuss the scope of the holding of the case.
▶ 1:37:09Sen. Booker: I find academic discussions important in our national dialogue, but you are being nominated for a very important position. My question to you I guess is very plain, if you morally disagree with the court order, do you believe you can defy that court order that the trump administration, the government come that you in your position could defy that court order?
▶ 1:37:34Sen. Booker: >> senator, I appreciate the clarification. However, just a general reference in this hearing to a litigant morally disagreeing to the decision of the court in my opinion is too hypothetical for me to be able to answer with precision.
▶ 1:37:53Sen. Booker: Do you understand that is not a comfortable assurance for me when there is credible concerns about the supreme court making a decision as in obergefell and having an administration that feels it can defy that? You're not given me great confidence by stating unequivocally that we are a nation that respects the separation of powers, the rule of courts.
▶ 1:38:22Sen. Booker: And far be it from me to lecture you and I hope you don't take it that way, but the traditions of our country that disagree with a morally law that the traditions we exult, one of the two exceptions of statutes underneath the dome of the capitol is martin luther king who is very clear about when you find a law morally wrong and you break that law, you accept the consequences of that -- which is jail or removal from a physician.
▶ 1:38:52Sen. Booker: I am seeing right now good-faith actors within government resigning their position. That is a very different tradition, that haunted tradition in our country, then a person in a position like your nominated from willfully disregarding a court order. That is in its very nature a constitutional crisis.
▶ 1:39:18Sen. Booker: And your failure in this forum to resolutely state your commitment to abide by court orders -- I hope you can understand why that would be troubling to many of the senators before you. You understand that is troubling?
▶ 1:39:33Mr. Reitz: I understand, senator booker, that is a perspective that members of this body may have.
▶ 1:39:41Sen. Booker: Very difficult for me to swallow that. And honestly, you sent a chill to me and my concerns about the current administration. Ms. dhillon, I am having cash happy to see here because of the pride of your family behind you. You can see it written on their faces. I hope you understand that.
▶ 1:40:06Sen. Booker: They're just extraordinary for me as american to see you sitting here and your incredible family behind you. I have some very direct questions for you that I do not have time with because I fear the chairwoman. But I'm going to put them in writing and they have to do with your knowledge of any plans to dismiss employees -- and a lot of the things that you rise interest to me. Would you commit to responding to me? Ms. dhillon: yes.
▶ 1:40:38Madam Chair: You, to, are timely.
▶ 1:40:42Sen. Booker: Thank you for the same kindness.
▶ 1:40:46Madam Chair: Senator lee.
▶ 1:40:48Sen. Lee: A few months ago, one of my colleagues asked a question about abiding by the rule of law and abiding by supreme court decisions. When the supreme court ruled that president biden did not in fact have authority to undertake his student loan forgiveness program, president biden made a statement following that to the effect of the following, "the supreme court blocked it but that did not stop me" flouting his defiance of the supreme
▶ 1:41:18Sen. Lee: Court and the rule of law. I would like to ask each of you, we will start with Ms. dhillon and then Mr. reitz and Mr. sauer. Just to be clear in your view, does president biden's statement hold water and would you follow the rule of law if confirmed your position?
▶ 1:41:39Ms. Dhillon: Thank you for that question. I, too, was surprised president biden's reaction to that order because the order itself I think many lawyers would agree was entirely consistent with the law. No argument was made by the president that the order was unconstitutional, illegal, immoral, etc. He simply defied it.
▶ 1:42:08Sen. Lee: Possession is 910's of the law is what he was saying.
▶ 1:42:11Ms. Dhillon: Correct. That is a little hard to swallow. In general, there many mechanisms for a party to disagree with a ruling, seek a stay, seek an appeal, etc. And those are the steps you would normally take. In this case, it was the highest court in the land. In that circumstance, I disagree with their president's position.
▶ 1:42:36Mr. Reitz: Yes, if confirmed, you personally come this body come the american people have an absolute commitment to always observe the letter of the law no doubt about it. I think my reaction to president biden's recently flouting a supreme court decision in which he was a litigant and thus lawfully bound to the holding of that court was disappointing and unlawful.
▶ 1:43:05Mr. Sauer: I agree with my colleagues. On a personal note as senator schmitt mentioned in his introduction, we were directly involved in litigating on that issue with the decision that became nebraska against biden. Those statements were particularly troubling. And if confirmed, will follow the rule of law.
▶ 1:43:27Sen. Lee: Ms. dhillon, the position to which you have been nominated is one that in some ways gets to the essence of the professional obligation we have as lawyers to represent clients as they come to us, especially when that client happens to be unpopular -- even especially when that client doesn't necessarily have the wins of public opinion at his or her back.
▶ 1:43:55Sen. Lee: You've had a prestigious career in civil rights law in which you have represented unpopular clients, in which you have represented people who have been forgotten by much of society and even much of the modern civil rights movement. How do you believe a civil rights division can be utilized in order to look out for those people?
▶ 1:44:15Ms. Dhillon: Thank you for the question. Civil rights division was established in 1957 and it has a long and storied history of standing up some of the most important heroes of the civil rights movement, including looking into violent crimes against many marchers in the civil rights movement and other important figures, martin luther king jr., and others.
▶ 1:44:43Ms. Dhillon: I would view my role if confirmed to be consistent with that obligation. As a lawyer involved in first amendment cases, you are often asked to defend and protect some of the most outrageous and unpopular speech.
▶ 1:45:00Ms. Dhillon: My work at the aclu dating back to college has taught me the importance of standing up for the rights of free speech and the rights of individuals to protest whether you agree or disagree with the subject matter or not. That would definitely be my charter if confirmed.
▶ 1:45:19Sen. Lee: Thank you. Mr. sauer, have been nominated to serve as solicitor general of the united states. The solicitor general performs many roles that americans probably associate with the attorney general will stop you are the chief litigator for the united states government virtually in matters before the supreme court and other federal appellate courts. Consequently, in that position if confirmed, will have a client -- I have two closely related questions. One, who's your client?
▶ 1:45:49Sen. Lee: Two, will you wear them morning suit if confirmed as solicitor general?
▶ 1:45:52Madam Chair: You can answer briefly.
▶ 1:45:55Mr. Sauer: Your client would be the united states, the people of united states. Your fidelity would be to the constitution and rule of law. I commit to wearing the morning suit but I will not look nearly as good as your father did when he wore it.
▶ 1:46:09Sen. Lee: Thank you.
▶ 1:46:10Madam Chair: Senator klobuchar.
▶ 1:46:13Sen. Klobuchar: I was in an ag hearing that was a little more mellow so I'm happy to be here. Ms. dhillon, I know we will talk on the phone soon. I have led efforts to protect voters access to the polls and the security of our elections, the freedom to vote act, setting basic national standards to make sure all americans can vote in a way that works best for them regardless of their zip code.
▶ 1:46:42Sen. Klobuchar: John lewis once said the right to vote is precious and almost sacred and one of the most important blessings of our democracy. Today we must be vigilant in protecting that blessing. Do you agree?
▶ 1:46:51Ms. Dhillon: I agree with everything you said with respect to the importance of the right to vote. I think it is a sacred right. I promise to safeguard that right if confirmed to this position.
▶ 1:47:02Sen. Klobuchar: Your comment earlier, right about the voting rights act referring to it as a law and this was in 2022, referring to it as a law that "was once necessary to push back on jim crow laws." I have concerns about the civil rights division under your leadership, whether or not it will enforce the voting rights act.
▶ 1:47:29Sen. Klobuchar: Isn't it true that two years ago, the supreme court reaffirmed section two of the voting rights act which prohibits states and localities from enacting laws or taking actions that have the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on the basis of race?
▶ 1:47:41Ms. Dhillon: That is correct. I would add I don't know the full context of the quote that you read but of course we all know that the united states supreme court is actually struck down provisions of the voting rights act is unconstitutional, specifically section 4a that effectively renders section 5 fidelity unless congress acts to fill in the gaps.
▶ 1:48:05Sen. Klobuchar: I was referring to section 2. But will you commit the bigger thing for me to vigorous enforcement of section 2 of the voting rights act including with respect to groups that have been subject to historic discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, or language minority status?
▶ 1:48:23Ms. Dhillon: I would have to see the facts but if the effects merit a section 2 investigation and/or legal action, I would pursue that.
▶ 1:48:34Sen. Klobuchar: Will you commit to not reassigning or firing career attorneys in the division based on their political and ideological affiliations, who they voted for, or their views of the 2020 election?
▶ 1:48:46Ms. Dhillon: Without getting into the job itself and understanding all of the motivations of individuals, I can't really commit any particular personnel decisions. I will say in my home state of california, we have lost about that and that is certainly my general practice to not react against people based on -- solely on their political views.
▶ 1:49:08Sen. Klobuchar: Mr. sauer, at the nomination hearing for president trump's first term solicitor general no francisco, chair grassley said "it is the responsibility of the solicitor general to defend the law even when they don't personally agree with the law." Mr. francisco agreed stating that the solicitor general is a lawyer representing the united states, what matters are the views expressed by the U.S.
▶ 1:49:35Sen. Klobuchar: And the statute for that this body passes. You agree it is the duty of the justice department to defend the laws congress passes and will you commit to do so even when the president may disagree with an act campaign against its passage or called for its repeal?
▶ 1:49:51Mr. Sauer: [no audio] I believe Mr. francisco stated that the duty of the solicitor general is to defend the validity of congressional enactments when reasonable arguments available to do so. I think he noted exception in certain cases where there's is a conflict between a claim of encroachment on the president's article 2 authority and I would commit to following those principles he outlined in his testimony.
▶ 1:50:19Sen. Klobuchar: I also note that on her first day in office come the attorney general issued a memo in which she said doj lawyers must be zealous advocates for their clients interests. Then she said, and this was troubling to many of us, and to do otherwise deprives the president of the benefit of his lawyers. When you served as a prosecutor in the eastern district of missouri during the obama administration, did you see yourself as president obama's lawyers?
▶ 1:50:49Mr. Sauer: I believe as an attorney for the department of justice at any level as I said to senator lee, the client of that attorney would be united states, the people of the united states.
▶ 1:51:02Sen. Klobuchar: Thank you. All justice lawyers as you know take an oath to the constitution and as you note the client is the people of the united states. I asked this of todd blanche and he answered that is true and so your client will in fact be united states government and the united states of america and not the president?
▶ 1:51:24Mr. Sauer: I stand by my prior answer.
▶ 1:51:29Sen. Klobuchar: Thank you.
▶ 1:51:30Madam Chair: I appreciate all of you being here today. Certainly, based on my history as a federal prosecutor and a judge and attorney general of the state of florida, I think the roles in which you are volunteering to serve and have accepted these nominations are some of the most important roles in our government, especially at this moment in time when so many people believe, so many
▶ 1:52:01Madam Chair: Americans believe that the department of justice and agencies within it have been used to unfairly target those that may hold a different political preference or persuasion. It is so important for the stability and consistency and long-term success of this nation to have people like you, patriots, passionate about this country and its founding principles, in these roles to assure americans that we are going to bring this back to a
▶ 1:52:33Madam Chair: Place where americans can trust that you are -- that the institution of the department of justice is a shield protecting not only americans safety, but there an innumerable -- inalienable rights. You believe add core?
▶ 1:52:50Mr. Sauer: Thank you for the question. I greatly appreciated the ability to work with you and your staff when I was in the state attorney general's office.
▶ 1:52:59Madam Chair: I know you said you equally adored the two as her attorney, but you never said which attorney general on the dais you liked and respected the most. >> there is only one here right now. [laughter]
▶ 1:53:13Madam Chair: You can always go with florida. It doesn't have to be your home state.
▶ 1:53:17Mr. Sauer: There are many wonderful public servants in the room and I respect them all greatly. In response, yes, I know I can improve on the way the principal is expressed in the quotations from president trump's inaugural address that are referenced in my opening statement.
▶ 1:53:34Mr. Reitz: I 100% agree with you.
▶ 1:53:37Mr. Sauer Ms. Dhillon: I agree with you as well.
▶ 1:53:41Madam Chair: Without objection, I would like to introduce for the record and letter from all four women republican attorneys general, my former colleagues, where they voiced support for you, Ms. dhillon, and we will enter that into the record without objection. One of the things they highlighted and I noted that we share this in common, most people don't know this about you because they hear what is only pushed and highlighted within the media.
▶ 1:54:09Madam Chair: As a young lawyer and continuing to this day, have without charge , free of charge, using her skills as an attorney for pro bono, defendant victims -- sought justice for victims of sex trafficking and domestic violence. I remember after working long days at my law firm going and sitting at the courthouse and helping victims of domestic violence.
▶ 1:54:33Madam Chair: I believe that shows your heart, protecting the most vulnerable in their time of need that may not understand how to navigate the court system and understand the court system is therefore their protection. I believe that is what you will bring and heart and spirit and passion to this role. To that end, have spoken to this as attorney general, I was one of the first to request a large corporation be investigated for discrimination for some of their hiring practices using racial quotas.
▶ 1:55:01Madam Chair: I also brought suit one of the first of the kind in the nation when pregnancy crisis centers were being firebombed and threatening messages were being written on them to make sure that we were protecting the life of those that are pro-life american debts protecting the rights of pro-life americans. Many of these duties would fall under the doj. I hope you will go back and review where that might not have been done under the last administration.
▶ 1:55:29Madam Chair: Do you assure this body and this committee that you will make every effort to do what this government is intended to do -- why it was set up to be a government of the free people, first and foremost, to protect our rights. Will you confirm for this body that you will make sure every american is protected under your leadership? Mr. reitz --.
▶ 1:55:54Ms. Dhillon: Thank you for that question most of it is an issue dear to my heart. Absolutely as I mentioned my entire legal career has spoken to the fact protecting the rights of the defenseless and following the law and enforcing the civil rights laws has and will be a passion of mine. And a top priority to make sure the defenseless and those who look to the united states for justice certainly have an open door in the civil rights division.
▶ 1:56:21Madam Chair: An under five minutes. I am concluding my questioning. As a model for all of my colleagues. We will now turn it over to senator padilla.
▶ 1:56:32Sen. Padilla: I was hoping you would convert to me you are extra 15 seconds.
▶ 1:56:37Madam Chair: Not a chance. [laughter]
▶ 1:56:40Sen. Padilla: Colleagues, before I jump into my questions, I have to express not just disappointment but alarm. There has been a number of department of justice nominees that have come before us. Most if not all echoing over and over again the respect for the constitution, the commitment to the constitution, the commitment to the rule of law.
▶ 1:57:06Sen. Padilla: Yet when pressed about whether or not they would be loyal to the constitution versus potential directives or decisions contrary to existing, they don't give strong answers. At least none that gave us the comfort level that the american people need and deserve.
▶ 1:57:33Sen. Padilla: When it comes to something as simple as the law says this, the court has ordered to stop doing that, to obfuscate, to -- I can't remember a time in history when it of all the nominees, department of justice -- high-ranking department of justice officials not adamantly defending the balance of power, coequal branches of government, the checks and balances built into the constitution's telling of the political times we are living in an alarming.
▶ 1:58:04Sen. Padilla: That being said, let me jump into a couple of questions for the folks before us. Mr. sauer, a solicitor general you are test with representing the U.S. before the supreme court should you be confirmed. As an attorney, any state bar in the country a task with defending the constitution.
▶ 1:58:25Sen. Padilla: The president has already issued an executive order in defiance in regard to birthright citizenship. We talked about this in my office and I told you I was going ask about it. Can you articulate for the committee the current supreme court precedents with respect to birthright citizenship in the 14th amendment?
▶ 1:58:46Mr. Sauer: Thank you for the question. Thank you for the opportunity to meet with you. I appreciated the conversation. I do recall in the conversation he asked me to look at certain 19th-century supreme court decisions. I agreed most of it I have done that. However, given this is a matter that would be very likely to come within my purview, I don't think would be appropriate.
▶ 1:59:10Sen. Padilla: Nice dodge. Thank you. Ms. dhillon, your record demonstrates to me and is a fellow californian I seen you work closely, post voting rights protections over the years including the john lewis voting rights advancement act, fought against use of voting rights act to challenges going to tory laws, spread disinformation about the 2020 election and defended restrictive voting laws in multiple states.
▶ 1:59:41Sen. Padilla: 2019, the california department of motor vehicles alleging the voter program. An audit found no widespread voter fraud. The lawsuit was unsuccessful. That was just one I think of about 10 lawsuits that you brought against the state when I was secretary of state. All unsuccessful and dismissed.
▶ 2:00:01Sen. Padilla: When you commit or how can you convince us that based on this track record that you would equally enforce, fairly enforce voting rights through the department of justice?
▶ 2:00:15Ms. Dhillon: Thank you. When we had the opportunity to meet in your office yesterday, I gave you an example of california's failure to abide by the nvra and make his foot rolls clean. That is one million voters in los angeles county alone, which the county of los angeles agreed --.
▶ 2:00:39Sen. Padilla: It my recollection is the county agreed to adopt traditional practices on maintaining voter rolls. All the lawsuits were unsuccessful.
▶ 2:00:46Ms. Dhillon: That is not true factually. I have won several lawsuits against california.
▶ 2:00:53Sen. Padilla: In the interest of my time, and a couple of questions for Mr. reitz. Thank you for being here. As part of our homework, came across some disturbing social media posts of yours that I would like to present for the record and ask if they are indeed you as they appear to be. February 2021 you wrote, the worst scotus decision since obergefell.
▶ 2:01:28Sen. Padilla: Is this you? Mr. reitz: it was.
▶ 2:01:35Sen. Padilla: April 2021, birthright citizenship is not a thing. As is your post? Yes or no?
▶ 2:01:42Mr. Reitz: That appears to be my x handle.
▶ 2:01:47Sen. Padilla: Another one -- is this you?
▶ 2:01:58Mr. Reitz: It appears to be my handle.
▶ 2:02:01Sen. Padilla: September 2020i believe it was, bring back the good old days. This is a picture of the infamous joe mccarthy. Was this your post?
▶ 2:02:15Mr. Reitz: That appears to be my x handle. Mr. chair. >> I find it fascinating my friends are concerned about a ignoring the supreme court decisions. Mr.
▶ 2:02:38Mr. Reitz: Sauer, you and I brought the student loan debt forgiveness case and joe biden said the supreme court blocked me, that did not stop me. So this lawlessness we have seen over the last four years all of this on my democrat friends have found religion when abiding by supreme court decisions. Ms. dhillon, my colleagues on the other site tell us you are a threat to civil rights. The truth is I think you're one of the fiercest advocates of civil rights in a generation.
▶ 2:03:08Mr. Reitz: On paper, civil rights are supposed to mean protection from discrimination based on characteristics like race. In practice, the entire civil rights bureaucracy as it currently exists as a vehicle for an entrenched new system of discrimination based on race. The left is right about one thing in my view, there is systemic racism that exists in america today but it is not jim crow or redlining or criminal justice system.
▶ 2:03:34Mr. Reitz: It is the pervasive racial discrimination that exists against asians, whites, and other disfavored groups that take place now on college campuses, the boardrooms of fortune 500 companies, even the halls of our own government. A gust by a bunch of different names, principally dei or crt come can go on and on it. .
▶ 2:03:58Mr. Reitz: Is wrong and has to stop most of the best way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race. That is one of the reasons I like you. I think I like most "major civil rights organizations today," you post racial discrimination in all forms. I want to ask you convince reverse racism still racism?
▶ 2:04:21Ms. Dhillon: Thank you for the question. I don't even use the term "reverse racism is what it is just "racism."
▶ 2:04:32Sen. Schmitt: Enter civil rights protections apply equally to all races?
▶ 2:04:34Ms. Dhillon: Yes.
▶ 2:04:40Sen. Schmitt: We have to root out this wokeism in this discrimination that has been under the cover from this cultural marxism of dei. I'm glad president trump is taking on the federal government. You've seen this obviously play out in the private sector as well. 2023, target, distort, explicitly stated that as part of its reach initiative it wanted to hire 20% more black employees and overt racial motor system.
▶ 2:05:09Sen. Schmitt: Title vii of the civil rights act prohibits discrimination plummet based on race, religion, sex, national origin. Invalids are civil rights. Does this practice have target having racial quotas raise red flags for you?
▶ 2:05:21Ms. Dhillon: Fd facts are as you describe them, I believe that practices illegal and unconstitutional.
▶ 2:05:29Sen. Schmitt: One of the things I find fascinating based from the last administration, against companies like spacex for example, the biden administration brought hundreds of civil rights actions. How many actions did the biden administration bring against dei racial quotas? Are you aware? Ms. dhillon: I'm not aware of any.
▶ 2:05:50Sen. Schmitt: It is zero .0. Nine. This is the truth -- it is 0.0. None. This is the truth. My friends on the other side had a system in place that needs to be fundamental he dismantled. The left views this as cultural marxism, a way to divide the room by race. It is tearing this country apart.
▶ 2:06:18Sen. Schmitt: You have a really important role that you're going to step into when you are confirmed. I think you're going to get confirmed. To try to end this. We should not have quotas, racial quotas. People should be judged on their merits. We need to bring marriage back to stop it is not a four letter word. It is a bedrock principle that has made the country a great place. Regardless of your skin color, should have every opportunity to succeed but you also should not be held back because of your skin color either.
▶ 2:06:48Sen. Schmitt: I think this leftist movement that the democrats have been captured by, they totally lost the plot. The american people have rejected. Part of what the american people did in november as they sat in the jury box and they watch this craziness over the last four years and rejected. You, given your background and your experience and I think your great to fight these tough fights, I could not think of anybody else more qualified to do the job you are about to do. Congratulations. You have my support.
▶ 2:07:19Sen. Cruz: I would like to record to reflect I believe this is the first time in the history of the republic the word has been used in the senate judiciary committee post up with that, senator schiff.
▶ 2:07:32Sen. Schiff: Mr. sauer, served as one of the presidents defense lawyers. Should cases arise in the justice department involving the same cases in which he represented him, we recuse yourself?
▶ 2:07:45Mr. Sauer: As reflected in the ethics agreement that I have signed and in the regulation and the department of justice as to any matter that were to come before me that might require recusal obligation I would consult with the department of justice officials and follow my obligations.
▶ 2:08:05Sen. Schiff: So you'll consult.
▶ 2:08:05Mr. Sauer: Yes.
▶ 2:08:09Sen. Schiff: You are aware they have been fired, demoted, transferred. They no longer exist. The two people in that office are one of your fellow criminal defense lawyers of donald trump and political appointee he graduated from law school just a few years ago. They don't exist read so who are you going to consult? Are you going to go to one of his other criminal defense lawyers to find out if you should recuse yourself?
▶ 2:08:34Mr. Sauer: I'm not aware of any personnel actions that you describe so I can't speak directly to those. I have just been recently through a process where I was consulting closely with a career --.
▶ 2:08:46Sen. Schiff: Mr. sauer, those actions have taken place. The two appointees are political appointees. The people who make the recusal recommendations to you are political appointees. One was Mr. boozman former chief of staff and the other was a fellow criminal defense lawyer for donald trump -- Mr. boe for donald trump -- Mr. bose's former chief of staff and the other was a fellow criminal defense lawyer for donald trump.
▶ 2:09:13Sen. Schiff: You took a position as donald trump's lawyer that he could order seal team six to assassinate a political opponent and not be prosecuted for it. Unless he was impeached first. Should the president order the use of violence against a political appointment, will that continue to be your position as a lawyer for the united states? We represent to the court that any prosecution should be dismissed if the president is not first impeached?
▶ 2:09:43Mr. Sauer: Senator, I believe the exchange that you're referring to which occurred during oral argument of the D.C. circuit judge in that decision, I was asked a question about that and when I responded was that the president may be prosecuted for inaction like that but under the plain language of the impeachment judgment clause, you must first be impeached and convicted by the senate.
▶ 2:10:05Sen. Schiff: As the judge of that argument made clear, that means your position is he cannot be prosecuted unless he is impeached first. So he dashed in order the use of his office to use violence against a political opponent and you would defend his ability to do that in any criminal prosecution unless he is impeached?
▶ 2:10:22Mr. Sauer: I believe the situation came up with respect to a real-world example.
▶ 2:10:29Sen. Schiff: I am giving you -- answer my question.
▶ 2:10:34Mr. Sauer: I believe I am post of obama ordered the essential killing of U.S. citizens located abroad by drone strike and my colleague on the other side of that case --.
▶ 2:10:48Sen. Schiff: My question is not about president obama and using a drone strike against the terrorist. My mission is donald trump using just my question is donald trump using his office to assassinate a political opponent if he is not impeached for it, would you defend against any prosecution a solicitor general? Mr. sauer: that is so outlandish I don't know if --.
▶ 2:11:10Sen. Schiff: You a dresser for the court but not the country in this hearing?
▶ 2:11:13Mr. Sauer: I think I said the same response.
▶ 2:11:17Sen. Schiff: You evidently would defend him against prosecution for that. Let me move on to the last question. The department moved to dismiss a corruption case against the mayor of new york. The acting southern district of new york, said attorney, refused to undertake an action that she believed was deeply unethical. So it then fell on her number two hagan scott to do the dirty deed of dismissing this case.
▶ 2:11:47Sen. Schiff: This is what he said, any assistant U.S. attorney would know our laws and traditions do not allow using prosecutorial power to influence other citizens much less elected officials in this way. If no lawyer within earshot of the president is willing to give him that advice, that I expect you will eventually find someone who is enough of a whole or coward to file your motion but it was never going to be me. My question to you, would that be you?
▶ 2:12:16Mr. Sauer: What I --.
▶ 2:12:21Sen. Schiff: Would be you, if it fell to you to dismiss that case, would you be the coward or full willing to dismiss that case on behalf of the president?
▶ 2:12:28Mr. Sauer: I can't speak any official action I might or might not take in a hypothetical scenario. I will say there was a distressing lack of letters like this during the weaponization of justice.
▶ 2:12:40Sen. Schiff: There is a disturbing presence of letters like this in your answer tells me that it would be you. My colleagues have praised your legal skills. I have no doubt about your knowledge of the law. But to me you can't be a good lawyer if you use the law to subvert the law. If you use our system to undermine our system. I am deeply afraid that is what you have done and that is what you will do in this position. I yield back.
▶ 2:13:08Chair Cruz: Let me state to the three of you, thank you for agreeing to serve our nation. Thank you for going to the department of justice. I will not my democratic colleagues are suddenly deeply concerned about the rule of law. All seem to have entered witness protection program during the four years of the bd four years of the biden presidency when it was the most lawless and partisan department of justice our nation has ever seen.
▶ 2:13:36Chair Cruz: And not a single democrat on this committee could be bothered to be concerned in the slightest about the weaponization of the department of justice to attack president biden's political opponents,. Merrick garland's refusal to enforce the law, including refusing to protect supreme court justice is when a clear federal statute made it a crime to protest and threaten the lives and families of supreme court justices and yet the buying department of justice refused to follow that.
▶ 2:14:06Chair Cruz: Mr. sauer, I will note you have -- you and I share a lot of legal history. We both attended the same law school, clerked for the same judge, you clerked for antonin scalia. We both started our legal career practicing under chuck cooper, one of the finest supreme court litigators on the planet.
▶ 2:14:32Chair Cruz: You have been nominated to an incredibly important position, solicitor general of the united states, a position recurrently referred to as the 10th justice. It is the only position in the entire federal government that is required by statute to be "learned in the law." I will note I am grateful that is not a requirement to serve on the senate judiciary committee.
▶ 2:14:56Chair Cruz: But I would ask you to share with this committee and share with the american people what is the responsibility of the solicitor general and how will you carry out this task if and when you are confirmed?
▶ 2:15:08Mr. Sauer: Thank you very much, senator, for the question and the opportunity to meet and discuss legal issues facing the united states. I believe I responded to earlier questions that the role of the solicitor general is to defend both the statutes of the united states that are enacted by congress and the executive actions of the executive branch was of the solicitor general does so on behalf of the client of the U.S.
▶ 2:15:33Mr. Sauer: Department of justice which is the united states, the american people, and does so consistent with fidelity to the constitution and the rule of law.
▶ 2:15:42Chair Cruz: I have every confidence you will do exactly that. Ms. dhillon, as a sikh woman who has immigrated to the united states at a young age, how does your background shape your civil rights look and how can that enhances civil rights division and advocate for all americans from all backgrounds? Thank you for that question.
▶ 2:16:08Chair Cruz: I would put it this way, my faith itself teaches first openness to all, respect for all , and protecting the defenseless. Those are among the tenants of my faith. That is why you see so many sikhs volunteering in war-torn areas and doing relief work around the world. I have been motivated by my faith and teachings in my home.
▶ 2:16:39Chair Cruz: My career has also demonstrated in many instances as other senators have mentioned of pro bono work, doing work for people who could not get a lawyer otherwise. I am proud of that work. In the civil rights division, there is a long and storied history of doing exactly the same thing which is standing up for the most disadvantaged individuals in our united states and ensuring equal justice for all.
▶ 2:17:06Chair Cruz: I would definitely be informed by those lifetime experiences, including 32 years as a lawyer representing --.
▶ 2:17:12Chair Cruz: How have your experiences as someone who has been subjected to rifle -- racial profiling interviews and in particular the incident in 1995 when you and your husband were attacked on a bus? Can you please briefly describe that and how that will inform how you will carry out the roles running the civil rights division?
▶ 2:17:30Ms. Dhillon: In the early 1990's as a newlywed, I got a terrible phone call from the chaplain at nyu that my husband, a medical resident in their program, had been shot and brought to nyu. He was shot in the chest by a racist who confronted him on a crowded new york city bus during rush hour and told him to get out of his face and to apologize and used numerous ethnic slurs.
▶ 2:18:01Ms. Dhillon: When my husband refused to apologize, he was shot. It really brought home to me that no matter what your education, affluence, background, their instances in which bigots and racists will operate in society to try to harm people and it is up to lawyers than stand up to that and make sure that there are severe punishments.
▶ 2:18:28Ms. Dhillon: Unfortunately, that was new york city and in that case, the person was not severely punished for shooting by then husband in the chest.
▶ 2:18:33Chair Cruz: That is truly horrible. Mr. reitz, will you tell this committee what the rule against perpetuities is? [laughter]
▶ 2:18:41Mr. Reitz: Mr. chairman will grant me, I know we are over time if I may answer.
▶ 2:18:47Chair Cruz: You may.
▶ 2:18:49Mr. Reitz: No interest is good and less and less vest if at all not later than 21 years after some life and being at the creation of the interest.
▶ 2:18:58Chair Cruz: Very good. [laughter] I want to enter into the record multiple letters in support of Mr. reitz's nomination, a letter from the national association of police organizations, a letter from former editorial board members of the texas review on the apologists come at mlk association of texas, a letter -- review, mlk association of
▶ 2:19:29Chair Cruz: Texas, and a letter from pastor willie davis, houston city council member. Without objection, these are entered into the record. Senator welch.
▶ 2:19:44Sen. Welch: Mr. reitz, very nice to visit with you. Nice to see your family. All of us are kind of amazed the cheerful person you're having survived working for this guy named cruz from texas. It is hard on us but we can imagine what it is like for the chief of staff.
▶ 2:20:08Chair Cruz: Your time has expired. [laughter]
▶ 2:20:13Sen. Welch: To all of you, let me express what is a concern I think many of us have. It is not a democrat-republican thing, but there is a profoundly new set of expectations and boundaries and with the executive power is now. We have had decisions that gives immunity to the president. I find that shocking. I think the president has to be subject to the law and not above the law.
▶ 2:20:42Sen. Welch: We also have a president who has been very explicit in determined that it is "my justice department." and so the statement made that if he doesn't just to save the country, it is lawful. That is unique.
▶ 2:21:03Sen. Welch: We have not had that point of view embedded into some extent, some validation with what the supreme court is doing and with the president is asserting. That causes me great concern because I think it really threatens the separation of powers and the coequal authority of congress to be a check and balance. All of you will have major positions that will require you basically to serve the interest of the president. We all understand that.
▶ 2:21:36Sen. Welch: But where there is a real redefinition of that presidential authority. I want to ask a little bit about that. I will ask Mr. reitz, I know you are sweet, you asked about that, can the president basically -- tell me where you come from in terms of what the limits are on presidential authority.
▶ 2:21:54Mr. Reitz: Thank you. It really was a pleasure visiting with you and your staff just yesterday. Senator come if I could clarify, referenced a tweet in which I said the president has unlimited power?
▶ 2:22:12Sen. Welch: I will get to the tweet. I thought senator durbin displayed it. I was told that. I am looking for some andrew jackson level leadership on this one. The judge has made his decision to let him enforce it. So it is a famous jackson that we can essentially disregard. The decision of the supreme court.
▶ 2:22:38Mr. Reitz: Thank you for clarifying, senator. My position reflects a fairly mainstream view within circles which is simply to suggest various supreme court or court of appeals decisions are more limited in scope than maybe our friends who share a different view of supreme court holding would suggest.
▶ 2:23:08Sen. Welch: Let's say there is a serve from court holdings in presidential policy is invalid. His motivation as he can say anything if it is to protect the country. And that anything would include disregarding the order of the court, disregarding the order was to save the country.
▶ 2:23:37Mr. Reitz: I think -- I'm not aware of any instance in which president trump generally stated that he can do anything.
▶ 2:23:50Sen. Welch: May be a hypothetical but I don't think -- this is hypothetical in that it hasn't happened yet but it is hypothetical based on the very explicit decisions. One by the supreme court and immunity and the other by president's own statements. Mr. sauer, do you believe the president has the authority in the name of saving the country to disregard a decision by the supreme court?
▶ 2:24:17Mr. Sauer: To be clear, had the privilege of representing president trump for much --.
▶ 2:24:25Sen. Welch: Are not asking that. I'm not asking about their privilege he had of serving the president, I'm asking about the question -- you heard my question. In the present rate disregard the order because in his opinion he is acting in a way that will "save the country"?
▶ 2:24:42Mr. Sauer: The answer I was trying to get respectively as that I've represented a Mr. trump for two years but I've never seen anything that would lead me to believe I could be put in any situation.
▶ 2:24:53Sen. Welch: I get it. You respect them, like them come here is your lawyer. I'm not asking about that. I give you that. But the president has now asserted that he has the right basically to do what he thinks is necessary to save the country. I'm asking whether that includes violating a supreme court order.
▶ 2:25:12Mr. Sauer: I would refer back to the answers I gave really just simpler questions from the ranking member.
▶ 2:25:20Sen. Welch: How about answering my question now that I'm here?
▶ 2:25:21Mr. Sauer: There was a lengthy exchange about that but I representing president trump for two years and have never been put in any situation like that
▶ 2:25:28Will Stop Sen. Welch: I just got to say, that is a little frustrating. I understand he is a good relationship with the president, respects him. The president has never put him in that position. There is a real question and emerging executive authority.
▶ 2:25:53Will Stop Sen. Welch: This is a serious question we've never had to face before, can the president disregard a decision by the supreme court? I will yield back. I just want to express my frustration in not getting a direct answer.
▶ 2:26:08Chair Cruz: I will note that witnesses did point out that president trump has been president for four years and one month now and he has never disregarded a court order. We just finished four years of joe biden routinely disregarding the law, and no incidents more flagrantly, concerning our southern border where he defied federal immigration law and allowed 12 million illegal immigrants to come into this country.
▶ 2:26:39Chair Cruz: The hypotheticals that are being posed by her democrat colleagues, sadly, we have lived in the last four years when you have a lawless president who does not follow the statutes passed by congress and signed into the united states governor. Senator kennedy.
▶ 2:26:53Sen. Kennedy: Thank you. The credentials of each of you are impressive. Ms. dhillon, did you ever have professor stephen virginia law school? Ms. dhillon: I did, I believe my first year.
▶ 2:27:14Sen. Kennedy: He is brilliant. He should be on the federal bench. Mr. reitz, I introduced senator cruz to some of his supporters one time.
▶ 2:27:43Sen. Kennedy: I said, let me tell you about senator cruz. He is brilliant. But so was the unabomber. [laughter] you've have got to watch him like a hawk. Was that a fair description? You don't have to answer that.
▶ 2:28:01Sen. Kennedy: [laughter] is it true that after a scotch senator cruz can burp the alphabet backwards? You don't have to answer that either. [laughter] let me say something serious for a second.
▶ 2:28:30Sen. Kennedy: Then I will have one or two questions. You are all adults. You are all officers of the court. So I'm going to give you some advice. I may be wrong but I doubt it.
▶ 2:28:52Sen. Kennedy: Don't ever, ever take the position that you are not going to follow the order of a federal court. Ever. Now, you can disagree with it within the bounds of legal ethics you can criticize it. You can't appeal it. Or you can resign.
▶ 2:29:24Sen. Kennedy: For four years, I have watched people in this town -- not everybody, that many -- trying to undermine the legitimacy of the federal judiciary. And it triggered each and every time I gag reflex. I have watched them try to pack the supreme court.
▶ 2:29:49Sen. Kennedy: I have watched c1 I have watched an esteemed member of this body on the steps of the supreme court threaten justices gorsuch and justice kavanaugh. I have seen that.
▶ 2:30:09Sen. Kennedy: I have seen this body, sunk in good faith, but some in bad faith, try to impose an unconstitutional violent of the separation ethics code on the supreme court. Just to undermine their legitimacy. All of our judiciary has an equal branch of government, has its legitimacy.
▶ 2:30:35Sen. Kennedy: Don't ever say you are not going to follow the order of the court. You may not agree with it. But that is my advice. And I want you all to take it. Mr. sauer, I'm glad to see that holly took you to a cracker barrel for lunch.
▶ 2:31:01Mr. Sauer: Yes, senator. If you are familiar with the area, it is the one that is halfway through missouri and --
▶ 2:31:13Sen. Kennedy: I have always thought of holly as a more whole foods type guy. [laughter]
▶ 2:31:15Mr. Sauer: I can only say his description was accurate. It was chicken fried steak.
▶ 2:31:19Sen. Kennedy: I'm glad to see his taste is getting better. Tell me, sauer sauer Mr., give me an example of an instance where a legislative body could pass a statute discriminating on the basis of race, which of course is a suspect classification, but could pass the scrutiny test.
▶ 2:31:50Mr. Sauer: I can't think of a hypothetical as I sit here. However, I am aware there is a line of cases --
▶ 2:32:03Sen. Kennedy: I am too. Is there any way a legislative body can pass legislation classifying people on the basis of race and past scrutiny?
▶ 2:32:11Mr. Sauer: I can't imagine a scenario as I sit here, senator.
▶ 2:32:20Sen. Kennedy: How is the -- how does the doctorate of equal protection apply to the federal government? I know the 14th amendment. It says the states can't deny our people equal protection of the law. I don't see anything in the constitution, but the federal government. Not in the fifth amendment. I'm not suggesting we shouldn't. But how does it apply?
▶ 2:32:51Mr. Sauer: I believe there is a supreme court decision from the early 1950's that essentially incorporated the doctrine of equal protection. People say rivers incorporated the doctrine of equal protection through the due process law of the fifth amendment.
▶ 2:33:02Sen. Kennedy: You agree with the due process model?
▶ 2:33:07Mr. Sauer: I have criticized that dock -- that doctrine that I disclose to the committee.
▶ 2:33:13Sen. Kennedy: Without it, how would we have equal protection of the laws apply to the federal government?
▶ 2:33:18Mr. Sauer: As I sit here today, I don't dispute the holding of what the supreme court held about 60, 70 years ago.
▶ 2:33:28Sen. Kennedy: You just think they got the methodology wrong?
▶ 2:33:32Mr. Sauer: The substantive due process law, it is different than that. As I sit here today, I'm not prepared to say whether they got it right or wrong. I would have to read the opinion again. It is long settled and binding law.
▶ 2:33:46Sen. Kennedy: Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 2:33:48Chair Cruz: Thank you, senator kennedy. In light of your initial line of questioning, I ask consent that in subsequent hearings, Mr. kennedy be bound and gagged. I will withdraw that request and recognize senator whitehouse.
▶ 2:34:04Sen. Whitehouse: Thank you. I will take this opportunity to put up what I consider to be a red flag of a maga takeover of the department of justice. What we regularly see is extremely good bromides, until we hit the area of trump sensitivity.
▶ 2:34:35Sen. Whitehouse: I think we have seen it in this hearing too. And then it is like watching people fly to the bermuda triangle, and all the nabs get weird. I think that is a very strong signal of what folks' intentions are as we go into this.
▶ 2:34:56Sen. Whitehouse: Project 2025, author russ vote, said his purpose to impose trauma in the federal workforce. And I think we are seeing those efforts right now with respect to fbi agent's who were assigned, for instance, to the january 6 cases. We see repeated signals that politics now matters.
▶ 2:35:25Sen. Whitehouse: We saw attorney general bondi ask members of the department of justice to disavow their own political beliefs in favor of, and I am quoting her here, the political views that prevailed in the election. I don't think we have ever heard an attorney general say anything like that before. We see the D.C. U.S. attorney in office, not formerly, like you, Mr.
▶ 2:35:50Sen. Whitehouse: Sauer, an office, describe himself now as trump's lawyer out to protect his leadership, when challenged by the media. The department actually has some pretty noble traditions of standing against politics and for the law.
▶ 2:36:13Sen. Whitehouse: A recent example includes when the department stood against the bush administration's unlawful, warrantless wiretapping scheme, and threatened mass resignations if it was not corrected. And it was corrected. That was a good thing. The department itself rejected its own secret shoddy office of legal counsel opinions that had propped up the torture program.
▶ 2:36:42Sen. Whitehouse: That was the department cleaning up its own mess, not just going along with the signal from the white house. Most recently, you saw the department stand against efforts to involve the department of justice in the georgia election subversion scheme. To me, those were noble days for the department. I don't see any chance of that happening.
▶ 2:37:10Sen. Whitehouse: What I see in front of me now is an environment in a natural resources division that has already been decapitated. No coincidence that the biggest polluters are the biggest donors to trump's campaign.
▶ 2:37:29Sen. Whitehouse: I see the entire anti-kleptocracy initiative of the department of justice illuminated, canceled, just as we watch a president cozy up to vladimir putin. Whatever trump russia was, it still is. And to take down the department's effort that goes after russian oligarchs who prop up putin sends a terrible, into me, unjustifiable signal.
▶ 2:37:58Sen. Whitehouse: We have seen a fig grand -- a fake grand jury investigation mounted, in order to create, or at least attempted to be mounted, in order to create a pretext to allow a fund that the president objects to but is way too late to veto, to be seized and held back from the obligations on it that congress has prevailed, has provided.
▶ 2:38:28Sen. Whitehouse: And recently, we saw a flagrant pretense that the withdrawal of the prosecution of new york's mayor was not part of an agreement, the latin term for agreement being quid pro quo. And then you saw tom homan's from the administration go on to tv and say, this was an agreement and if you don't honor it, I will be, and I won't use the phrase that he used because it is vulgar.
▶ 2:39:00Sen. Whitehouse: I hope that in some way, I can call to each of your senses of decency, so that when the moment comes, which it will, when you are asked to choose between the public duties of the department of justice and the political imperatives of the trump administration, you will come down on the right side. I'm sad to say I don't see any indication of that right now.
▶ 2:39:27Chair Cruz: Thank you, senator whitehouse. Thank you to through -- to each of the three witnesses.
▶ 2:39:34Sen. Kennedy: Mr. chairman? I want to raise a point of order. I forgot to ask william and caroline if they had anything they wanted to add? Anything? How about a vote for my dad? >> yeah!
▶ 2:39:52Sen. Kennedy: Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 2:39:55Chair Cruz: An excellent ground to close the hearing. Congratulations to each of the three of you. You did a terrific job. Senator kennedy did an ok job. For everyone's information, written questions for the record can be submitted until tomorrow at 5:00 p.m. And the committee will ask each of the nominees to answer and return the questions to the committee as soon as possible so we can quickly schedule committee votes. With that, the hearing is adjourned.