Prepared Statement of Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa
Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee
Statement Opposing the Nomination of Peter Kadzik
to be Assistant Attorney General,
Department of Justice Legislative Affairs Office
Tuesday, June 17, 2014
Last week, I addressed the Senate regarding my opposition to Peter Kadzik’s nomination to the Department of Justice’s Office of Legislative Affairs. Today, I’d like to make a few concluding remarks about this nominee’s record, as well as this administration’s record, more broadly speaking, with respect to congressional oversight.
It’s hard for me to imagine a nominee that is less suited to head up the Legislative Affairs Office than Mr. Kadzik. It’s not a mystery how the nominee will run that office if he’s confirmed. He’s been acting in the position for well over a year now. And he’s got a long and well-established history of contempt for congressional oversight authority.
It’s clear to me that when it comes to this nominee, past practice will be an accurate predictor of future performance. Unfortunately, there’s a lot of evidence that justifies my conclusion.
Let’s start with the nominee’s record of contempt for congressional authority before he joined the Justice Department. Back in 2001, the House ordered the nominee to testify as part of Congress’s investigation into the eleventh-hour pardon of billionaire tax fugitive Marc Rich. The nominee represented Rich.
Not only did the nominee refuse to appear voluntarily, but he got on a plane to California the day before he was scheduled to testify before the House committee. In order to get him to testify the House had to send the U.S. Marshals to personally serve him with a subpoena in California. And when he returned to Washington, he actually claimed that his lawyers had never bothered to mention the subpoena to him before he left. We know that claim isn’t true because of handwritten notes that are now part of the record of the nominee’s confirmation hearing.
Unfortunately, things haven’t improved much since then.
The nominee’s record as acting Assistant Attorney General has been completely unacceptable.
Senators’ letters and questions go unanswered for many months, before the nominee provides – most often – a largely non-responsive reply.
So, as I said last week, this administration is sending a message by nominating Mr. Kadzik to the Legislative Affairs Office. That message is this: expect more of the same.
I want to ask my colleagues this: How much more abuse of this body’s prerogatives by this White House are we willing to accept?
How much more stonewalling of our legitimate and reasonable requests for information are we prepared to tolerate?
How many more times do you intend to look the other way as this administration flouts the law through illegal and unilateral executive action?
Because in recent weeks, the administration has raised the stakes.
Two weeks ago the president approved the release of the Taliban Five from Guantanamo without so much as a phone call to the Chair or Vice Chair of the Select Committee on Intelligence.
Disposition of the detainees at Guantanamo is one of the most important issues related to the War on Terror.
And Congress has a well-defined role under the law when it comes to releasing these dangerous terrorists. But the administration doesn’t care about that role. The administration has shown total contempt for its obligations under the law. I guess the President’s view is that it’s better to ask forgiveness after the fact than it is to abide by his constitutional obligation to follow the law and take care that it’s faithfully executed.
That’s one reason why this nomination is so important.
It’s the perfect example of this administration’s contempt for oversight, and contempt for the law. This Senator believes that Congress is entitled to learn why the administration thinks it’s free to ignore the law.
That’s why I asked the Attorney General to provide the legal rationale for the president’s unilateral executive actions that the Office of Legal Counsel gave to the administration. But back in May, the nominee refused to disclose the Office of Legal Counsel materials. Given the administration’s flagrant disregard for the law governing the release of the Taliban fighters, I think my request to the Attorney General is all the more important now.
So, I’ve renewed my request that the administration provide us with whatever advice it received from the Office of Legal Counsel before it decided to violate the National Defense Authorization Act and go forward with the stealth release of the Taliban terrorists. On June 5th, I asked the Attorney General to provide the Justice Department’s legal rationale by June 19th – that’s this Thursday. At the very least, Senators should wait for a vote on this nomination until then, so we can determine whether the Justice Department intends to comply. That would be a modest first step the administration could take to demonstrate it’s serious about respecting oversight authority, and the separation of powers under the Constitution.
So, I’ll conclude with this.
My colleagues know this nominee embodies the administration’s disregard for our oversight authority, and its dismissive approach to its legal obligations. That much is clear. But my colleagues also need to remember this: if they vote for this nominee, they are voting to diminish congressional authority. If they vote for this nominee, they are voting to give the President a free pass on the unlawful release of the Taliban fighters. They are voting to empower unlawful executive actions by this and future administrations. They are voting to chip away at the network of checks and balances that undergirds the relationship between the executive and the legislative branches. And they need to remember that one day, the shoe may be on the other foot. One day there may be a Republican administration that is just as cavalier about its legal obligations. And if that administration ignores our oversight requests, any Senator who voted for this nominee will have no right to complain.
I urge Senators to stand up for the Senate and stand up to this administration and vote no.
-30-