The Senate Judiciary Committee holds a business meeting.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00The nomination of Jason
00:09Quinonez, drug enforcement, and
00:11Sarah Lotta, to be director of
00:13U.S. marshal service, are being
00:14considered for the first time,
00:16and under committee rules will
00:18be voted on next week.
00:20The nomination of Jason
00:24Quinonez, to be U.S. attorney
00:26for the southern district of
00:29Mississippi, is being considered
00:31for the first time.
00:32The eight bills on the committee
00:34are part of the senate's
00:36traditional judiciary
00:40committee's long-standing
00:42bipartisan commitment to law
00:44enforcement that we do this time
00:46of the year.
00:48It's a true testament to the
00:50bipartisan nature of law
00:54national police week.
00:56Today's markup has four
00:58democrat-led bills, so I thank
01:01ranking member Durbin and his
01:03staff for working with us on
01:06this side of the aisle to put
01:08together this agenda, and I'd
01:10like to thank all members of the
01:12committee for their continued
01:14support of this long-standing
01:17tradition.
01:18Law enforcement across the
01:20country put their lives on the
01:22line every day.
01:23This year I led a resolution
01:25with senator Durbin honoring
01:28234 officers who made the
01:30ultimate sacrifice and are being
01:32recognized as line-of-duty
01:35deaths.
01:36This includes two of my fellow
01:38Iowans, trooper Jeffrey Brown
01:41and senior police officer
01:45Tran Phucom.
01:47The devotion of these officers
01:50merits our admiration and will
01:56be deeply indebted to them.
02:00I'm pleased my resolution with
02:02senator Durbin passed the senate
02:04with over 80 co-sponsors
02:06demonstrating the overwhelming
02:08support of the United States
02:10senate for law enforcement.
02:12The bills on today's agenda are
02:15a good example of extensive
02:18problems facing our law
02:20enforcement community.
02:22They deal with recruitment and
02:24retention issues, protecting law
02:27enforcement from the dangers of
02:29fentanyl, providing law
02:31enforcement with the equipment
02:33they need to serve our
02:35communities, protecting families
02:37of first responders, and
02:39providing resources for mental
02:41health of law enforcement.
02:45Like my colleagues, I back the
02:49blue.
02:50When I see law enforcement, I
02:52take the chance to tell them
02:54thank you for keeping the peace
02:56and I'm not for defending the
02:58police.
02:59That's why I'm pleased that
03:01we're able to have so many bills
03:04on the agenda.
03:05Each of the bills will help law
03:07enforcement, first responders
03:09throughout our nation.
03:11Once these bills are out of
03:13committee, I look forward to
03:15quickly moving them on the
03:17senate floor.
03:18I've heard some criticism from
03:19Democrats about the Trump
03:21administration's reallocation of
03:23resources within the justice
03:25department, but there's a great
03:27deal of positive news from this
03:30administration that we should
03:32recognize.
03:33Effective law enforcement and
03:35responsible spending are not
03:37incompatible.
03:38The administration's focus on
03:40returning federal law enforcement
03:42to its core mission of combating
03:45violent crime has delivered
03:47results.
03:48FBI director Patel was sworn in
03:51only a few months ago, but under
03:54his leadership, the agency has
03:56already brought into custody
03:59three of the top ten most wanted
04:02fugitives including a key leader
04:05of MS-13 who has been extradited
04:08from Mexico facing justice in
04:11this country.
04:12In early March, department of
04:16justice and FBI secured the
04:19arrest of one of the key
04:21orchestrators of the deadly ISIS
04:24K attack at Abbey gate which
04:27killed 13 young servicemen during
04:30the withdrawal from Afghanistan.
04:32More recently in May, 115
04:35children were rescued and 205
04:40predators were arrested in the
04:43FBI's operation restore justice
04:46protecting our nation's most
04:49vulnerable.
04:50Even without a permanent
04:52administrator, the DEA has
04:54delivered similar results as part
04:56of operation take back America in
04:58partnership with other federal
05:00and state law enforcement.
05:02The DEA accomplished its largest
05:05seizure of illicit fentanyl to
05:08date consisting of two and
05:11seven-tenths million potential
05:13lethal pills.
05:14We could all go on, but the
05:17president's focus on taking down
05:19violent criminals has brought to
05:21justice many of the worst of the
05:23worst targeting dangerous
05:25criminals and terrorists who
05:27threaten America's safety and way
05:29of life and I applaud these early
05:31accomplishments and look forward
05:33to more.
05:34Part of the administration's
05:36effort to refocus on violent
05:38crime included evaluation of
05:41inappropriate spending from the
05:43previous administration.
05:44Here are some of the examples of
05:47programs that we're spending
05:49taxpayer dollars on.
05:51We were spending over 600,000 on
05:56podcast series, blog and academic
05:59conference presentations.
06:01Seems to me we ought to use these
06:03resources to prosecute crime in
06:05instead of just talking about
06:08crime.
06:09Some grants appear to be aimed at
06:11sending children into dangerous
06:13situations to mediate gang
06:16conflict.
06:17We ought to take a hard look at
06:19that spending.
06:20That said, in April I wrote to
06:22justice department for clarity
06:24about its plan to grant funds.
06:27I would like to enter their
06:29response into the record and
06:31without opposition I will do
06:33that.
06:34The justice department told me
06:3693% of the terminations affect
06:39grants awarded to nongovernmental
06:42agencies.
06:43The justice department plans to
06:45reallocate funds from terminated
06:47grants to new grants that would
06:49effectively support law
06:51enforcement.
06:52To those worried about grant
06:54cuts, I'll say Congress has the
06:56ability to authorize spending
06:58and several bills on today's
07:00agenda do just that.
07:01I look forward to advancing those
07:03bills yet today.
07:04Senator Durbin.
07:05Thanks, chairman Grassley.
07:07We're 115 days into the second
07:09trump administration.
07:10Attorney general bondi's
07:11department of justice I'm afraid
07:13is resisting this committee's
07:15efforts at oversight.
07:16To date I have sent 18 oversight
07:18requests to the department of
07:20justice.
07:21Received two responses to the
07:23request.
07:24I have not received a response
07:26from the department of justice
07:28to the request.
07:29I have received two responses
07:31and they were cursory.
07:32One involved a simple records
07:34preservation request.
07:35It took the department 76 days
07:37to respond.
07:38And they wouldn't even commit to
07:40preserving the records.
07:41Contrast this with the justice
07:43department's response to
07:45chairman Grassley.
07:46By your count you've received
07:48responses to almost half of your
07:50letters.
07:51And the department has provided
07:53thousands of documents that
07:54you've requested.
07:55During my four years as chair of
07:57the committee I pressed the
07:58Biden justice department to
07:59respond to oversight requests
08:01from democrats and republicans
08:03alike.
08:04In June 2021, only five months
08:07into the Biden administration, I
08:09convened a bipartisan meeting
08:11between judiciary committee
08:12members and attorney general
08:14Merrick Garland to discuss the
08:16need to respond to committee's
08:19request.
08:20I restored the committee's
08:22longstanding tradition of
08:23holding regular oversight
08:25hearings.
08:26At this point in the Biden
08:28administration we had convened
08:29oversight hearings with the FBI
08:31director and the bureau of
08:32prisons.
08:33And I held a justice department
08:35oversight hearing with just
08:36attorney general Garland a few
08:38months later.
08:39Why does this committee's
08:41oversight of the justice
08:43department matter?
08:44Let me take a moment to briefly
08:46discuss my latest request to
08:48attorney general Bondi.
08:49As president Trump confirmed a
08:51few days ago, his administration
08:53is in talks with the state of
08:55Qatar to receive a private jet
08:57as a gift from the royal family.
08:59This aircraft would be
09:01retrofitted to act as air force
09:03one for the remainder of Trump's
09:05term in office, and then
09:07ownership would be transferred
09:08to Trump personally and the
09:10Trump presidential library
09:12foundation.
09:13The president claimed it would
09:15be, quote, stupid to say, no,
09:17we don't want a free, very
09:19expensive airplane.
09:20What the president failed to say
09:22was that it would cost America
09:24taxpayers more than the value of
09:26the airplane to outfit it to be
09:29air force one.
09:30And of equal importance, the
09:32constitution, which we've all
09:34sworn to uphold and defend, is
09:36expressed on the issue of gifts
09:38or emoluments from foreign
09:40sources.
09:41The constitution gives Congress
09:43the power to control whether any
09:46officer of the United States,
09:48including the president, may
09:50accept a gift from, quote, any
09:53king, prince, or foreign state.
09:55This gift clearly violates the
09:57constitution, and the law is
09:59enacted by Congress to govern
10:01such gifts.
10:02Yet attorney general Bondi
10:04reportedly produced a legal
10:06memorandum concluding that it
10:08would be, quote, legally
10:10permissible, close quote, for the
10:12president to accept this
10:14airplane from this foreign power.
10:16This committee and the American
10:18people need to see her legal
10:20rationale.
10:21That purportedly permits this
10:23unprecedented gift.
10:24I've requested that memo be
10:26produced.
10:27There are also grave concerns
10:29with attorney general Bondi
10:31participating in any matter
10:33involving the state of Qatar.
10:35Given that she was a registered
10:37foreign agent of that government
10:39who lobbied the Qatari
10:41government prior to her
10:43confirmation as attorney general,
10:45there are obvious questions to
10:47be asked and answered.
10:49During her confirmation process
10:51attorney general Bondi failed to
10:53list the state of Qatar as a
10:55conflict of interest.
10:56When I asked her about it, she
10:58refused to commit to recusing
11:00herself from matters involving
11:02this foreign power.
11:03She claimed she would, quote,
11:05consult with career ethics
11:07officials within the justice
11:09department and make the
11:11appropriate decision.
11:13However, Trump political
11:15appointees have conveniently
11:17removed the senior career ethics
11:19officials who would advise on
11:21such decisions and put their
11:23duties in the hands of two
11:25inexperienced political
11:26appointees beholden to the
11:28attorney general.
11:29In light of these significant
11:31ethical concerns, I've also
11:33requested that attorney general
11:35Bondi provide information
11:36related to any ethical
11:38consultation on her involvement
11:40in the Trump administration's
11:42consideration of this gift.
11:44Let's not forget that the
11:46president Trump confirmed
11:48reports of this gift merely
11:50weeks after his family
11:52personally landed a deal for a
11:54Trump-branded luxury golf resort
11:56where?
11:57In Qatar.
11:58For years the Republicans have
12:00baselessly claimed that
12:02President Biden engaged in
12:04criminal wrongdoing, but
12:05Republicans continue to turn a
12:07blind eye to President Trump
12:09pocketing millions and millions
12:11of dollars at the expense of
12:13American people while testing
12:15the limits of the Constitution.
12:17Mr. Chairman, I have two
12:19requests.
12:20First, let's convene a meeting
12:22with attorney general Bondi as
12:24soon as possible to discuss
12:26responding to our oversight
12:28request as I did with attorney
12:30general Eric Garland.
12:31Second, it's imperative that we
12:33hear from her as well and FBI
12:35director Patel under oath.
12:37I hope that we can convene
12:39these oversight hearings as
12:41quickly as possible.
12:42I yield.
12:43I want to ask you a question.
12:45You mean beyond our regular
12:47oversight hearings that we have
12:49with the attorney general and
12:51the FBI director or part of
12:53that?
12:54Do you remember when Biden took
12:56office and we raised, I think
12:58you led, and we all joined in,
13:00the bipartisan request that they
13:02answer our request, our letters
13:04and such.
13:05And you didn't like the way you
13:07were treated.
13:08I didn't like the way you were
13:10treated.
13:11I think we need to do it again.
13:13I think we need to do it again.
13:15I think we need to do it again.
13:17I think we need to do it again.
13:19I think we need to do it again.
13:21I want to respond to what you
13:23said about oversight letters.
13:25First of all, I want to make it
13:27very clear that I think every
13:29member of Congress, not just
13:31Senator Durbin as ranking member
13:33or my as chairman ought to get
13:35answers to your oversight
13:37letters.
13:38The other thing is I think I
13:40testified way back in 2017 when
13:42the first Trump administration
13:44said that they were only going
13:46to answer letters from chairman
13:48of committees, which means that
13:50about 80% of the members of the
13:52Congress would never get answers
13:54to their letters, and I did that
13:56not only by writing and getting
13:58that reversed by that
14:00administration.
14:01Now, maybe that reversal didn't
14:03do much good, but we still got it
14:05reversed, and I testified before
14:07the house oversight committee
14:09or maybe it was the judiciary
14:11committee on the very same
14:13subject that not only chairman
14:15but ranking members but all
14:17535 members of Congress are
14:19entitled to answers to their
14:21letters.
14:22Now, I'd like to respond to what
14:24you said.
14:25During the 117th Congress, when I
14:27was ranking member of this
14:29committee, it made me anxiety
14:31coming into meetings, I raised
14:33issues with the Biden justice
14:35department nonresponsive to my
14:37oversight letters.
14:38I repeatedly asked Biden justice
14:40and FBI for in-person meetings
14:42to get answers, but that never
14:44happened.
14:45The committee did convene one
14:47fairly brief phone call with
14:49committee members and attorney
14:51general garden.
14:52I'll have some statistics here.
14:54I don't think that changed the
14:56thing.
14:57The committee's lack of further
14:59effort obviously resulted in the
15:01Biden justice department still
15:03not getting answers.
15:05The committee's lack of
15:07communication with the Biden
15:09justice department stiff arming
15:11us on this committee.
15:13Take, for example, my 144
15:15outstanding justice oversight
15:17letters.
15:18Not once did I get a fully
15:20responsive production from the
15:22Biden justice department.
15:24So let's not pretend for a
15:26minute that last administration
15:28was a benchmark for responsiveness.
15:30Moreover, last Congress, the
15:32Biden justice department produced
15:34a report on the Durham
15:36investigation.
15:37As you all recall, that
15:39investigation further unpacked
15:41the already discredited cross
15:43fire hurricane investigation.
15:45The Biden justice department
15:47gave access to that classified
15:49only to the chairman, ranking
15:52member, and one staffer for
15:54each.
15:55Everyone else was boxed out.
15:57When I became chairman, I
15:59renegotiated those terms to
16:01include all members of this
16:03committee, Republican or
16:05Democrat, and a staffer for
16:07each, and I made sure that the
16:09justice department bring that
16:11document here to the Senate, and
16:13I demanded that members and
16:15staff be allowed to take notes.
16:17Notes weren't allowed that
16:19Congress, weren't allowed last
16:21Congress.
16:22The justice department and
16:24intelligence community
16:26relented.
16:27So things have already begun to
16:29change for better with this
16:31administration and this
16:32Congress, and whatever you want
16:34me to do, help you get answers
16:36to your question, I will be glad
16:38to do it.
16:39It's my responsibility.
16:41As you said, you contacted
16:43Garland for us.
16:45Chairman, I did, and I do it
16:47again, and I do it for any
16:49member of the committee to get
16:51an answer, and what we're facing
16:53right now with this gift from
16:55Cutter of a plane worth $400
16:57million or whatever it is, it's
16:59entirely appropriate for us to
17:02ask the attorney general for a
17:04copy of the memorandum where she
17:06said it was legally permissible
17:08for this administration to take
17:10possession of that airplane, and
17:12the fact that she was a foreign
17:14agent of this government, Cutter,
17:16that she was a paid lobbyist for
17:18that government as well, raises
17:20some ethical issues that need to
17:22be addressed directly.
17:23It's timely.
17:24We should do it.
17:25To ignore it is to walk away
17:27from our responsibility.
17:29I want to speak about that in my
17:31issue, not directly to what you
17:33just said, and I don't know why
17:35that document shouldn't be made
17:37available, but I think I need
17:39more reason before I can say
17:41that with the certainty that
17:43you'd like to have me say it.
17:45Mr. Chair?
17:46Down here.
17:47Tom Tillis.
17:48To your right.
17:49The other Tom.
17:50We look a lot alike.
17:52I'd like to speak for the
17:54members of the committee.
17:56The other Tom.
17:57We look a lot alike.
17:58I'd like to speak first, and
18:00then I'll call on anybody that
18:02wants to speak.
18:03I find it interesting that my
18:05Democrat colleague continued to
18:07bring up the emolument clause
18:09regarding Trump.
18:10They did so in his first term
18:12and have done so again with
18:14respect to the airplane, yet my
18:16Democrat colleagues never cared
18:18about my emolument clause
18:20oversight during the March 2016.
18:22At that time I wrote the Obama
18:24Justice Department.
18:25I wrote about Secretary Clinton's
18:272009 to 2013 financial
18:29disclosures when she was
18:31Secretary of State.
18:32Those disclosures showed her
18:34husband participated in at least
18:3662 events in foreign states.
18:38Some of those were speaking
18:40events in connection with foreign
18:42governments, and some speaking
18:44events were financially supported
18:46by foreign governments.
18:47For example, on at least two
18:49occasions, Bill Clinton received
18:51hundreds of thousands of dollars
18:53for appearances sponsored by
18:55Middle Eastern governments.
18:57Bill Clinton also received
18:59$200,000 for a speech connected
19:01to the Chinese government.
19:03In another example, Bill Clinton
19:05received almost $200,000 for a
19:07speech sponsored by a foreign
19:09city.
19:10In at least one example, Bill
19:12Clinton received $500,000 for a
19:14speech in Moscow.
19:16That speech was funded by the
19:18Russian investment bank whose
19:20senior members included former
19:22intelligence personnel.
19:23I wrote about that example in
19:252017.
19:26Hillary and Bill Clinton were
19:28married and she was Secretary of
19:30State when all that money was
19:32made.
19:33Thus it was a joint income.
19:36As my investigation work has
19:38shown, Hillary Clinton directly
19:40received money from foreign
19:42governments while Secretary of
19:44State.
19:45Moreover, Bill Clinton's speaking
19:47fees appear to have increased
19:49from $150,000 to sometimes
19:51$500,000 or even $750,000 when
19:53Hillary became Secretary of
19:55State.
19:56I don't recall hearing my
19:58colleagues on the other side of
20:00the aisle showing any interest
20:02in these apparent violations of
20:04emoluments.
20:05When Democrats filed suit
20:07against President Trump in his
20:09first term, they argued before
20:11the courts that foreign
20:13involvement emolument clause
20:15quote, regulates the private
20:17conduct of federal officials
20:19end of quote.
20:20They claimed he was violating
20:22the clause through his private
20:24businesses and so Congress
20:26couldn't use the quote power of
20:28the purse unquote to correct
20:30things.
20:31Well, here's here.
20:33That's not the case.
20:35Now they're arguing he's
20:37violating, that Trump's
20:39violating the emolument clause
20:41for what clearly isn't for his
20:43private use but is instead a
20:45gift to the American people.
20:48In any event, when an emolument
20:50clause violation occurs, a
20:52remedy is to disgorge the
20:54emolument to the federal
20:56government.
20:57Here's an example with Trump
20:59and unlike Clinton, the federal
21:01government would be a recipient
21:03of the airplane and the plane
21:05reportedly won't be used by
21:07Trump outside of government and
21:09rather it may be parked in a
21:11presidential library which is
21:13ultimately operated by the
21:15president.
21:16It's ultimately operated by
21:18national archives.
21:20Senator Coons, you won the
21:22floor.
21:23Thank you very much, chairman,
21:25and thanks to both you and the
21:27ranking member for the long
21:29bipartisan tradition of police
21:31week.
21:32I'm the co-chair of the law
21:34enforcement caucus with Senator
21:36Cornyn.
21:37We had a very productive and
21:39very well attended event here
21:41yesterday about de-escalation of
21:43these eight common sense bills
21:45and I think it's important that
21:47we continue to advance bipartisan
21:49bills that strengthen law
21:50enforcement.
21:51I will say as someone who was
21:53for much of a decade responsible
21:55for the second largest law
21:57enforcement entity in my state,
21:59I was really struck that DOJ
22:01recently terminated hundreds of
22:03grants totaling nearly a
22:05billion.
22:06Yes, you're right, many of them
22:08went to non-profits but through
22:10those non-profits they funded
22:12things like state and local
22:14anti-terrorism training, the
22:16police officer mental health
22:18under the valor initiative,
22:20school-based mental health
22:21workers to prevent potential
22:23school shootings, funding for
22:25prosecutors to investigate child
22:27abuse.
22:28In my view, this particular
22:30exercise was a DOJ staffer
22:32overreaching with no
22:33consultation with the relevant
22:35DOJ career staff and these cuts
22:38disrespect both law enforcement
22:40and frankly this committee.
22:42If we want to work together to
22:44reform and reshape OJP and the
22:47grant programs that make such a
22:49critical difference in the
22:50connection between federal,
22:51state and local law enforcement,
22:53we should do it in a way that
22:55follows the law and is
22:56disciplined and organized, not
22:58in the haphazard cuts that just
23:00recently happened.
23:01Thank you for the opportunity to
23:03be heard.
23:04Senator Whitehouse.
23:05Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman.
23:07We're on the subject of grants
23:09today and I appreciate your
23:11bringing up some of the
23:13bipartisan grants that I've been
23:15working on.
23:16We've also had a stop
23:19termination of a whole bevy of
23:22grants that come out of the
23:23Department of Justice and I just
23:25want to flag some of the areas
23:27in which grants were terminated
23:29in areas where this committee
23:30has done really good work.
23:32Grants were terminated for
23:34Project Safe Neighborhoods.
23:36Over and over again this
23:37committee has applauded Project
23:39Safe Neighborhoods.
23:40It's been 25 years, I want to
23:42say now, in the Department of
23:44Justice.
23:45Rhode Island when I was U.S.
23:46Attorney was one of the first
23:47states to start what is now
23:51called the Project Safe
23:52Neighborhoods program.
23:53If you're a violent gangster and
23:55you use a gun in a crime, one
23:57simple thing was you're going
23:59federal.
24:00And that was replicated around
24:01the country.
24:02I think Project Safe
24:03Neighborhoods is a very good
24:05program with longstanding
24:06bipartisan support.
24:07Don't know why it was cut.
24:09You and I, Mr. Chairman, have
24:11done the reauthorization of the
24:13Juvenile Justice Delinquency
24:14Prevention Act.
24:16Funding for assisting states in
24:18complying with that was also
24:20cut.
24:21I think we all agree that the
24:23JJDPA as we reauthorized it is
24:25a good thing.
24:26It had no problem passing as a
24:28reauthorization.
24:29CARA, Comprehensive Addiction
24:31Recovery Act was the biggest
24:32piece of opioid legislation
24:34we've ever passed.
24:35I worked on that.
24:36It's been repeatedly funded.
24:38And I just don't know why
24:40something as bipartisan as
24:42funding for CARA designated
24:45programs would be cut.
24:48The Second Chance Act was also
24:51cut, which helps with people
24:53coming out of prison and going
24:55into reentry at the state level.
24:57This worked so well in the
25:00community.
25:01I think we all agree that the
25:03Second Chance Act was a good
25:05thing.
25:06This worked so well in Rhode
25:08Island and in other states that
25:10Senator Cornyn and I did a
25:12federal version of it, which
25:14passed without much contest.
25:16Everybody supported it.
25:18For federal prisons as well.
25:20And it's been very, very
25:21successful.
25:22The most useful thing probably
25:24is helping people coming out of
25:26prison with addiction issues to
25:28get medication-assisted
25:29treatment started before their
25:31discharge so that when they're
25:32discharged, they don't have to
25:34go through that same program.
25:36That saved lives.
25:37It reduced reoffending.
25:39So over and over again, whether
25:41it's Project Safe Neighborhoods,
25:43JJDPA, CARA, or Second Chance,
25:46here are programs that this
25:48committee on a bipartisan basis
25:51has strongly and continually
25:53supported, and yet they're cut.
25:55So I'd like to try to get more
25:57of an explanation of that from
25:59the department.
26:00And then going forward, grants
26:01that are going to be submitted
26:03today are going to be subjected
26:05to a screen that obliges the
26:07department to look at whether
26:09there are sanctuary cities in
26:11the jurisdiction.
26:12I don't know what that actually
26:14means.
26:15It's not a legal term of art.
26:17We have a federal court and a
26:19circuit court of appeals, the
26:21first circuit, that have
26:22determined that you need a
26:24warrant for local law
26:26enforcement to make immigration
26:28arrests.
26:29This is law enforcement.
26:32They're not going to be
26:33punished for not obeying court
26:35orders, and they shouldn't be
26:37tasked or punished with not
26:39getting grants because they are
26:41obeying court orders.
26:42This is law enforcement, for
26:44Pete's sake.
26:45School COVID vax requirements.
26:47I don't know what that has to do
26:49with anything.
26:50In Rhode Island, the
26:51municipality doesn't directly
26:52control the school.
26:53There's a separate school
26:54committee that does.
26:55So it makes it very hard to hold
26:57a police chief accountable for
26:59what a separate school committee
27:01does.
27:02I don't know what that means.
27:04Does that mean that recruiting
27:06female officers is a statement
27:08of gender ideology that would be
27:10punished?
27:11It doesn't make any sense, but
27:13who knows?
27:14We need clarity on that.
27:16No mentions of DEI or EJ.
27:18I had the unhappy circumstance
27:20of being the attorney general
27:22when a white police officer in
27:24uniform shot and killed a black
27:26woman.
27:27I don't know what that means.
27:29Does that mean that recruiting
27:31a black police officer out of
27:32uniform, not knowing that he was
27:34a fellow officer?
27:35It was a blue-on-blue shooting.
27:37It inflamed for good reasons the
27:39black community that this had
27:41happened.
27:42The man who was killed, his
27:44father, was a very senior officer
27:46in the police department, and the
27:48USDOJ community relations service
27:50came in to help deal with the
27:52community issues that had arisen
27:54and lower the temperature, and
27:56they were very effective.
27:58I thought that we've supported
28:00the DOJ community relations
28:02service always.
28:03Is bringing in CRS a DEI or, you
28:08know, environmental justice
28:10concern?
28:11We need to know.
28:12If you've had a vandalized
28:14monument, it looks like that
28:16disqualifies you.
28:17I think there are a great number
28:19of jurisdictions that have had
28:21vandalized monuments, and I
28:23don't know that that's a
28:25legitimate test for whether
28:27somebody should get, for
28:29instance, a CARA grant to deal
28:31with opioid offenses.
28:33And finally, full compliance with
28:35all executive orders seems to be
28:37required, even where those
28:39executive orders have been thrown
28:41out of court as unconstitutional.
28:43Again, these are law enforcement
28:45agencies.
28:46You can't ask them to comply with
28:49an order that their courts have
28:51already determined to be
28:53unconstitutional, and they
28:54shouldn't be punished in terms of
28:56being unable to get project safe
28:58neighborhoods, JDPA, CARA, or
29:00second chance grants because of
29:02that.
29:03My point here is that this is a
29:05huge mess and muddle right now,
29:07and it would be very helpful,
29:09particularly as the chair of the
29:11court subcommittee, to figure
29:12out a way to get some clarity
29:14about what DOJ really means and
29:16what people applying for the
29:17grants that we're going to
29:18approve today will need to
29:20disclose and how they need to
29:22prepare for that to make sure
29:24that these grant programs are
29:26properly and with common sense.
29:27Before I call on Klobuchar, I
29:31will just kind of repeat, and I
29:34haven't followed up on what the
29:36Justice Department has told me,
29:39so maybe we'll find out it's not
29:41as directed towards law
29:43enforcement as I said in my
29:45opening statement, but you
29:47remember I said 93% of the
29:49grants that have been eliminated
29:52by DOJ were awarded to
29:55non-governmental entities.
29:57And then I quoted what the
29:59department said in response to
30:01my letter, that they'll
30:03reallocate the savings into the
30:05future awards that, quote,
30:07directly support law enforcement
30:09operators.
30:10I'm not going to repeat my
30:12statement, but I do have a
30:14letter that I entered in the
30:16record that I'd direct people
30:18to.
30:19Senator Klobuchar.
30:20Yeah, thank you, Chairman.
30:22I hope we can get a quorum soon.
30:24I was excited to get these bills
30:27done for police week.
30:29This week I joined law
30:31enforcement leaders and families
30:33of fallen officers at the
30:35National Law Enforcement
30:37Officers Memorial Candlelight
30:39Vigil on Tuesday night.
30:40It was remarkable as it always
30:42is, but it was pouring rain for
30:45three hours, and yet all of
30:47these families sat out there
30:49with their umbrellas out of
30:51respect for those that they had
30:53lost.
30:54And I think it was remarkable
30:56to see all of the families that
30:58were there, including a number
31:00of families and fellow officers
31:02from Burnsville, Minnesota,
31:04where we lost two officers and a
31:07paramedic, and officers Paul
31:10Elmstead, Matthew Ruge, and
31:13paramedic Adam Finseth,
31:15responding to a domestic
31:17violence call.
31:18They were basically ambushed,
31:20and yet they saved seven kids.
31:22They got seven kids out of there
31:24and they were able to save seven
31:26children.
31:27And I think it was a very
31:29remarkable day.
31:30And I also want to thank the
31:32officer who was the perpetrator
31:34while he was giving life-saving
31:36CPR to one of the officers who
31:38died.
31:39And as one of the officers,
31:42Sergeant Medlacott said, we were
31:45there for seven children.
31:47Nothing could be more honorable.
31:49And I don't think you can teach
31:51that kind of heroism, and I hope
31:53your committee members are
31:56cosponsors of this bill.
31:58Every day our first responders
32:00put their lives on the line to
32:02protect all of us.
32:04As Senator Padilla knows, the
32:06whole country watches more than
32:0916,000 firefighters and other
32:11first responders battle the
32:13wildfires across Los Angeles.
32:15Just this week in northern
32:17Minnesota we have extensive
32:19fires and we know there's a high
32:21incidence of cancer among
32:22first responders who are at fire scenes and that's why Senator Kramer and I
32:27introduced our bipartisan legislation to make sure that firefighters and first
32:32responders who die or become disabled as a result of service-related cancers get
32:37the support that they've earned. This bill was inspired by a St. Paul
32:42firefighter Mike Piter who was exposed to toxic substances and died at a very
32:47young age and I want to thank all of the senators who have joined as co-sponsors
32:53on the committee Blackburn, Blumenthal, Coons, Cornyn, Cruz, Durbin, Graham, Hirono,
32:59Kennedy, Moody, Padilla, Schiff, Welsh and Whitehouse. Second, the bill that you and
33:05I have together, the Grassley-Klobuchar bill on protecting first responders from
33:11secondary exposure. I urge our colleagues to support that bill and then finally
33:17the Retired Law Enforcement Officers Continuing Service Act and this bill
33:24would establish a grant program to make sure law enforcement agencies can
33:28continue to utilize the skills that talented law enforcement retirees have
33:33built up over a career of public service and I thank Senator Grassley for your
33:39support of that bill and I urge our colleagues to join us. The other, there
33:44was one other officer I quickly wanted to mention. Jamal Mitchell shot and
33:49killed in the line of duty last June in Minnesota. Another ambush and I've gotten
33:54to know his widow and again when you're standing there in the rain you remember
34:00why we're here and the sacrifice that these families make every single day so
34:05I thank our colleagues for supporting these bills. I assume that you made this
34:09statement when I was going to call on you and each one of these bills. Yeah I
34:13decided to do it while you were waiting for a quorum because I believe in time
34:17efficiency. Yes. Senator Padilla and then Senator Moody. Thank you Mr. Chair. You know
34:24colleagues this week we come together to honor the courage, the commitment and the
34:29sacrifice of law enforcement officers across the country. I'm proud to support
34:33the bipartisan bills that are before us today. They provide long overdue benefits
34:39to families of officers who've made the ultimate sacrifice. They provide mental
34:45health support to officers under strain and they strengthen community policing
34:50efforts that keep our neighborhood safe. But as we are working together on a
34:56bipartisan basis to advance these bills I also want us to confront a serious and
35:01growing threat to how these programs are funded and administered. The Department
35:08of Justice has issued a sweeping and likely unlawful directive that
35:12threatens to cut off vital public safety grants to jurisdictions not because
35:18they've misused funds, not because they fail to serve their communities, but
35:24because they don't align with the administration's political views on
35:28immigration enforcement. I like to call it what it is. It's an attempt to turn
35:34what is supposed to be non-partisan public safety funding into a political
35:41weapon. Federal grants like Burn Jag and COPS and the Public Safety Officers
35:48Benefits Program were created by Congress for clear lawful purposes.
35:54Nothing in those statutes give the Department of Justice the authority to
35:59cut off funds to law enforcement officers, paramedics or grieving families
36:04simply because of where they work. It's not just wrong, it's dangerous. It's the
36:11kind of federal overreach that threatens to defund the very police officers that
36:16we are all here to support. Our officers didn't sign up to be pawns in a
36:22political fight, they signed up to serve, to protect and to serve. And we have a
36:28duty to stand with them regardless of their zip code and regardless of who's
36:33in the White House. So as we move these bills forward, I would just urge the
36:38committee to send a clear message that public safety funding isn't a partisan
36:43bargaining chip. It's a lifeline and we owe it to our officers and the
36:49communities that they serve to keep this funding above politics and to stay
36:53focused on what matters most and that's the public safety of all communities.
36:58Thank You Mr. Chairman. I appreciate you giving us a chance to remark on Police
37:08Week and the bills that we're putting forward today in a bipartisan way.
37:13As Florida's former Attorney General, certainly as a former federal prosecutor,
37:18as the wife of a law enforcement officer, I have had the opportunity to know
37:24personally and work closely with so many law enforcement officers across the
37:29state of Florida and indeed across the United States of America. And as those of
37:34us who have worked with them know, they are the ones that stand on that very
37:38thin line between good and evil and chaos and order, between light and dark
37:44and they do so in a way that shows that they are selfless and purpose and they
37:51stand there bravely and confidently without hesitation to protect us and
37:55many instances when other folks would run in the opposite direction and I for
38:02one have sat in admiration of those kinds of people and those that wear the
38:07badge and those that chose professionally to take that oath many
38:11many times and not only in my prior experience and roles but now as a United
38:18States Senator I continue to be inspired by them every day and I think
38:23it is important that we recognize Police Week more than just an annual tradition
38:29where certain ceremonies are held or memorials are done or where we pass
38:33resolutions. I think we need to remember that it is a promise to them every year
38:38that we will not forget those that paid that ultimate sacrifice so that we could
38:43live in a free nation under a rule of law because there were men and women of
38:48integrity that signed up for those dangerous jobs and I think Police Week
38:53is a way that we that have been entrusted with the great responsibility
38:58in these roles can say we will never forget them and we will never forget the
39:03families that lost them in the line of duty because we know every day that they
39:08put on those uniforms it doesn't just include that badge it includes a
39:11bulletproof vest and that is an absolute must in this day and age and
39:16they know what they are taking on symbolically when they put that on every
39:20day they know what they are taking on on our behalf and so I just wanted to say
39:26thank you to those men and women who sign up for these roles continue to sign
39:31up for them are led by a mission in life to be part of something that is
39:38greater than themselves I admire that as a person and I admire that as a
39:42leader in this country I think the families who know that they bring home
39:47with them every day a unique set of stressors and there's often an
39:52unpredictable schedule that goes along with that so I say thank you to all of
39:56the families of law enforcement and finally on this particular day in Police
40:02Week when we have Democrats and Republicans coming together to put forth
40:06legislation to support law enforcement both federal and state no matter what
40:12color they wear blue green and tan I think it is remarkable that on this day
40:16we are putting forward not just one not two not three but eight pieces of
40:20legislation out of this committee and we are doing that unified saying we support
40:26you we support your families and indeed we support this free nation that is held
40:31together in a stable prosperous way by the men and women that enforce the laws
40:36of we the people so thank you Mr. Chairman for giving me the opportunity
40:39to speak on behalf of the great men and women that wear the badge and on behalf
40:43of this committee that is putting forward important pieces of legislation
40:47today. The first item on our agenda is a nomination of Jason Quinez US Attorney
40:56for the Southern District of Florida does any we can't vote on until we get
41:01Mr. Chairman I appreciate you're calling this nominee and I want to make
41:11a statement since we are continuing to honor the blue slip you've said that
41:17yeah I've said that Senator Grant before you said as much we did it for four
41:23years a blue slip gives the attorneys from the state or the appointment is
41:28being made the option of approving or disapproving we're an integral part of
41:33that decision process I think that is important but we have to work hard to
41:38make sure it continues I'm sorry to say that the White House is reaching out to
41:44individual senators in a capacity that is not consistent with the blue slip but
41:48if we were going to hold fast to that as a principle I urge the White House to
41:52work on a bipartisan basis to help I also want to say that I understand
41:57Jean Jeanine Perot was sworn in yesterday to serve as interim US
42:02attorney for the District of Columbia for the record when President Trump's
42:07first term over 80 US attorneys were appointed no roll call votes in this
42:12committee no roll call votes on the floor they all went by voice vote that
42:17world has changed because of the insistence of one Republican senator in
42:23the last four years we are now required to take roll calls on each US attorney
42:28at least just become the president of the committee you at each US attorney
42:33gets a roll call vote in the committee and then because of former attorney
42:38senator and now vice president Vance a requirement they also get a roll call
42:44vote on the floor it means more and more votes for us on the floor for things
42:49that we already know the outcome and I am troubled by that that it's reached
42:53this point on this particular one with Jeanine
42:58I'm concerned that this is not consistent with what we were trying to do we wanted
43:03to give a president an option of an interim US attorney while we at the
43:09Senate level deliberate advise and consent on a permanent appointment that
43:15has been changed dramatically instead of a hundred and twenty days we now have a
43:20daisy-chained situation where Ed Martin was almost 120 days he stepped aside
43:27Jeanine Perot comes in for 120 days I think that is a violation of what we
43:34were trying to achieve to give interim authority instead what we have now is
43:38possibility of repeated appointments over and over again for the same
43:43position these interim positions mean that we and the Senate are giving up our
43:49constitutional authority and responsibility that's a mistake you
43:55along this line if you figure that we have 93 US attorneys and a minimum of
44:05two hours of debate that has to be eaten up and a half a half hour if we do it
44:12within a half hour to cast a vote it'll take two hundred and thirty two hours of
44:16floor time to get all 93 US attorneys approved so I guess we're going I don't
44:24know how it's gonna be handled but well this I raised the question on the floor
44:28repeatedly with Senator Vance not to do this because the nominees were not
44:35controversial but he insisted on it and now he's established a precedent that is
44:39very difficult for me to ignore I didn't talk to Senator Vance about it but I did
44:44talk to another senator at that time and pleaded with them not to hold up
44:50and I I'm not going to say what sort of a response I got but it wasn't very
44:57positive and I and I and then I told the Republican Caucus in January of this
45:04year that what has been announced by Schumer last week was bound to happen
45:11and I'm I just want people to be alerted to it I don't know how you handle US
45:16attorneys but if you and I could reach any sort of compromise on it I'd be glad
45:22to do it but I doubt I think we're too low level to get that done we still
45:28don't have a quorum we need to find out are we going to get a quorum or aren't
45:32we there's no sense of sitting around we're going to have a we're going to
45:37have a quorum at 1115 mr. chairman yeah mr. chairman who is it oh go ahead mr.
45:45chairman I'm wondering why we're waiting for a quorum is it appropriate to speak
45:50on the the bills yes thank you may I be recognized for that purpose please do
45:56that I want to thank this has to do with the protect our children
46:00reauthorization act of 2025 which is on our agenda for today I want to thank
46:06senator Blumenthal for his partnership on the bill as well as all of our
46:11colleagues for their support we have to continue to do what we can to protect
46:17the most vulnerable in our society to that end it's critical to support law
46:23enforcement in their efforts to catch child predators and to fight online
46:28sexual exploitation the protect our children reauthorization act does this
46:33by reauthorizing the internet crimes against children task forces the ICAC
46:39which are the state and local law enforcement entities that investigate
46:43and prosecute online sexual abuse and exploitation the protect act authorizes
46:50training and technical assistance victim services community education and
46:55importantly forensic and investigative funding online crimes against children
47:02have unfortunately become an increasing threat due to technological advances it
47:07makes me shudder when I think that our society will be judged about how we
47:12treat our most vulnerable and particularly our children the protect
47:18act is a critical step toward better safeguarding our children by providing
47:22the backbone of funding for law enforcement to track down and arrest
47:26offenders and mr. chairman if I may proceed to also speak on the strong
47:34Communities Act which is set for our agenda today while we're waiting for a
47:40quorum I'm proud to co-lead the strong Communities Act with senator Peters and
47:45I thank my colleagues on the committee for supporting this bill as we know
47:50we've all heard from law enforcement groups this week police week and that
47:55one of the biggest challenges right now for police and law enforcement agencies
47:59is recruiting and retaining officers strong Communities Act will address this
48:04problem by allowing funds under the community oriented policing services
48:10grant program the COPS program to be used by local law enforcement agencies
48:16to send both existing officers and new recruits to training programs in return
48:22for attending these training programs the officers agree to serve for a set
48:27number of years in the funding agency in order to build trust within local
48:32communities the bill also requires that the officers live within or near the
48:37jurisdiction of the funding agency this bill passed the Senate last Congress and
48:43I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure that this year we
48:47can advance this bill through both chambers and on to the president's desk
48:51to become law thank you mr. chairman we're supposed to yes go ahead well
48:59we're waiting for quorum I would like to ask unanimous consent to be added as a
49:04co-sponsor on s 539 and s 1563 I think you'll be a thank you
49:12senator why I'd be recognized to speak to the two bills that will be considered
49:17when the quorum arrives I want to first thank senator Holly for his leadership
49:24on the support and treatment for officers in crisis so-called stoic act
49:30that we originally passed this in 2019 it provides resources for law
49:38enforcement officers to get support when the stress of the job gets to them very
49:44often on a peer-to-peer basis it has been very well received in the law
49:49enforcement community this is a clean reauthorization with no changes to the
49:57bill so it should be non-controversial and extremely bipartisan Holly White
50:05House Blumenthal Hirono Coons Grassley Welch Booker Klobuchar and Durbin the
50:11second one of my bills that will be voted on today is a new one improving
50:16police critical aid for responding to emergencies which senator Cornyn and I
50:22have done co-sponsored by senator Tillis Coons and Durbin this is to address the
50:30situation in which police officers are the first to arrive at a scene where
50:38somebody has suffered traumatic injuries before the EMTs have a chance
50:43to get there so that they have the equipment necessary and the training
50:49necessary to provide immediate trauma services while they're waiting for the
50:55EMTs to show up this makes a lot of sense it follows very much the logic of
51:04the bulletproof vests bill that we passed allowing for burn jag grant funds
51:11to go through and I would urge all of my colleagues to vote in favor of it and
51:16thank senator Cornyn for his good work making sure that this day has come to
51:22pass I'm sorry to say this it's not a very good way to honor police week but I
51:37think they might as well end this meeting because we're not going to have
51:42a quorum thank you