[Senate Hearing 118-29, Part 7]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                         
                                                 S. Hrg. 118-29, Part 7

                     CONFIRMATION HEARING ON FEDERAL 
                              APPOINTMENTS

=======================================================================






                                HEARING

                               before the

                       COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               ----------                              

                             JULY 12, 2023

                               ----------                              

                           Serial No. J-118-2

                               ----------                              

                                 PART 7

                               ----------                              

         Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary







              [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]












              CONFIRMATION HEARING ON FEDERAL APPOINTMENTS













                                                 S. Hrg. 118-29, Part 7

                     CONFIRMATION HEARING ON FEDERAL  
                              APPOINTMENTS 

=======================================================================






                                HEARING

                               before the

                       COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION
                               __________

                             JULY 12, 2023
                               __________

                           Serial No. J-118-2
                               __________

                                 PART 7
                               __________

         Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary 
         





               [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
   





                        www.judiciary.senate.gov
                            www.govinfo.gov 
                            
                                ------
                            
                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 

55-362 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2024 
















                       COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                   RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois, Chair
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California         LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina, 
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island       Ranking Member
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota             CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware       JOHN CORNYN, Texas
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut      MICHAEL S. LEE, Utah
MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii              TED CRUZ, Texas
CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey           JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
ALEX PADILLA, California             TOM COTTON, Arkansas
JON OSSOFF, Georgia                  JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
PETER WELCH, Vermont                 THOM TILLIS, North Carolina
                                     MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
                                     
             Joseph Zogby, Chief Counsel and Staff Director
      Katherine Nikas, Republican Chief Counsel and Staff Director 














      
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

                       JULY 12, 2023, 10:04 A.M.

                    STATEMENTS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS

                                                                   Page

Durbin, Hon. Richard J., a U.S. Senator from the State of 
  Illinois.......................................................     1
Graham, Hon. Lindsey O., a U.S. Senator from the State of South 
  Carolina.......................................................     2
Kennedy, Hon. John, a U.S. Senator from the State of Louisiana, 
  introducing Jerry Edwards, Jr., to be United States District 
  Judge for the Western District of Louisiana, and Brandon S. 
  Long, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern 
  District of Louisiana..........................................     9

                              INTRODUCERS

Brown, Hon. Sherrod, a U.S. Senator from the State of Ohio, 
  introducing Philip S. Hadji, to be a Judge of the United States 
  Court of Federal Claims........................................     4
Cardin, Hon. Benjamin L., a U.S. Senator from the State of 
  Maryland, introducing Hon. Matthew James Maddox, to be United 
  States District Judge for the District of Maryland.............     5
Van Hollen, Hon. Chris, a U.S. Senator from the State of 
  Maryland, introducing Hon. Matthew James Maddox, to be United 
  States District Judge for the District of Maryland.............     6
Cassidy, Hon. Bill, a U.S. Senator from the State of Louisiana, 
  introducing Jerry Edwards, Jr., to be United States District 
  Judge for the Western District of Louisiana; Brandon S. Long, 
  to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District of 
  Louisiana; and Philip S. Hadji, to be a Judge of the United 
  States Court of Federal Claims.................................     7
Vance, Hon. J.D., a U.S. Senator from the State of Ohio, 
  introducing Philip S. Hadji, to be a Judge of the United States 
  Court of Federal Claims........................................    10

                       STATEMENTS OF THE NOMINEES

Witness List.....................................................    31
Edwards, Jerry, Jr., Nominee to serve as United States District 
  Judge for the Western District of Louisiana....................    11
    questionnaire and biographical information...................    32
Hadji, Philip S., Nominee to serve as a Judge of the United 
  States Court of Federal Claims.................................    13
    questionnaire and biographical information...................    58
Long, Brandon S., Nominee to serve as United States District 
  Judge for the Eastern District of Louisiana....................    12
    questionnaire and biographical information...................    83
Maddox, Hon. Matthew James, Nominee to serve as United States 
  District Judge for the District of Maryland....................    12
    questionnaire and biographical information...................   109

                               QUESTIONS

Questions submitted to Jerry Edwards, Jr., by:
    Ranking Member Graham........................................   156
    Senator Klobuchar............................................   160
    Senator Lee..................................................   161
    Senator Cruz.................................................   164
    Senator Kennedy..............................................   171
    Senator Tillis...............................................   172

Questions submitted to Philip S. Hadji by:
    Ranking Member Graham........................................   180
    Senator Klobuchar............................................   184
    Senator Lee..................................................   185
    Senator Tillis...............................................   188

Questions submitted to Brandon S. Long by:
    Ranking Member Graham........................................   196
    Senator Klobuchar............................................   200
    Senator Grassley.............................................   201
    Senator Lee..................................................   202
    Senator Cruz.................................................   205
    Senator Kennedy..............................................   213
    Senator Tillis...............................................   215
    Senator Blackburn............................................   223

Questions submitted to Hon. Matthew James Maddox by:
    Ranking Member Graham........................................   225
    Senator Klobuchar............................................   229
    Senator Lee..................................................   230
    Senator Cruz.................................................   233
    Senator Kennedy..............................................   240
    Senator Tillis...............................................   244

                                ANSWERS

Responses of Jerry Edwards, Jr., to questions submitted by:
    Ranking Member Graham........................................   252
    Senator Klobuchar............................................   261
    Senator Lee..................................................   262
    Senator Cruz.................................................   270
    Senator Kennedy..............................................   283
    Senator Tillis...............................................   287

Responses of Philip S. Hadji to questions submitted by:
    Ranking Member Graham........................................   293
    Senator Klobuchar............................................   302
    Senator Lee..................................................   304
    Senator Tillis...............................................   311

Responses of Brandon S. Long to questions submitted by:
    Ranking Member Graham........................................   318
    Senator Klobuchar............................................   328
    Senator Grassley.............................................   330
    Senator Lee..................................................   333
    Senator Cruz.................................................   342
    Senator Kennedy..............................................   360
    Senator Tillis...............................................   367
    Senator Blackburn............................................   375

Responses of Hon. Matthew James Maddox to questions submitted by:
    Ranking Member Graham........................................   379
    Senator Klobuchar............................................   390
    Senator Lee..................................................   392
    Senator Cruz.................................................   402
    Senator Kennedy..............................................   420
    Senator Tillis...............................................   435

           LETTERS RECEIVED WITH REGARD TO JERRY EDWARDS, JR.

Crichton, Hon. Scott J., June 29, 2023...........................   444
Johnson, Hon. Bernette J., retired, June 27, 2023................   446

             LETTER RECEIVED WITH REGARD TO PHILIP S. HADJI

Current and former Department of the Navy Office of the General 
  Counsel (Navy OGC) attorneys, July 11, 2023....................   447

            LETTERS RECEIVED WITH REGARD TO BRANDON S. LONG

Boys Hope Girls Hope of Greater New Orleans, New Orleans, 
  Louisiana, July 2, 2023........................................   449
Duval, Hon. Stanwood Richardson, Jr., retired, July 1, 2023......   450
Former Assistant U.S. Attorneys who worked with Mr. Long in 
  Washington, DC, and New Orleans, July 7, 2023..................   451
Grindler, Gary G., July 3, 2023..................................   454

                MISCELLANEOUS SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

American Bar Association's Standing Committee on the Federal 
  Judiciary, evaluation of the professional qualifications of 
  Jerry Edwards, Jr..............................................   456
American Bar Association's Standing Committee on the Federal 
  Judiciary, evaluation of the professional qualifications of 
  Brandon S. Long................................................   457
American Bar Association's Standing Committee on the Federal 
  Judiciary, evaluation of the professional qualifications of 
  Hon. Matthew James Maddox......................................   458

 
                     CONFIRMATION HEARING ON FEDERAL  
                              APPOINTMENTS

                               ----------                              

                        WEDNESDAY, JULY 12, 2023

                              United States Senate,
                                Committee on the Judiciary,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:04 a.m., in 
Room 226, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Richard J. 
Durbin, Chair of the Committee, presiding.
    Present: Senators Durbin [presiding], Blumenthal, Hirono, 
Booker, Padilla, Ossoff, Graham, Lee, Hawley, Kennedy, Tillis, 
and Blackburn.
    Also present: Senators Brown, Cardin, Van Hollen, Cassidy, 
and Vance.

          OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD J. DURBIN,
           A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

    Chair Durbin. This meeting of the Senate Judiciary 
Committee will come to order.
    Today, we will consider four nominees: Jerry Edwards, Jr., 
nominated to the U.S. District Court for the Western District 
of Louisiana; Brandon Long, nominated to the U.S. District 
Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana; Judge Matthew 
Maddox, nominated to the U.S. District Court for the District 
of Maryland; and Philip Hadji, nominated to the U.S. Court of 
Federal Claims.
    Congratulations to all the nominees, and their families.
    There are a few Senators joining us today for 
introductions, but I would like to make a note about today's 
panel. I understand the Congressional Black Caucus has raised 
concerns about White House consultations with Congressman Troy 
Carter regarding the two Louisiana nominees on today's panel. I 
do not know the details of these consultations, but I hope that 
any concerns can be resolved as we move forward.
    Congressman Carter is the only Black Member of the 
congressional delegation in a State whose population is more 
than 30 percent African American, and where people of color 
have been historically underrepresented. I understand why he 
feels that the White House should consider his views and the 
views of his constituents regarding lifetime appointments to 
the Federal courts.
    I also know that the Louisiana Senators have, over the last 
several months, answered my invitation, and challenge, to work 
in good faith with the White House on judicial and executive 
nominees. I value their partnership and appreciate the 
bipartisan cooperation that has produced the two nominees on 
today's panel.
    Notably, one of the nominees on today's panel will be the 
first person of color to serve on the Federal bench in the 
Western District of Louisiana. It is important to recognize 
this important historic milestone, as well as the 
accomplishments and professional experience of all of today's 
nominees. I hope these exemplary qualifications will be the 
focus of today's hearing.
    I now want to turn to Ranking Member Graham for opening 
remarks.

          OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. LINDSEY O. GRAHAM,
        A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

    Senator Graham. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I want to applaud my colleagues from Louisiana, finding a 
way to move forward. Elections do have consequences, and I 
think people on our side of the aisle have been trying to work 
with the White House, particularly at the district court level, 
to get people that we can find consensus on, and that is sort 
of the way the system works. And, we will continue along those 
roads, down those roads.
    A couple of matters, and I will not take long. I wrote a 
letter to Mr. Weiss about--the U.S. Attorney handling the Biden 
investigation in Delaware, about some of the accusations made 
about whistleblowers, about Mr. Weiss being denied the ability 
to become a Special Counsel. In my letter, I think he said no. 
I need a better answer, a more clear one that he did not seek 
Special Counsel status, was not denied.
    In the letter, he seems to indicate that he was not 
rebuffed, by DC or California U.S. Attorneys, to bring more 
serious charges. But, again, I think we need more clarity 
there.
    But, this is one area that was a complete blow-off. The 
1023 allegations that we talked about pretty extensively that 
Senator Grassley, to his credit, discovered, came from 
whistleblowers telling Senator Grassley that there was an 
investigative form called the 1023 that had allegations coming 
from a paid informant the FBI considered to be reliable, along 
the lines that a Burisma senior official--a gas company in 
Ukraine--apparently said that he had tape recordings of 
conversations between him, Hunter Biden, and, at the time, 
former Vice President Biden, which would run completely 
contrary to what President Biden has said.
    I don't know if those allegations are true, but, here's 
what I do know: That the U.S. Attorney involved in the 
clearinghouse endeavors, the Attorney General Barr said, he had 
a system that when allegations were made, he sent them to a 
U.S. Attorney, I think, in Pennsylvania, Mr. Brady, to look and 
see if they were worthy of consideration by Mr. Weiss.
    One thing I do know is that those allegations contained in 
the 1023 went through that system, and the information was 
forwarded to Mr. Weiss. A briefing was provided by FBI agents, 
and others, regarding the extent of the allegations contained 
in the 1023, and that is where the trail ends.
    In the letter back to me, Mr. Weiss said he could not 
comment on the handling of the 1023 allegations because of an 
ongoing criminal investigation. That means one of three things: 
that they are still looking at those allegations, and may bring 
about additional charges beyond what we are reading about in 
the paper; they have looked at the allegations and disposed of 
them; or, they never looked at all.
    What I want to know is the answer to the question, ``What 
did you do with the allegations? '' I think the ongoing 
criminal investigation is about to be ended with a plea deal, 
it appears. And, I can promise you, Mr. Chairman, the trust 
level on this side is incredibly low, and we have accusations 
of thumbs on the scale during the course of this investigation 
of Mr. Biden. And, one of the allegations on the 1023, if 
accurate, shows interaction contrary to every public statement 
being made.
    And again, it may be just rumor and innuendo, but, we need 
to find out what happened on Mr. Weiss' watch regarding the 
allegations contained in the 1023, discovered by Senator 
Grassley that came from a whistleblower. And, I need a more 
direct answer, from him, on: ``Were you ever denied Special 
Counsel status? '' ``Was there anybody there, in DOJ, 
dissuading you from seeking more serious charges in other 
venues? ''
    So, I just want to let you know, Mr. Chairman, the letter 
did not answer my questions. It created more questions. Thank 
you.
    Chair Durbin. Thank you, Senator Graham.
    Of course, the President made the decision that the 
attorney who would investigate his own son would be the Trump 
appointee in the State of Delaware and that the administration 
would take a hands-off attitude toward that investigation. 
Nothing has been disclosed, to my knowledge, that contradicts 
that goal, nor the result that followed.
    It is up to individual Senators to ask questions if they 
wish. We are going to focus on that issue if it comes before 
us, but, we have other business today, which is of great 
importance.
    Senator Graham. And, I don't want to delay the Committee 
any longer, but, your statement about there is nothing to 
suggest that this was done, anything above--being above board, 
there is plenty of suggestions. I think there are six 
whistleblowers, I can't remember--two, I know of--that suggest 
that this thing was not handled in the normal course of 
business. In that regard, we will keep asking questions. Thank 
you.
    Chair Durbin. It is true that it was not handled in an 
ordinary course because the President of the United States 
allowed the U.S. Attorney in Delaware, a Trump appointee, to 
continue the investigation of his son, and much of the evidence 
that we are discussing has, at one point, been in the hands of 
then-Attorney General Bill Barr working for President Trump, or 
even the President's personal counsel, Rudolph Giuliani. So, 
there is a lot more to the story than----
    Senator Graham. Well, let's just--let's--okay, so, what 
happened to the 1023? Do you know? Was it looked at? Was it 
investigated? What did they find? Who did they talk to?
    Chair Durbin. I----
    Senator Graham. If you know about that, please share it 
with me. Thank you.
    Chair Durbin [continuing]. I would give you any information 
that I have on the subject, and I will continue to.
    We have colleagues who are coming today to speak to the 
nominees. Senator Brown of Ohio, I am taking you out of order 
because I understand you have a scheduling conflict, and I----
    Senator Brown. Thank you,
    Chair Durbin [continuing]. Will then go back to the regular 
order.
    Senator Brown. Thank you, Mr. Chair, as I know all four of 
us have scheduling conflicts. That is the way it works, but, 
thank you.

    STATEMENT  OF  HON. SHERROD  BROWN,  A   U.S.  SENATOR 
      FROM THE STATE OF OHIO, INTRODUCING PHILIP S. HADJI, 
      TO BE A  JUDGE  OF THE UNITED STATES COURT  OF  FED-
      ERAL CLAIMS

    Senator Brown. Chair Durbin, Ranking Member Graham, 
colleagues on the Committee here, it is my honor to introduce 
Phil Hadji, a highly qualified nominee, to serve on the Court 
of Federal Claims. He is a proud son of Ohio. He was born and 
raised in Cleveland.
    After serving as a Senate staffer, he returned home and 
earned his law degree at Case Western Reserve University Law 
School where two things happened: He received recognition for 
his scholarship and leadership, and he met his future wife, who 
is a really important staff person for my friend Senator 
Cassidy.
    His life of service was only getting started. He spent over 
a decade with the U.S. Navy, handling complex legal matters 
with distinction, from contract disputes, to fraud 
investigations, to awarding major contracts. The General 
Counsel of the Navy called Mr. Hadji an exemplary advocate, and 
described Mr. Hadji's work as encompassing, quote, ``the most 
complex, high-profile, and sensitive acquisition integrity 
matters facing the Navy.''
    His service to the Navy has drawn praise and recognition. 
He has been awarded both the Navy's Superior Civilian Service 
Award and the Navy's Meritorious Civilian Service Award. His 
exemplary record in service to the country is why Senator 
Portman, Senator Vance's predecessor, and I, were proud to come 
together to recommend his nomination in the previous Congress 
to the Court of Federal Claims.
    He brings not only his impressive credentials, but also, an 
unwavering dedication to fairness, and respect for others. It 
is why over 40 of his colleagues wrote a letter in support of 
his nomination. It is also why his former law school dean and 
U.S. district court judge spoke not only of Mr. Hadji's 
intellect, but also, of his ethics, and his moral character, 
and his sound temperament. It will serve him well in this role.
    Mr. Hadji, we know your family, and the whole State of 
Ohio, are proud of the work you have done, and grateful for it. 
Several family members have accompanied him here. He will 
obviously introduce them.
    We look forward to your continuing to serve this country 
with distinction as a judge in the Court of Federal Claims.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Chair Durbin. Thanks, Senator Brown. Now Senator Cardin to 
introduce Judge Maddox.

     STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, A U.S. SENATOR 
       FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND, INTRODUCING  HON. MAT-
       THEW JAMES MADDOX,  TO  BE  UNITED STATES DISTRICT 
       JUDGE FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

    Senator Cardin. Thank you, Chairman Durbin, Ranking Member 
Graham, Senator Kennedy, Members of the Committee. Thank you.
    Senator Van Hollen, and I, thank you very much for 
scheduling this hearing for Judge Matthew Maddox, President 
Biden's nominee to fill the district court vacancy in the State 
of Maryland.
    Senator Van Hollen, and I, have a process in which we use a 
nonpartisan committee to interview anyone who is interested in 
serving on our district courts. They then tier the nominees, 
and the top tiers are interviewed by Senator Van Hollen and 
myself. And, we are proud to recommend to this Committee, as we 
did to President Biden, the confirmation of Judge Maddox to 
fill this vacancy.
    Judge Maddox was born and raised in Maryland. He graduated 
summa cum laude from Morgan State University in Baltimore in 
1999, where he majored in philosophy and religious studies, and 
minored in psychology. I think that is an interesting 
combination for the courts.
    After receiving his B.A. degree, Judge Maddox was a 
Fulbright Scholar and taught high school through the Teach For 
America program. Judge Maddox received his J.D. degree from the 
Yale Law School in 2011. After working in private practice and 
serving in two judicial clerkships, in 2015, Judge Maddox was 
appointed as an Assistant U.S. State's Attorney in the District 
of Maryland. In this capacity, Judge Maddox prosecuted a range 
of criminal cases and conducted trainings for law enforcement 
on the topics of human trafficking and identity theft.
    In 2020, Judge Maddox was selected to serve as the Deputy 
Chief of the Major Crimes Section in the Northern Division of 
the United States Attorney's Office. He has quite a bit of 
experience.
    In February 2022, Judge Maddox was sworn in as United 
States magistrate judge and sits in Baltimore. He now presides 
over both preliminary criminal proceedings and civil lawsuits. 
He, therefore, also brings a remarkable experience to this 
position, having served as a Federal prosecutor for nearly a 
decade, and now having served as a magistrate judge for over a 
year.
    If confirmed, he would continue to serve on the same court 
where he now sits as a magistrate judge, and where he has 
practiced as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for many years.
    Senator Van Hollen, and I, believe that Mr. Maddox meets 
the highest standards of integrity, competence, and 
temperament. I am confident that Judge Maddox will safeguard 
the rights of all Marylanders and uphold the Constitution, rule 
of law, and faithfully follow the judicial oath to do equal 
rights to the poor, and to the rich.
    Mr. Chairman, Judge Maddox has devoted his entire life to 
public service, from his start with Teach For America, to now, 
being a magistrate judge. I want to acknowledge that those who 
give this type of service, it is a family commitment. I want to 
thank his wife, and son, for sharing Judge Maddox with all of 
us in public service, and I urge his confirmation, recommend 
favorable action by this Committee.
    Chair Durbin. Thanks, Senator Cardin. Senator Van Hollen.

      STATEMENT OF  HON. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, A U.S. SENATOR 
        FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND, INTRODUCING HON. MAT-
        THEW JAMES MADDOX,  TO  BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT 
        JUDGE FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

    Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Chairman Durbin, Ranking 
Member Graham, Members of the Committee, for the chance to say 
a few words in support of the nomination of Magistrate Judge 
Matthew Maddox, to be a U.S. district court judge for Maryland.
    Senator Cardin has, as always, covered his background, and 
resume, well. I just want to add a few more thoughts. Because 
when we had a chance to talk to Magistrate Judge Maddox about 
some of his life-forming experiences, he, of course, talked 
about his service in the various capacities that Senator Cardin 
mentioned.
    But, he started by his service down in Arkansas, and, along 
with his wife, Nicole, who he credited with making sure that 
they remained connected and involved in the communities 
wherever they were.
    And, it was 22 years ago, right after their wedding, Judge 
Maddox and Nicole--and, I want to welcome her, and their son, 
Mosiah. Judge Maddox and Nicole enjoyed what he called a, 
quote, ``two-year honeymoon,'' teaching at public schools in 
rural Arkansas.
    The important work of serving students in the Arkansas 
Delta required every ounce of their youthful energy and 
creativity, especially, because, as you heard, Judge Maddox was 
a philosophy major, and he was teaching math in high school. 
They overcame their challenges, more and more. They served 
their students well, including through their mutual support for 
one another.
    Judge Maddox says that, quote, ``sharing that demanding and 
fulfilling experience of public service, at the very outset of 
their marriage,'' set them on the path that now brings them 
before the Committee with the nomination as district court 
judge.
    Members of the Committee, there is no doubt that Magistrate 
Judge Maddox has the record, and resume, to do the job. I think 
this story also reflects his commitment to public service. And, 
I thought, it was also especially telling, that when asked if 
there was a story about his career he would like to share with 
the Committee, he told us it was one about his love for his 
wife, and their shared commitment to service to our country.
    I urge Members of the Committee to support this important 
nomination.
    Chair Durbin. Thanks, Senator Van Hollen. Of course, 
Senator Cardin. Thank you, both, for being here before the 
Committee. I know your schedules are busy. You may have to 
leave, but your testimonies are very important to us.
    Next, Senator Kennedy. Do you want to go with Senator 
Cassidy? Senator Cassidy.
    Senator Cassidy. I have three people to introduce. So, I 
will briefly do all three.

    STATEMENT  OF  HON. BILL  CASSIDY, A  U.S.  SENATOR FROM 
      THE  STATE OF  LOUISIANA,  INTRODUCING  JERRY EDWARDS, 
      JR.,  TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR THE WEST-
      ERN  DISTRICT  OF LOUISIANA;  BRANDON S.  LONG, TO  BE
      UNITED  STATES  DISTRICT  JUDGE  FOR  THE EASTERN DIS-
      TRICT OF LOUISIANA; AND PHILIP S. HADJI, TO BE A JUDGE
      OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

    Senator Cassidy. Mr. Chair, Mr. Ranking Member, it is an 
honor to introduce Jerry Edwards, Jr., to the Committee today, 
and to recommend him for a seat on the Western District of 
Louisiana. I also welcome his mother, Ramona Williams, his 
stepfather, Kollister Williams, who are joining him.
    Mr. Edwards is an accomplished lawyer, a Louisiana native, 
and currently serves as the First Assistant U.S. Attorney for 
Louisiana's Western District. He spent the majority of his 
career as an accomplished civil litigator and as an associate 
and partner with Blanchard, Walker, O'Quin, and Roberts, 
leaving to join the U.S. Attorney's Office Civil Division in 
2019.
    Mr. Edwards told me that since he was invested in serving 
his community in his spare time, he might as well do it full 
time. In his role as First Assistant U.S. State Attorney, he 
has expanded the scope of his work to overseeing some of the 
most serious Federal criminal matters, in addition to civil and 
administrative cases. In total, Mr. Edwards' practice has been 
95 percent litigation, mostly in the Western District of 
Louisiana.
    Mr. Edwards' commitment to his community and bar is a 
personal credit to the character required to be a successful 
judge. He has been a member of the Louisiana Committee on Bar 
Admissions since 2019, serving on its character and fitness 
panel.
    In addition, Mr. Edwards is the chairman of the board of 
the Community Foundation of North Louisiana, a philanthropic 
community development organization. He remains involved in 
various leadership roles with Volunteers of America, serving 
adults with mental illness, low-income families, orphans, 
veterans, the homeless, and more.
    Suffice it to say, that Mr. Edwards has one of the most 
profound and thoughtful community service backgrounds that we 
have seen in a judicial nominee. I look forward to his approval 
by this panel and the entire Senate.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking Member. With that, I 
yield.
    Next, I would like to go to Mr. Brandon Long.
    And, keep in mind, Mr. Chairman, I got three today. So, 
when I say, ``I yield,'' I mean, I yield on that one, not on 
all three.
    Chair Durbin. Sure.
    Senator Cassidy. It is also a privilege to introduce New 
Orleans native Brandon Long, to the Committee today, to be a 
judge on the Eastern District of Louisiana. He is here with his 
wife of 11 years, Elizabeth; his two sons, ages 9 and 7; his 
mother, Bobbi; sister, Gina; and in-laws, Sam, Nancy, and Alex.
    Mr. Long's career is a model of what a good Federal judge 
should have as a career. Mr. Long practiced at King and 
Spalding's DC office for 5 years in their special matters and 
government investigations practice.
    He has a stellar academic and professional background, and 
with that, he could have stayed in a more lucrative attorney 
position. Instead, he chose public service, choosing to work to 
make things better, as a public service in his hometown of New 
Orleans.
    As a Federal prosecutor, he has tried a noteworthy 32 
criminal cases to verdict. He also currently serves as a member 
of the Financial Crimes Unit, and served 3 years as an opioid 
coordinator in the Eastern District.
    His hometown community recognized him when the New Orleans 
Metropolitan Crime Commission awarded Mr. Long their Excellence 
in Law Enforcement Award. He continues to serve the community 
as a boardmember for Boys Hope Girls Hope of New Orleans, an 
organization that helps academically motivated middle and high 
school students rise above disadvantaged backgrounds. The 
organization runs two group homes for children and provides 
academic scholarships and tutoring. Mr. Long also serves as a 
high school mock trial coach.
    Considering his experience, commitment to the community, 
and knowledge of the law, Mr. Long has a lifetime of 
demonstrating the values and traits that qualify him to be an 
exceptional Federal judge. I look forward to seeing him 
confirmed.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking Member. With that, I 
go to my third.
    It is an honor to introduce Philip Hadji, which Senator 
Brown also introduced, but, I have a personal connection to 
Philip. I recommend him for an appointment to the U.S. Court of 
Federal Claims.
    He is an accomplished Navy attorney who will be an 
excellent Federal judge. I also welcome his family here to 
support him: his father, Serge; his mother, Yanna; his 
brothers, Alexios and Andreas; and his wife, Katie. As you 
might guess, Mr. Hadji's roots are in Greece.
    He received his B.A. from Hamilton College, where he was 
president of his class. He received his J.D. from Case Western 
Reserve, where he served as editor-in-chief of the Journal of 
International Law. He received his LL.M. in Government 
procurement law from George Washington University, where his 
thesis won a public contract law writing award from the 
American Bar Association.
    For over a decade, he held several positions with the Naval 
Office of the General Counsel, his practice focusing on 
Government contract law matters, a large category of cases on 
the Court of Federal Claims docket. Mr. Hadji has worked on a 
variety of litigation, including Government contract claims, 
bid protests, and False Claims Act litigation. He also worked 
on contract awards and performance issues, in support of the 
warfighter.
    Notably, he successfully litigated a bid protest of the 
Navy's $7 billion next-generation global IT network services 
contract. He supervised a team of attorneys responsible for 
supporting the Suspending and Debarring Official of the Navy, 
who bans non-responsible contractors from doing business with 
the Government.
    His work has been recognized by the General Counsel of the 
Navy through the Navy Superior Civilian Service Award in 2021, 
and the Navy Meritorious Civilian Service Award in 2020.
    I will note that Mr. Hadji would be the only judge on the 
court to have served as an attorney at the Department of 
Defense and the only judge with an LL.M. degree in Government 
procurement law. He is recommended for the position on a 
bipartisan basis by his home State Senators, Senator Brown, and 
former Senator Portman.
    I am confident that his experience, temperament, and 
judgment will make him an excellent judge. I look forward to 
his approval.
    And with that, Mr. Chairman, I truly yield. Thank you.
    Chair Durbin. Thank you, Senator Cassidy. And, it is such a 
big Louisiana day in this Committee. I am sure that you, and 
Senator Kennedy, will be bringing a box of beignets around for 
all of us, at some point later.
    [Laughter.]
    Chair Durbin. Senator Kennedy.

    OPENING  STATEMENT  OF HON. JOHN KENNEDY, A U.S. SEN-
      ATOR  FROM  THE  STATE  OF  LOUISIANA,  INTRODUCING
      JERRY EDWARDS, JR.,  TO  BE  UNITED STATES DISTRICT
      JUDGE  FOR THE WESTERN  DISTRICT  OF LOUISIANA, AND
      BRANDON S. LONG, TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
      FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

    Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The White House 
Counsel's office, as we all know, is the part of the White 
House that is charged with advancing a President's nominees to 
the Federal judiciary.
    Every President in recent memory has had a White House 
Counsel's office. And, all White House Counsel offices do their 
job. They try to--they think they are right, and they try to 
get what their boss wants. And, of course, all Senators think 
they are right, and we try to get what we want.
    It took--I think this is true of all White House Counsel's 
offices. It took a while for President Biden's White House 
Counsel's office, and I, to get to know each other. But, we 
have. Now I am not suggesting that we are ready to go to summer 
camp together, and it could all fall apart tomorrow, but we 
have had a number of vacancies on the Federal judiciary in 
Louisiana. We need to fill them. Working with White House 
Counsel's office, and my quarterback, Senator Cassidy, we 
filled two of them.
    Today, we have two additional, splendid nominees, to offer 
up to you. I returned a blue slip on both of them, and, unless 
they really, really, really screw up today----
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Kennedy [continuing]. Which I do not think they 
will--I am going to vote for them.
    Senator Cassidy covered Jerry's and Brandon's resumes. 
Look, I am not going to repeat everything. But, if you look at 
these two gentlemen and are not impressed, as Lindsey Graham 
says, you shouldn't be driving.
    Mr. Edwards graduated from Georgia State University, 
Vermont Law School, he's clerked for two district court judges 
in Louisiana--one Republican, one Democrat. He spent 13 years 
at Blanchard Walker, a hell of a law firm. He was a partner 
there.
    He has been the Chief of the Civil Division in the U.S. 
Attorney's Office in the Western District. He has been rated 
unanimously ``well qualified'' by the ABA.
    Brandon Long, Mr. Long, is, he's from New Orleans--actually 
Metairie. He went to the University of Texas. He graduated cum 
laude from Duke Law School. He spent 5 years at King and 
Spalding, was earning a great living. Decided to get into 
Government service. We appreciate that.
    He has been a Federal criminal prosecutor in both DC and 
the Eastern District of Louisiana. He has tried 32 cases to 
verdict. I think Mr. Edwards has tried a bunch of cases to 
verdict, as well.
    He was FBI Director Wray's Deputy Chief of Staff for a 
while. And, he is eminently qualified.
    I have gotten to know both of these gentlemen. Each of them 
is smart. Each of them is principled. Each of them has thought 
about the world, and they have formed opinions about the world. 
But, I am convinced that they will limit their decisions to the 
law, and to the facts of a specific case.
    Each understands the role of our Madisonian system of 
checks and balances, and separation of powers. And, each of 
them understands the importance, and the nuances, and the 
limitations, of the law. And, I am really glad we could get 
this all worked out, and my work here is done.
    Chair Durbin. Thanks, Senator. Senator Vance.

    STATEMENT OF HON. J.D. VANCE, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE 
      STATE OF OHIO, INTRODUCING PHILIP S. HADJI, TO BE A 
      JUDGE  OF   THE  UNITED  STATES  COURT  OF  FEDERAL
      CLAIMS

    Senator Vance. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks to the 
Ranking Member, and the Members of the Committee, for having 
me. It is a little weird to be on this side of the rodeo, here. 
But, I am here to testify on behalf of Phil Hadji, and to 
support his nomination to the Court of Federal Claims.
    Phil is a native Ohioan, born and raised in the Cleveland 
area, and would make a fine addition to the Federal bench. His 
long career in public service, including many years at the U.S. 
Navy's Office of General Counsel, has allowed him to develop an 
expertise in Federal contracting and Federal claims, exactly 
the expertise he will need if confirmed as a judge to the CFC.
    After graduating cum laude from Hamilton College in upstate 
New York, Phil worked for Senator Robert Byrd, of West 
Virginia, before returning home to Ohio, for law school at Case 
Western. Philip later continued his legal education at George 
Washington University Law School, where he received advanced 
degrees.
    Now, since 2011, Phil has worked at the Navy's Office of 
General Counsel, where he has applied the skills honed at Case 
Western and G.W., and where he has practiced the law of 
Government contracting, day in and day out.
    Over the last decade, Phil has been lead counsel, or co-
lead counsel, on several high-profile matters, including 
debarment actions, bid protests at the Government 
Accountability Office, contract claims at the Armed Services 
Board of Contract Appeals, and substantial contract awards.
    He has also been the Navy's lead attorney on matters where 
the Department of Justice has intervened for the Government in 
district courts throughout the Nation, including several qui 
tam matters. Among other accolades, Phil has been awarded the 
Navy's Superior Civilian Service Award, and the Navy 
Meritorious Civilian Service Award for his work in the General 
Counsel's Office.
    With such a distinguished record, I think this should be an 
easy confirmation. Of course, I am biased. But, I encourage the 
Committee to approve Phil's nomination, and, I thank you for 
having me.
    Chair Durbin. Thank you, Senator Vance. Your statement will 
be made part of the official record.
    I now ask the staff if they would transition our witness 
table for the nominees.
    Senator Kennedy. Hell of a job, Vance.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Vance. Thank you.
    Senator Graham. We have some questions.
    [Pause.]
    Chair Durbin. If I could ask the nominees to please step 
forward, and if you remain standing for just a moment? I ask 
you to please raise your right hand. Do you affirm the 
testimony you are about to give before the Committee will be 
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help 
you God?
    [Witnesses are sworn in.]
    Chair Durbin. Let the record reflect that the nominees have 
all answered in the affirmative, which we are relieved to 
report.
    And, we start with Mr. Edwards. Five minutes. The floor is 
yours.

      STATEMENT OF JERRY EDWARDS, JR., NOMINEE TO SERVE AS
        UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR  THE WESTERN DIS-
        TRICT OF LOUISIANA

    Mr. Edwards. Good morning, Chair Durbin. And, thank you, 
and Ranking Member Graham, Members of the Committee, for the 
opportunity to appear before you today.
    I would like to thank President Biden for nominating me, 
and also my home State Senators, John Kennedy and Bill Cassidy, 
for supporting me, and for their very, very kind words today.
    I am so thankful to have the support and encouragement of 
my family, especially my parents. My father, who will always be 
``big Jerry''--I am, yes, ``little Jerry''--who is supporting 
me from home, and my mother and stepfather, who are here with 
me today, all the way from Okinawa, Japan. The greatest 
blessing on my life is the privilege of having Ramona as my 
mom.
    I am also joined by friends and colleagues, some of whom 
are here and many others who are watching and supporting me 
from home. I am grateful to my mentors and colleagues in 
Louisiana, who gave me opportunities to learn, grow, and serve 
in the legal profession, and in the community. It is a great 
honor to be with you today, and I am happy to answer your 
questions.
    Chair Durbin. Thank you very much. Mr. Long?

    STATEMENT OF  BRANDON S. LONG,  NOMINEE TO SERVE AS
      UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR THE EASTERN DIS-
      TRICT OF LOUISIANA

    Mr. Long. First, let me thank you, Chair Durbin, Ranking 
Member Graham, and other Senators on this Committee, for 
convening today's hearing.
    I am deeply grateful to Senator Cassidy and Senator 
Kennedy, and their staff, for supporting my nomination. And, I 
would like to thank both Senators for their gracious 
introductions.
    I would also to thank President Biden for placing his faith 
in me. I am honored and humbled by this nomination.
    I am joined here today by some pretty important folks. I 
would not be here without the heart and soul of our family, my 
wife, Elizabeth, who juggles a full-time career as an 
architect, with being a full-time mom, and still somehow finds 
time to spread kindness and joy to countless friends and 
family.
    Also here are our two sons, ages 9 and 7. Everything is 
more joyful, more interesting, more colorful when they are 
around, and I could not be more proud to be their dad.
    My mother, Bobbi, is here, bringing her trademark warmth, 
sense of humor, and unwavering optimism, along with my 
incredibly supportive sister, Gina.
    We lost my dad, Buddy Long, almost 3 years ago, but his 
unmistakable imprint on our family endures. In my household 
growing up, character was paramount. My mom and dad raised me 
and my sister on some pretty simple rules: You always told the 
truth, you work hard because nothing substitutes for hard work, 
and you were respectful, and kind, to others. These are basic, 
yet fundamental principles that have guided me throughout my 
life.
    Also in attendance are my father-in-law, Sam; mother-in-
law, Nancy; and brother-in-law, Alex; along with our dear 
family friend, Tom Kitchen. These are some of the most generous 
and kind-hearted folks you will ever meet.
    I would also like to acknowledge other family and friends 
who could not be here in person that are tuning in. I am lucky 
to have you in my corner.
    Finally, I would like to recognize the fantastic attorneys 
and staff at the law firm King and Spalding, where I began my 
legal career, as well as my friends, and colleagues, throughout 
my stints at the Justice Department and, specifically, at the 
U.S. Attorney's Office in my hometown of New Orleans, where I 
currently serve.
    With that, Senators, thank you, again, for considering my 
nomination, and I look forward to your questions.
    Chair Durbin. Thank you, Mr. Long. Judge Maddox?

      STATEMENT  OF  HON. MATTHEW JAMES MADDOX,  NOMINEE
        TO SERVE AS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR THE
        DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

    Judge Maddox. Good morning, Chair Durbin, Ranking Member 
Graham, and Members of this Committee. Thank you for convening 
this hearing.
    To President Biden, thank you for this nomination to serve 
as a United States district judge for the District of Maryland. 
This nomination is the honor of my career.
    To Senator Cardin and Senator Van Hollen, I am honored by 
your kind introduction, and in the confidence that you have 
placed in my abilities by recommending me for this nomination, 
and the opportunity it presents to me to continue serving the 
community that has given so much to me, and to my family.
    Speaking of family, I must acknowledge the presence of 
family members who are here in this room, and others watching 
remotely. Thank you, for your unwavering support.
    My wife, Nicole, is present. She is my best friend, and my 
life partner, and my strongest and most constant supporter and 
benefactor. I will never be able to thank her enough.
    My son is also present. I thank him for being my greatest 
inspiration.
    My parents, Wayne and Camilla, are also here. Having you as 
my parents was my first and my longest-enduring blessing.
    I would also like to acknowledge the many talented 
attorneys and judges I have had the fortune of calling 
colleagues, and from whom I learned the arts of lawyering and 
judging. Foremost among them are the judges for whom I had the 
honor of serving as a judicial law clerk: District Judge Gerald 
Bruce Lee and Circuit Judge Andre M. Davis, both retired. Your 
lessons remain with me, and have elevated the quality of my 
work since the day I met each of you.
    I thank my chamber staff for the past year and a half you 
have given, to supporting my work as a magistrate judge.
    And, finally, I want to acknowledge the many great teachers 
I have had throughout my education. Your work as educators is 
worthy of the highest recognition, not only by me, but, by all 
of us, for whom reaching our full potential would have never 
been possible without the vital roles that you have played in 
our lives.
    Thank you. I look forward to any questions that Members of 
this Committee have for me.
    Chair Durbin. Thank you, Judge. Mr. Hadji?

      STATEMENT OF PHILIP S. HADJI, NOMINEE TO SERVE AS A 
       JUDGE OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

    Mr. Hadji. Thank you, Chairman Durbin, and Ranking Member 
Graham, for holding this hearing, and to your staff, who have 
been excellent to work with.
    I am truly honored to be here, today, as a nominee to the 
Court of Federal Claims. Thank you, President Biden, for 
nominating me. Thank you to my home State Senators, Senator 
Brown and Senator Vance, for your bipartisan support of me, and 
for your thoughtful introductions.
    Thank you, Senator Cassidy, for your support and your 
introduction.
    And, thank you, also, to former Ohio Senator Portman, for 
your support.
    I would like to introduce my family that is here today, and 
thank them all. First, I have to start with my wife, Katie. I 
certainly would not be sitting here today without Katie's 
support and encouragement. Also in attendance are my mom and 
dad, Yanna and Serge; and my brothers, Alexios and Andreas; and 
Alexios' wife, Jamie. Last, my colleagues from the Navy Office 
of General Counsel who are here, and watching online, thank 
you.
    I would be remiss if I did not say a few quick words about 
my parents because they have had such an impact on me and the 
reason why I am here today. My parents are both from Greece 
and, like many, immigrated to the United States for all of the 
opportunities that this great country affords.
    My dad was born in 1942 during the Nazi occupation of 
Greece. Some of his earliest childhood memories were of the 
aftermath of World War II, including the Communist uprising 
that sparked the Greek civil war.
    For example, he remembers being one of the lucky ones 
because his grandmother had chickens on their balcony in their 
apartment building. The chickens produced eggs, and because of 
this, he was able to eat even when food was often scarce. 
Ultimately, with the help of the United States through the 
Marshall Plan, democracy and capitalism prevailed in Greece.
    As a first-generation American, the decision to come to 
America is very recent in our family's history. And, this 
history, that I have described, and love of country, and the 
rule of law, has certainly shaped me in profound ways, 
including my decision to spend my career in public service, and 
with the Navy.
    For 12 years, I have had the privilege of working as an 
attorney in the Navy Office of the General Counsel, where I 
have handled legal matters in support of the critical national 
security mission of the warfighter, our sailors and Marines.
    It is a great honor to be here, today, as a nominee, and I 
look forward to the Committee's questions.
    Chair Durbin. Thank you, Mr. Hadji.
    I am going to start the questioning. Five-minute rounds for 
each of the Members of the Committee present today. And, let me 
say, at the outset, that the three judicial nominees have been 
judged ``well qualified,'' and that is a matter of record. And, 
they certainly enjoy bipartisan support coming before us, and I 
wanted to just ask a question or two.
    Mr. Edwards, you have been a litigator since 2006, working 
in private practice, and at the U.S. Attorney's Office in 
Shreveport. Before that, you clerked for two judges on the 
First Judicial District of Louisiana. So, you have been 
acquainted with a number of Federal judges. Tell me about the 
good ones, and tell me about the bad ones.
    Mr. Edwards. Thank you, Chair----
    Chair Durbin. You do not need to name names.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Edwards. Thank you, Chair Durbin, for the question.
    Senator Kennedy. Be very careful here.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Edwards. I have been very fortunate to work with many, 
many great judges. Judge Jeanette Garrett and Judge, now 
Justice Scott Crichton, were the judges who brought me to 
Shreveport, in a way, because they offered me a clerkship, 
while I was in law school, for when I graduated. And, they 
taught me the importance of being engaged in the profession. 
And, I think that judges should be engaged in the profession to 
advance civility, and professionalism, and the rule of law in 
the community, by making sure that people in the community 
understand how the system works.
    And so, I learned that, principally from them, and, I can 
tell you that every judge in Shreveport is a great judge.
    [Laughter.]
    Chair Durbin. Pretty safe comment.
    Mr. Long, it is a lifetime appointment. Tell me your 
opinion of good--the qualities of a good judge.
    Mr. Long. Chairman Durbin, I think the qualities of a good 
judge are, first and foremost, faithfully following the law, 
being prepared, having command of the law every time you walk 
into court, being a good listener, being open-minded, and 
hearing the testimony, seeing the evidence, and hearing the 
arguments from the parties. Being respectful of the litigants 
themselves, and creating an atmosphere where decorum is 
paramount in the court, and being humble.
    Learned Hand said, know ``that ye may be mistaken.'' 
Realize when you need to give a matter an examination, and a 
re-examination, before rushing to a conclusion because that is 
what the litigants expect, and that is what the public expects, 
from the judges.
    Chair Durbin. Thank goodness, on this side of the panel, 
humility is really the trademark of a Senator. Right?
    Senator Graham. Right.
    [Laughter.]
    Chair Durbin. Right. Judge Maddox, what is your experience, 
and what would you say are the qualities that you look for in a 
judge that you practice before, or serve, with?
    Judge Maddox. Thank you, Chair. My very first lesson in 
judging was the importance of preparation. Preparation, 
preparation, and more preparation. And, at the time of the 
hearing, keen listening. I agree with my colleague, Mr. Long, 
on that.
    Preparation is highly important because every hearing 
presents an opportunity for a judge to convince, not just the 
litigants who appear before them, but, also the general public, 
that every litigant who does make an appearance will have their 
arguments, and their positions, considered very carefully by 
the judge. And, it is only through preparation can a judge 
convey that through the questions that they ask at the hearing, 
and through the comments that they make.
    And, listening is equally important in that regard, and I 
have tried to convey, and have tried to emulate, those 
qualities in my work in the past year and a half that I have 
served as a magistrate judge in the District of Maryland.
    Chair Durbin. Let me ask you, Mr. Hadji, since your 
selection is for a little different position of responsibility, 
you have had a lot of experience working on Government contract 
matters, having served as a lawyer in the U.S. Navy for more 
than 10 years. You have worked on a range of issues, bid 
protests, contract claims, contract performance issues. How 
have these experiences, do you believe, prepared you to serve 
on the Court of Claims?
    Mr. Hadji. Chairman Durbin, I think that the breadth of my 
experience, as you have described, is with the Navy doing 
Government contract law matters. A big part of the docket of 
the Court of Federal Claims is Government contract law matters. 
The court hears claims against the United States for monetary 
relief, and I have had a lot of experience working on claims 
against the United States for monetary relief in the course of 
doing Government contract law work.
    Chair Durbin. Thank you. Senator Graham.
    Senator Graham. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think this is a 
good example of how the Committee can work.
    And, to all my colleagues who made this day possible, thank 
you very much. Senators Kennedy and Cassidy, I think you have 
chosen wisely.
    Mr. Long, you were--what role did you have at the FBI?
    Mr. Long. Senator, I was Deputy Chief of Staff to Director 
Wray.
    Senator Graham. Okay. What period of time?
    Mr. Long. This would have been in 2020, and the first half 
of 2021, and for a brief period of time, I was also the Acting 
Chief of Staff.
    Senator Graham. Okay. You were there on January 6th?
    Mr. Long. I was.
    Senator Graham. So, what have you learned from that 
experience? What is your take-away about January 6th?
    Mr. Long. Well, I want to be a little careful here, 
Senator. There are a number of open investigations, and open 
cases, right here in the District of Columbia. As a judicial 
nominee, and a Department attorney, it would not be appropriate 
for me to comment on January 6 cases.
    Senator Graham. I am not asking you to talk about the 
cases--about the event itself.
    Mr. Long. Well, again, Senator, I am----
    Senator Graham. Would you say it was a good day or a bad 
day for America?
    Mr. Long. It was a bad day for America, Senator.
    Senator Graham. Yes, that is all I am saying. I agree with 
you. So--the FBI. The FBI is taking a beating right now, at 
least on our side of the aisle. Did you have any knowledge of 
some of the accusations being made about FBI's handling of the 
Steele dossier, anything about the Hunter Biden investigation, 
about whether or not Mr. Weiss had all the power he needed? Do 
you know anything about that moment in time?
    Mr. Long. Well, with respect to the Crossfire Hurricane 
investigation, that predated my role at the FBI by a few years. 
With respect to the more recent investigations, no, I do not 
have any information. I have not been at the FBI in over 2 
years. I have been prosecuting cases in New Orleans over the 
past 2 years. So, I do not have any information about those 
investigations.
    Senator Graham. So, you were there up until mid-2021. Is 
that right?
    Mr. Long. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Graham. Okay. So, apparently, some of these 
allegations by whistleblowers were made in the middle of 2020. 
Were you aware of any allegations being made regarding the 
investigation of Hunter Biden as not being fair?
    Mr. Long. Well, my understanding, Senator, is that there is 
an open investigation involving Hunter Biden----
    Senator Graham. No, my question: Did you know anything 
about this?
    Mr. Long. I do not have any information. No, I do not know 
anything about this.
    Senator Graham. So, you do not know--you have no 
recollection of Mr. Weiss asking for Special Counsel, 
additional assistant status?
    Mr. Long. Again, Senator, this involves an open 
investigation. As a Department of Justice attorney, as well as 
a judicial nominee, it is--I am bound not to comment on open 
investigations.
    Senator Graham. Okay. Thank you.
    Chair Durbin. Senator Booker.
    Senator Booker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I can't help, 
always, but pause when I look at rooms like this, and just feel 
a sense of gratitude and pride in our country. And, to have 
people who have spent their lives, many of them, focused on 
public service, step forward to stand before our Senate 
Judiciary Committee for a lifetime appointment to serve in our 
Article III branch of Government.
    And, I am always moved when I look at the families of the 
folks behind there, and I can only imagine the pride they feel, 
as well as the sense of commitment to this country, and our 
higher ideals. Our country's media tends to highlight our 
divisions. But, anybody who travels around this world knows how 
much we have as--in common, as a people, and I think that we 
all, or most of us, still have a common yearning that this 
Nation will live up to its ideals.
    And, over the history of this country, one of the places 
where people have sought one of those highest ideals, justice, 
has been through our courts. And, there have been shameful 
chapters, and there have been incredibly righteous chapters. 
And, not just on the bigger issues, but often just someone 
looking for a fair shake at a crisis point in their lives.
    So, I want to thank all the people that are here. I want to 
thank the families, in particular. It really moved me during 
the opening statements.
    And this, as Senator Graham, who has been, I think, an 
incredible Ranking Member, in trying to keep comity in this 
Committee, and trying to create a process that can work. This 
is one of those times where we have seen a lot of bipartisan 
efforts to get to this moment.
    I've--as one of the few African Americans in the Senate, I 
serve on Congressional Black Caucus, and there has been a lot 
of concerns about the overall process. Chairman, I know you are 
aware of that, because you spoke about it at the top. I have 
been disappointed with some mistakes, I believe, that the White 
House made in a process sense, and I am going to do everything 
I can, as, I think, the Chairman has committed, to try to make 
sure that we address those process concerns, that that does not 
take away from what I saw here today, as Republicans coming 
before the Committee, and those on the Committee. But, I think 
it is important to mention my commitment to working to improve 
this process.
    I want to just finally say thank you to the folks that are 
sitting here, because this is not an easy process. It is not a 
quick process, and in many ways, you have to open your life up 
to the kind of scrutiny that a lot of you probably did not sign 
up for. And--I am sorry, in an impolitic way--one of my friends 
has said, ``This is one of the worst proctology exams anybody 
could ever imagine.''
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Booker. And so, I have limited time, and I am going 
to do something--because he is rascally and I appreciate him at 
times--is, I just want to talk about Senator Kennedy, if I can. 
And maybe, Mr. Long, you can help me out with an issue between 
two friends who are often put on the opposite sides of the 
ideological divide. Don't worry, this is not a trap.
    But, I think people would--they look at us, probably 
understand that we are not only different parties, but we have 
a lot of different beliefs. But, when it comes to opioids, if 
you took the Venn diagram of our beliefs, there is probably a 
lot of common ground between Senator Kennedy and I. Too many 
people are dying in our States.
    And, I remember--the reason why I want to ask you this 
question, Mr. Long--when I was mayor of the City of Newark and 
I sat down with my FBI, and they were detailing me a lot of the 
challenges we were facing with drugs, I looked at them, and, 
this was a bit of a trap for the FBI Director, because I'd 
thought I knew what his answer was going to be. I go, ``Well, 
how do we solve this problem? ''
    And, the FBI Director looked at me, and said very 
pointedly, ``We don't solve this problem, Mr. Mayor. The 
solutions to this problem are not law enforcement. The 
solutions to this problem are things that you are going to have 
to think a lot more creatively about. We are dealing with the 
symptoms of the problem.''
    And so, my friend, Mr. Kennedy, and I, have had some 
private conversations. I was forced to go to the floor and 
object to one of his unanimous consents. I am not sure if he 
has forgiven me for that, yet. But, I want to ask you, very 
pointedly, when it comes to the opioid crisis in this country, 
is the solutions--in your opinion, having dealt with this space 
in the law enforcement capacity, are the solutions to this 
problem really going to come from law enforcement activities, 
or is it going to come from larger, public policy decisions 
that we might be able to make an effect?
    Mr. Long. Well, Senator, I think it is a really important 
question. I can tell you, I have prosecuted a number of opioid 
cases in my career, and was fortunate to serve as the opioid 
coordinator of the Eastern District of Louisiana U.S. 
Attorney's Office. And, in that role, I worked shoulder to 
shoulder with not just State, and local, and Federal law 
enforcement, but also public health officials and other 
stakeholders in the community, to try to come up with some 
solutions.
    And, we worked toward sort of addressing three prongs: 
Prevention and education, being one prong; treatment, being a 
second prong; and, enforcement, being a third prong. And, our 
approach was that all of those three things combined were 
essential to addressing the opioid crisis.
    Senator Booker. So, we need strong enforcement of our laws, 
but we also need education, awareness, treatment, and things 
like that, are just as important? Or, do you put an order in 
them? You said, they are all three important.
    Mr. Long. Well, this is, again, my view based upon my 
experience dealing with the opioid crisis in the Eastern 
District of Louisiana, and particularly in New Orleans, where, 
at this point, opioid overdose deaths in New Orleans have far 
surpassed the murder rate in the city. And so, that was the 
approach that we took to try to address the crisis.
    Senator Booker. I am grateful for that. You may have helped 
heal our relationship of Brother Kennedy and I, and I am hoping 
that your wisdom will inform probably some really strong 
actions.
    Thank you, sir. And, Mr. Chairman, thank you for the time.
    Chair Durbin. Thanks, Senator Booker. Senator Kennedy.
    Senator Booker. I did not know he was going to get a 
rebuttal so quickly.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Kennedy. Senator Booker has a silver tongue. 
Doesn't he? He's good.
    I know Mr. Long, and I know Mr. Edwards. I don't know Mr. 
Hadji, or Judge Maddox. Congratulations to all four of you, 
though.
    Judge Maddox, I think I will start with you. I just want to 
talk about the law a little bit. I stipulate that you will 
follow the law, and apply it to the facts of the case as you 
are guided, including, but not limited to, precedent.
    I thought the Supreme Court just handed down some really 
interesting decisions. One of them has not been talked about 
much, but, I found it fascinating. Tell me about Moore v. 
Harper. That was the independent State legislature theory. What 
is that all about?
    Judge Maddox. Good morning, Senator.
    Senator Kennedy. Good morning.
    Judge Maddox. Yes, Moore v. Harper concerned whether or not 
the Elections Clause, in Article I of the Constitution, gave 
the State legislature sole authority to regulate elections for 
Federal office in their States, without any judicial 
oversight----
    Senator Kennedy. Mm-hmm.
    Judge Maddox [continuing]. And, the Supreme Court held that 
the Elections Clause did not preclude judicial oversight of the 
legislatures' regulation of Federal elections.
    Senator Kennedy. I can tell you looked at the case. Let--
here's one way of looking at it. Every State has a State 
constitution, and--and, I want you to tell me if you think I am 
wrong here. Every State has a State constitution. And, in fact, 
many State constitutions preceded the Federal Constitution. 
And, some of the provisions in our Federal Constitution were 
copied directly from State constitutions.
    And, as I read Moore v. Harper, what the Supreme Court is 
saying to a State legislature is, look, yes, Congress gave you 
the power to draw congressional districts, but, you have got to 
do it consistent with your State constitution. And, so the 
State courts get to weigh in. And, if the State courts do not 
render opinions that are consistent with the Federal 
Constitution, then the Federal courts get to weigh in.
    What do you think?
    Judge Maddox. I believe that that is a fair reading of, or 
maybe, perhaps reading between the lines of that opinion. That 
particular question is not one that I have considered 
previously, although I have reviewed that opinion.
    Senator Kennedy. Yes. I just found the whole case very 
interesting because the theory of the plaintiffs was that State 
legislatures can do anything they want to do with respect to 
congressional reapportionment, because Congress gave them 
power. But, it ignored the role of the Federal judiciary, and 
the State constitutions, which--anyway.
    Mr. Hadji, tell me about--I need to get a life, I guess. 
Mr. Hadji, tell me about this Waters of the United States 
controversy. What is it all really about?
    Mr. Hadji. Senator, I am not--I have been an attorney for 
12 years with the Navy, and I have practiced in Government 
contract law for a long time, and I have worked on those kinds 
of issues for the last, almost, 12 years. I have not 
encountered that particular issue that you are referencing.
    Senator Kennedy. Okay. All right. Tell me--this will be my 
last question. Tell me, doesn't strict liability seem 
inherently unfair to you?
    Mr. Hadji. So, my understanding of strict liability, 
Senator, is that there is limited circumstances for when it is 
applied, and my job----
    Senator Kennedy. Like what? Like what?
    Mr. Hadji. Excuse me?
    Senator Kennedy. Give me some examples.
    Mr. Hadji. Like in a product liability case, for example.
    Senator Kennedy. Yes.
    Mr. Hadji. And, I think the idea of strict liability is 
under those limited circumstances to encourage the right sort 
of behavior for, let's say, a private manufacturer to not 
create a product that is going to kill a baby, for example, 
that severe consequences have to ensue.
    Senator Kennedy. Well, I am not saying I disagree with you. 
But, tell me how does it comport with due process? I mean, this 
is basically--some would argue, this is basically a legislature 
saying, hey, if you do it, you are automatically liable. You do 
not get due process. You do not get to defend yourself. There 
are no defenses.
    What do you think about that?
    Mr. Hadji. Well, my understanding is that strict liability 
comports with due process because you have the right to be 
heard in court, and, it is, I think, a good example of the 
balancing of the branches of Government from that perspective 
because it, like you said, takes Congress' perspective into 
consideration as well.
    Senator Kennedy. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you, Mr. 
Chairman.
    Chair Durbin. Thanks, Senator Kennedy. Senator Padilla.
    Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before leading 
into my question, let me kind of tee it up with a couple of 
experiences.
    And, prior to joining the Senate, I served as a secretary 
of State for the State of California where, on a periodic 
basis, we would showcase, especially around Admission Day every 
year, the original California constitution, because, in fact, 
there was more than one, when California was becoming a State. 
There was both an English language constitution that the 
legislature adopted, and a proclamacion in Espanol, a Spanish 
proclamation, at the beginning of statehood for the State of 
California--just as historic evidence of the diversity of 
California from the very, very beginning.
    Senator Kennedy, I believe, Louisiana had some similar 
history, not just with two languages, but three----
    Senator Kennedy. Mm-hmm.
    Senator Padilla [continuing]. English, Spanish----
    Senator Kennedy. Mm-hmm.
    Senator Padilla [continuing]. And, French.
    Senator Kennedy. Mm-hmm.
    Senator Padilla. So, our respective States have celebrated, 
and enjoyed----
    Senator Kennedy. Mm-hmm.
    Senator Padilla [continuing]. The benefits of beautiful 
diversity for a long time now.
    And, I had a chance to see those original documents, last 
week, when I took my son to the archives----
    Senator Kennedy. Oh, really.
    Senator Padilla [continuing]. And we were doing some 
exploration there. So, it is fresh and top of mind, and I lead 
with that because my question, my primary question here today 
is about diversity. We have worked a lot in this Committee over 
the last couple of years to increase the diversity of the names 
recommended to the White House, those--the names of the folks 
nominated by the White House to serve on the Federal bench 
because we know the added value of diversity in the judiciary.
    But, it is not just on the bench where diversity 
strengthens our judiciary. It is beyond just who sits on the 
bench. It is everybody else who works in a courtroom, 
particularly law clerks. Right? I think you all would agree, 
and please feel to chime in if you do not, that a quality 
clerkship experience was pivotal in your career, and your 
trajectory.
    I mean, it is those clerkship experiences that lead to 
future Federal judges, for future leaders in private practice 
across the country. And so, my question for each of you is, if 
confirmed by this body, and the Senate as a whole, what would 
you do to ensure, and increase diversity in your courtrooms? 
And, we will begin with Mr. Edwards, and go down the row here.
    Mr. Edwards. Thank you, Senator, for the question. And, I 
wholeheartedly agree with you that diversity is very important 
to the judiciary and, particularly, clerkship diversity. I was 
a clerk for two State court judges, it served as a springboard 
for me into private practice, and into the bar. It was an 
opportunity for me to meet all parts of our bar as a law clerk, 
and it really set my career, I think, on a good trajectory.
    If I was so fortunate to be confirmed, I would be very 
intentional about casting a wide net to have as much diversity 
in my office as possible, because I do think that it increases, 
or enhances, public confidence in the judiciary, to have 
diversity in the courts.
    Senator Padilla. Thank you. Mr. Long?
    Mr. Long. I agree, Senator, with everything Mr. Edwards 
just said. I would also say that I think organizations on the 
whole are stronger to the extent that they take into account 
people from diverse perspectives, diverse viewpoints, diverse 
professional experiences, and I--if I am fortunate to be 
confirmed, I will certainly have that in mind, as I look to 
fill my chamber.
    Senator Padilla. Including colleges and universities. But, 
that is a topic for another day.
    Judge Maddox?
    Judge Maddox. Yes. Like Mr. Edwards, I would like to, in my 
answer, go back to my own clerkship experience. And, in my 
first clerkship, I had an opportunity to help coordinate a 
nationwide internship program that was focused on increasing 
diversity among law students who obtain judicial internships. 
And, in that role, I helped recruit qualified law students from 
across the country to think about working in the judge's 
chambers, and to make applications, and to advise them on those 
applications to maximize the success of those applications.
    After I left that clerkship, I continued to be involved in 
the program by helping to screen applicants for a series of 
years. And now, I have the fortune of serving as a judge where, 
now, I am participating in hiring from that program. So, I 
send--I receive applications, and recommendations, through that 
program for potential hiring in my own chambers, and sort have 
come full circle, with respect to my involvement in that 
diversity internship program.
    Senator Padilla. Thank you. Mr. Hadji?
    Mr. Hadji. I will echo the sentiments of my colleagues. 
Diversity is important, and to include diversity of experience, 
and it is important at all stages in one's career, from 
college, and law school, and clerkships, and beyond.
    Senator Padilla. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Chair Durbin. Thanks, Senator Padilla. Senator Hawley--I'm 
sorry----
    Senator Hawley. I think it is Senator Blackburn.
    Chair Durbin. Senator Blackburn. Right.
    Senator Blackburn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Congratulations 
to each of you. I know that you are excited about what the 
future holds for you, and for your families.
    Mr. Edwards, one quick question for you. I had looked 
through your background, and it appears you have a lot of 
experience in civil matters. But, district courts have many 
criminal cases, and I could only find one criminal case, just 
one, where you had been counsel in a criminal case.
    So, build this out for me. You have no experience, 
basically, on the criminal side. So, how would you function in 
that position as a district judge?
    Mr. Edwards. Thank you, Senator. Over the course of my 
career, I have handled several criminal matters, but, you are 
correct that only one as counsel in Federal court. But, in my 
role as First Assistant U.S. Attorney, I have oversight over 
the Criminal Division in our office, as well as the Appellate 
Division in our office. And, over the last 15 or so months in 
that position, I have been involved with the entire criminal 
process, and have learned----
    Senator Blackburn. So, you are confident in your ability--
--
    Mr. Edwards. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Blackburn [continuing]. To move forward handling--
--
    Mr. Edwards. Absolutely, yes.
    Senator Blackburn [continuing]. Criminal cases?
    Mr. Edwards. Yes,
    Senator Blackburn. Okay.
    Mr. Edwards. Thank you.
    Senator Blackburn. Mr. Long, let me come to you, if I may? 
As I went through your record, I noted your time as the Acting 
Chief of Staff for Director Wray, and that caught my attention. 
I noted that you were there in that position when the Hunter 
Biden laptop story broke in October of 2020. Is that correct?
    Mr. Long. In October of 2020, Senator, I would have been 
the Deputy Chief of Staff.
    Senator Blackburn. The Deputy Chief of Staff, okay. And so, 
you were there when the FBI, despite having possession of that 
laptop, refused to correct all the misinformation that was out 
in the media. And, the FBI's mishandling of the Hunter Biden 
laptop is one example of why people think there is a two-tier 
system of justice.
    I did a Telephone Town Hall last night, with several 
thousand Tennesseans on that Telephone Town Hall. And, lack of 
trust with the FBI, just really a disappointment with the 
political cabal inside the FBI, is something that came up 
repeatedly in the questions that people brought to me.
    I noted that you were also there when concerned parents 
that went to school board meetings were labeled as ``domestic 
terrorists.'' And also, during that time, the FBI targeted pro-
life individuals. They allegedly obstructed the Hunter Biden 
tax probe. And this--we need to know what your participation in 
all of this, was.
    So, Senator Graham has already asked you about this, and I 
want to drill a little bit further on this. Did you participate 
in any meetings, any memos, any emails that would have provided 
discussion, advice, or guidance on how to handle the Hunter 
Biden laptop situation? Did you participate in any meetings, 
any writings, any memos, any advice, any guidance on labeling 
parents as ``domestic terrorists'' ? Did you participate in any 
meetings on how to handle parents at school board meetings?
    What was your knowledge of, and your participation in, 
those decisions, in those actions that the FBI carried out, 
during that time that you were there, the Deputy Chief of 
Staff, the Acting Chief of Staff?
    Mr. Long. Well, Senator, let me, maybe, explain my role a 
little bit as the Deputy Chief of Staff at the FBI----
    Senator Blackburn. I think we know. I do not want you to--
my time is going to run out. I want you to answer the question. 
We know what the role is. We know what the job description is.
    Mr. Long. Well, Senator, specifically with respect to the 
Hunter Biden matter, I am a Department of Justice employee.
    Senator Blackburn. Mm-hmm.
    Mr. Long. I am a judicial nominee. That is a pending 
matter, and it would be----
    Senator Blackburn. We fully realize that. I am asking, as 
did Senator Graham, and, I know you did not want to answer his 
question, either. So, why don't you submit for me in writing, 
and include any emails, any memos, anything that you 
participated in. I would like to know.
    Two tiers of justice is one of the main concerns of 
Tennesseans. They want fairness. They want equal treatment.
    And sir, I have a problem with the fact that you were there 
in a leadership role during a time when actions were taken by a 
few people within the FBI that has caused enormous distrust.
    So, I am asking you to submit to me in writing so that we 
know what your participation was in this. It is something that 
has upset this country terribly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Chair Durbin. Senator Hirono.
    Senator Hirono. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To ensure the 
fitness of all nominees who appear before any of the Committees 
on which I sit, I ask the following two initial questions, 
which I will ask each of the panel, which are the nominees, and 
we will start with Mr. Edwards.
    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?
    Mr. Edwards. No, Senator.
    Mr. Long. No, Senator.
    Judge Maddox. No, Senator.
    Mr. Hadji. No, Senator.
    Senator Hirono. Have you ever faced discipline, or entered 
into a settlement, related to this kind of conduct?
    Mr. Edwards. No, Senator.
    Mr. Long. No, Senator.
    Judge Maddox. No, Senator.
    Mr. Hadji. No, Senator.
    Senator Hirono. Thank you. Mr. Edwards, as an Assistant 
U.S. Attorney, you were an attorney in a lawsuit successfully 
requiring local schools to desegregate, and bring in more 
minority students and faculty. What is the importance of these 
desegregation orders to the community, and how do they advance 
our Nation's ongoing commitment to equality?
    Mr. Edwards. Thank you, Senator, for the question. I've--as 
Chief of our Civil Division in the U.S. Attorney's Office in 
the Western District of Louisiana, I assisted my colleagues 
here in Washington with the ongoing consent decree matters 
pending in our district. And, I can say, that all of those 
cases worked toward ensuring that past vestiges of de jure 
discrimination were being remedied.
    Senator Hirono. Thank you for that. Because I do think that 
we still face issues relating to racial discrimination, and 
equality, in our country. That is for certain.
    You also served as chair of the Louisiana Judiciary 
Committee, receiving complaints against State judicial 
officers. So, you evaluated the character and fitness of 
candidates for the State bar, among other things. So, why are 
judicial ethics and judicial integrity important to the justice 
system?
    Mr. Edwards. Senator, judicial ethics is very important to 
public confidence in the judicial system. In courts, generally, 
someone is going to be disappointed in the outcome of a case.
    Senator Hirono. Mm-hmm.
    Mr. Edwards. But, judicial ethics, if properly followed, 
can ensure that everyone has confidence in the process that 
they went through to reach that outcome.
    Senator Hirono. I think I--relating to the fact that our 
Supreme Court does not have a code of ethics, I won't put you 
on the spot with that one, but there are some of us here who 
consider that very important.
    For Judge Maddox, among your speaking engagements, you 
served as a presiding judge in naturalization ceremonies for 
new Americans. These are important civic events that bring 
together communities, and our country's newest citizens.
    What did it mean to you to participate in the 
naturalization ceremonies, and what lessons did you learn when 
you presided over these ceremonies?
    Judge Maddox. Well, thank you for that question, Senator. I 
can say, that my experience presiding at naturalization 
ceremonies may be among the most gratifying experiences that I 
have had as a judge. Never as a judge do you get an opportunity 
to see so many smiling faces in the same place, and everybody 
walk in happy, and everybody walk out happy, where nobody 
loses.
    But, more importantly, the lesson that I draw from each of 
those events is the vast range of experiences that bring the 
people in that room, to that room. And, they meet in the same 
place, but they come from literally all over the world. And, 
there must be something that they hold in common that brings 
them there, and what they hold in common becomes evident in the 
course of that ceremony. They want--they picked this country, 
out of anywhere else in the world, to live out the rest of 
their lives.
    So, there is something special about this country that 
brings everyone into that room, from all over the world. And, 
to be reminded of that----
    Senator Hirono. Mm-hmm.
    Mr. Edwards [continuing]. And the gravity of that, I think, 
is humbling as a judge, and it is a lesson that I take with me 
in my work, throughout my caseload.
    Senator Hirono. We often refer to our country as a country 
of immigrants, except for the Native peoples who were here long 
before the white people came. So, yes, I think it is really 
important that the naturalization ceremonies, which I have also 
participated in, both as a naturalized citizen, but also, as a 
Member of Congress, have been very, very touching to see all 
these people who come to our country with the promise that our 
country holds for a better life for themselves, and their 
families. That is very, very obvious. And, there are tears, 
and, as you say, a lot of smiles. Thank you very much for your 
participation in these very important ceremonies. Thank you, 
Mr. Chairman.
    Chair Durbin. Thanks, Senator Hirono. Senator Hawley.
    Senator Hawley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Congratulations to 
the nominees.
    Mr. Long, I did not understand your answer to Senator 
Blackburn. So, I just wanted to come back to that for a second, 
if I could? She asked you if you'd participated in any meetings 
at all related to the Hunter Biden laptop. Was that a yes or a 
no?
    Mr. Long. Senator, as a Department of Justice employee 
bound by Section 1-7 of the Justice manual, as well as a 
judicial nominee, it is not appropriate for me, and I am bound 
not to----
    Senator Hawley. Why--wait, wait, wait, wait. Why isn't it 
appropriate for you as a judicial nominee? This does not have 
anything to do with any case that you have. Right? I am asking 
you what you did in your former employment as the Deputy Chief 
of Staff to the FBI Director. Did you participate in any 
meetings related to the Hunter Biden laptop?
    Mr. Long. Senator, again, as a Department of Justice 
employee----
    Senator Hawley. It sounds like you are not going to answer 
me. Is this going to be a, ``I am not going to answer you'' 
type deal?
    Mr. Long. Senator, I am bound to follow the Code of 
Judicial Conduct----
    Senator Hawley. The Code of Judicial Conduct does not have 
any bearing on this question, whatsoever. What possible bearing 
could it have? That is a question mark.
    Mr. Long. Well, Senator, as the Code of Judicial Conduct 
requires integrity, and independence in the judiciary. It 
requires judicial officers to act with----
    Senator Hawley. It is not a ``get out of jail free'' card, 
when you do not want to answer questions when you are under 
oath before a Committee who is considering you for a lifetime 
appointment to the Federal bench. I am going to try one last 
time.
    Did you participate in any meetings during your time as 
Deputy Chief of Staff, or Acting Chief of Staff, related to the 
Hunter Biden laptop, yes or no?
    Mr. Long. Senator, again, I am not permitted to answer.
    Senator Hawley. Oh, you are permitted to answer. You do not 
want to answer because it would be inconvenient for you. And, I 
have to tell you, I find that extremely troubling, Mr. Long. 
Extremely troubling. Not a good start.
    Let's see if we can do better on a different topic. While 
you were at the Department of Justice--sorry, at the FBI, in 
your capacity as Deputy Chief of Staff, and Acting Chief of 
Staff, did you ever observe FBI resources being used to monitor 
pro-life groups, or pro-life individuals?
    Mr. Long. No, Senator. I do not have any information about 
that.
    Senator Hawley. What about Catholic parishes, or Catholic 
groups?
    Mr. Long. No, Senator.
    Senator Hawley. Now, I notice you are happy to answer those 
questions, but you are not happy to answer the Hunter Biden 
questions--they are not qualitatively different. I would just 
like to note that for the record.
    Are you familiar [holds up document] with this memo 
generated by the FBI field office in February--sorry, in 
January of 2023, regarding the infiltration of Catholic 
parishes by the FBI? I am sure you have seen this in the news.
    Mr. Long. I have not seen that memo, but, I have seen news 
reports relating to that memo.
    Senator Hawley. Well, let me tell you what is in the memo. 
In the memo, the FBI field office, in Richmond, recommends 
infiltrating Catholic parishes that it deems traditionalists, 
associated with the Latin Mass, recruiting FBI informants, 
within those parishes, to monitor speech within the parishes.
    The House Judiciary Committee has later learned, this is in 
a letter dated April 10, 2023, that the FBI relied on, at 
least, one undercover agent to produce its analysis, in this 
memo, and the FBI has proposed that its agents engage in 
outreach to Catholic parishes to develop sources among the 
clergy.
    Did any of this occur while you were at the FBI?
    Mr. Long. Senator, I have not been at the FBI in over 2 
years.
    Senator Hawley. That is not my question. Did any of this 
occur while you were at the FBI? Did you see anything like this 
happening while you were at the FBI?
    Mr. Long. I did not, Senator.
    Senator Hawley. Do you think it is appropriate?
    Mr. Long. Senator, I have not worked at the FBI in close to 
2 years.
    Senator Hawley. I am not asking you that. I am asking do 
you think that this--do you think this [holds up document] is 
appropriate? Do you think it is appropriate to recruit 
informants in Catholic parishes?
    Mr. Long. Senator, I do not know the circumstances 
underlying that memo. I have not reviewed that memo. It would 
not be appropriate for me to comment on it.
    Senator Hawley. Well--it is not appropriate for you to 
comment on whether or not the Federal Government of the United 
States should be infiltrating religious entities, and 
organizations, and trying to recruit informants, and sources, 
in the clergy? You do not have an opinion on that? You want a 
lifetime Federal appointment to the judiciary to conduct 
impartial justice, but, you can't say that this [holds up 
document] is inappropriate?
    You know, let me give you a refresher course. The Attorney 
General of the United States sat right where you are sitting, 
and he could not run away fast enough from this. He said it was 
a gross abuse of Department authority. He claimed that it had 
never happened. He was not telling the truth, as it turns out.
    But, he said that if it was happening, he would put a stop 
to it immediately--immediately. Because it was grossly 
inconsistent with the First Amendment of the Constitution of 
the United States. Can you say that?
    Mr. Long. Senator, that was not--that memo and the conduct 
that it relates to was not anything that I would have 
discussed----
    Senator Hawley. I am not asking you that. I am asking you 
whether or not you can say, as a jurist, as a lawyer, as a 
member of the bar, as an American, whether this [holds up 
document] is appropriate--to be recruiting informants in 
Catholic churches, to be using Federal Government resources to 
go after clergy in Catholic churches, to be designating, and 
treating, members of Catholic parishes as terrorists. Is that 
appropriate or not?
    Mr. Long. Senator, again, based upon my experience at the 
FBI, this was not something that we ever discussed. This was 
not--I have never seen that memo before. It would not be 
appropriate for me to comment.
    Senator Hawley. I cannot believe your answers. I cannot 
believe that any--I can't believe anybody who would come before 
this Committee, would look at this, and look at what they have 
tried to do, and just listen to the Attorney General, for 
heaven's sake, and would not say it is grossly inappropriate. 
This should never happen. I am absolutely stunned by this. And, 
for that reason, among others, I cannot support your 
nomination. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Chair Durbin. Senator Lee.
    Senator Lee. Mr. Maddox, I would like to start with you. In 
2000, you worked for a group called ACORN, the Association of 
Community Organizations for Reform Now. It is a left-wing 
organization, an advocacy group mired in scandal over 
allegations of election interference, embezzlement, and other 
illicit activities.
    What were your responsibilities in that role, when you 
worked for ACORN?
    Judge Maddox. Good morning, Senator. I worked for ACORN 
approximately 23 years ago for a couple of months, and my role 
was primarily focused on the membership drive where I visited 
and canvassed neighborhoods in Washington, DC, recruiting 
members for the organization.
    Senator Lee. Did you ever participate in ACORN's voter 
registration drives?
    Judge Maddox. You know, Senator, looking back, I am not 
sure whether there was a voter registration component to 
recruiting members to the organization. I think that that is 
possible. I do not specifically remember it. And, I have to 
note that you mentioned a scandal earlier. It is my 
understanding that that scandal arose several years after my 
involvement in ACORN ended, and I did not witness any voter 
registration fraud, and certainly did not participate in any.
    Senator Lee. You were there in 2000, and left thereafter?
    Judge Maddox. Correct, sir.
    Senator Lee. Okay. Now, you said it in your bio, that you 
had been a member of the American Constitution Society starting 
in 2008. Is that correct?
    Judge Maddox. As a law student, I was a member of the 
organization at Yale Law School. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Lee. Okay. Now, the American Constitution Society 
is advocating very strongly for what they characterize broadly 
as, quote, ``Supreme Court reform.'' If you go to the 
organization's website, it puts a little bit more detail on the 
matter. It says, quote, ``Our Supreme Court is in a full-
fledged legitimacy crisis. Put simply, we no longer have a 
Supreme Court that can be trusted to uphold constitutional 
rights, democratic principles, and judicial norms, in this 
country,'' closed quote. Let's just pause right there. I have 
got more I want to read from that.
    Do you agree with that, so far?
    Judge Maddox. Senator, my involvement with ACS ended at the 
time that I graduated from law school, and I am not aware of 
any positions that they have taken on this particular issue. 
But, as a sitting judge, I am bound to follow the precedents 
set by the Supreme Court, and I do so, faithfully, in my work, 
and I will continue to do so, if I have the fortune of being 
confirmed for a district judgeship.
    Senator Lee. Do you agree with the assertion made in the 
statement that I just read to you?
    Judge Maddox. Senator, as a sitting judge, I do not believe 
it would be appropriate for me to comment on that particular 
issue. That issue could be an issue that comes before me in my 
role as a judge, and I do not believe that it would be proper 
for me to comment on that.
    Senator Lee. Right. Well, I would certainly hope that as a 
sitting judge, or as a judicial nominee to become a judge, you 
could not reach any comment other than to say, I disagree with 
it. I mean, this is calling into question the legitimacy of the 
Court. It is saying that we no longer have a Supreme Court that 
can be trusted to uphold constitutional rights.
    Are you saying you take no position as to that, and that 
you cannot take any position as to that?
    Judge Maddox. I was referring to any arguments that that 
organization may have to support the position that you have 
been describing. I can say that as a judge, I treat the Supreme 
Court's majority opinions as the law, as the state of the law. 
And, I apply it in the cases where it applies. Any cases before 
me, that come before me in my role as a judge, I apply relevant 
Supreme Court cases.
    Senator Lee. Why would it be asking too much for you to 
say, I disagree with ACS' characterization that the Supreme 
Court cannot be trusted to uphold constitutional rights?
    Judge Maddox. I follow the Supreme Court in everything that 
I do, Senator. It is the--they set the supreme law of the land, 
and I follow that law, and apply it in my cases.
    Senator Lee. Even as----
    Judge Maddox. As far as I am concerned, the Supreme Court 
is a legitimate institution.
    Senator Lee. Okay. And, an institution that can be trusted 
to uphold constitutional rights?
    Judge Maddox. That is the institution that is charged with 
upholding constitutional rights, Senator, and I follow their 
direction.
    Senator Lee. Now, let me continue with the quote. It goes 
on to say, ``This is the result of the right packing the 
Supreme Court and of the Court's resulting conservative super 
majority being driven by a staunchly partisan agenda that is 
increasingly hostile to fundamental rights and judicial 
norms,'' closed quote. Let's unpack that one, and let's go to 
the first part of that sentence: ``This is result of the right 
packing the Supreme Court.''
    Do you agree with that characterization? Has anyone packed 
the Supreme Court in your lifetime?
    Judge Maddox. I understand that the Supreme Court Justices 
have been duly appointed to those positions. They were 
nominated by the President at the time of their appointment, 
and the Senate confirmed their nominations. And, that is how--
that is the process that each one of those Justices underwent 
that got them to the Supreme Court, and that is the law. That 
law was followed in each of those instances.
    Senator Lee. And, in fact, the number of Justices on the 
Supreme Court has not changed in over 150 years. So, do you 
agree with the characterization that they have packed the 
Supreme Court, that anyone has packed the Supreme Court--in 
your lifetime, in the last 100 years, in the last 150 years?
    Judge Maddox. Again, Senator, I am not familiar with the 
positions that this organization has taken on this particular 
issue. I am not sure----
    Senator Lee. I just told you that position. They said that 
the Court has been packed.
    Judge Maddox. But, I am really not sure what they mean by 
``packed.'' I think that the persons who occupy the seats on 
the Supreme Court currently were duly appointed to those 
positions.
    Senator Lee. Okay. I am out of time. Let me just finish 
with one thought here. They characterized the Court, at the end 
of that sentence, as, quote, ``increasingly hostile to 
fundamental rights and judicial norms.''
    Do you agree, or disagree, with that statement?
    Judge Maddox. I would not agree with the statement that 
they have been hostile to fundamental rights, Senator.
    Senator Lee. Thank you.
    Chair Durbin. Thank you very much. I thank the nominees for 
gathering today, and the families for being part of this 
process.
    Before we adjourn, I am going to take a quick logistical 
note and make record of it. Questions for the record will be 
due to the nominees by 5 p.m. on Wednesday, July 19, and the 
record will likewise remain open until that time to submit 
letters and supplemental materials.
    And with that, this hearing stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 11:32 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
    [Additional material submitted for the record follows.]

                            A P P E N D I X

              Additional Material Submitted for the Record

               [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                                 [all]