[Senate Hearing 118-352]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                       S. Hrg. 118-352

                NOMINATIONS OF SHERRI M. BEATTY	ARTHUR,
                   RAHKEL BOUCHET, ERIN C. JOHNSTON,
                    RAY MCKENZIE, AND JOHN C. TRUONG

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

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                              COMMITTEE ON
               HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS


                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                NOMINATIONS OF SHERRI M. BEATTY-ARTHUR,
            RAHKEL BOUCHET, ERIN C. JOHNSTON, RAY MCKENZIE,
   AND JOHN C. TRUONG TO BE ASSOCIATE JUDGES, SUPERIOR COURT OF THE 
                          DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

                               __________

                              JUNE 4, 2024

        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov

                       Printed for the use of the
        Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
        
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                               
                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
54-045 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2024                    
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------     

        COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

                   GARY C. PETERS, Michigan, Chairman
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware           RAND PAUL, Kentucky
MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire         RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona              JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada                  MITT ROMNEY, Utah
JON OSSOFF, Georgia                  RICK SCOTT, Florida
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut      JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
LAPHONZA BUTLER, California          ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas

                   David M. Weinberg, Staff Director
                  Claudine J. Brenner, Senior Counsel
              Devin M. Parsons, Professional Staff Member
           William E. Henderson III, Minority Staff Director
              Christina N. Salazar, Minority Chief Counsel
                  Andrew J. Hopkins, Minority Counsel
                     Laura W. Kilbride, Chief Clerk
                   Ashley A. Gonzalez, Hearing Clerk

                            C O N T E N T S

                                 ------                                
Opening statements:
                                                                   Page
    Senator Peters...............................................     1
    Senator Butler...............................................    13
    Senator Hawley...............................................    15
    Senator Carper...............................................    18
    Senator Marshall.............................................    20
    Senator Lankford.............................................    23
Prepared statements:
    Senator Peters...............................................    27

                               WITNESSES
                         Tuesday, June 4, 2024

Sherri M. Beatty-Arthur, to be an Associate Judge, Superior Court 
  of the District of Columbia
    Testimony....................................................     2
    Prepared statement...........................................    28
    Biographical and professional information....................    30
    Responses to post-hearing questions..........................    51
Rahkel Bouchet, to be an Associate Judge, Superior Court of the 
  District of Columbia
    Testimony....................................................     4
    Prepared statement...........................................    54
    Biographical and professional information....................    56
    Responses to post-hearing questions..........................    76
Erin C. Johnston, to be an Associate Judge, Superior Court of the 
  District of Columbia
    Testimony....................................................     6
    Prepared statement...........................................    77
    Biographical and professional information....................    79
    Responses to post-hearing questions..........................    96
Ray McKenzie, to be an Associate Judge, Superior Court of the 
  District of Columbia
    Testimony....................................................     8
    Prepared statement...........................................    97
    Biographical and professional information....................    99
    Responses to post-hearing questions..........................   125
John C. Truong, to be an Associate Judge, Superior Court of the 
  District of Columbia
    Testimony....................................................     9
    Prepared statement...........................................   127
    Biographical and professional information....................   129
    Responses to post-hearing questions..........................   152

 
                             NOMINATIONS OF
                        SHERRI M. BEATTY-ARTHUR,
                   RAHKEL BOUCHET, ERIN C. JOHNSTON,
                    RAY MCKENZIE, AND JOHN C. TRUONG

                              ----------                              


                         TUESDAY, JUNE 4, 2024

                                     U.S. Senate,  
                           Committee on Homeland Security  
                                  and Governmental Affairs,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in 
room SD-342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Gary Peters, 
Chair of the Committee, presiding.
    Present: Senators Peters [presiding], Carper, Hassan, 
Rosen, Blumenthal, Butler, Lankford, Hawley, and Marshall.

             OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PETERS\1\

    Chairman Peters. Today, we are considering five nominees to 
be the Associate Judges on the Superior Court of the District 
of Columbia; Sherry Beatty-Arthur, Rahkel Bouchet, Erin 
Johnston, Ray McKenzie, and John Truong. Welcome to each of one 
of our nominees, and to your friends, and your family members 
who I know are joining you. We welcome all of you here to this 
Committee, and congratulations on your nominations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The prepared statement of Senator Peters appears in the 
Appendix on page 27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Thank you. That's a very sincere thank you for your 
willingness to take on a very challenging role at the DC 
Superior Court as a judge. The DC Superior Court functions as 
the State-level trial court here in the nation's capital. The 
court handles some of the highest case volumes in the country 
and is strained further by extended vacancies on the bench.
    Every day, judges in the superior court decide matters that 
impact the freedom, the livelihoods and safety of individuals 
and families all across the District of Columbia. Currently, 13 
of the 62 seats on the current court are vacant, delaying 
cases, and placing serious burdens on current judges.
    This Committee has advanced seven superior court nominees 
this Congress, but most are unfortunately still waiting to be 
confirmed by the full Senate. I am glad that we will be voting 
on two of these nominees, however, later today. Tanya Jones 
Bosier and Judith Pipe both currently serve as magistrate 
judges on the Superior Court, and have dedicated their legal 
careers to serving the people of the District of Columbia. I 
urge my colleagues to join me in supporting these well 
qualified nominees, and I hope we will be able to fill the 
remaining vacancies for the court very soon.
    To the nominees here today I look forward to learning more 
about your qualifications, as well as your plans for serving 
the superior court bench. It's the practice of the Homeland 
Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC) to swear in 
witnesses. If each of you would please stand and raise your 
right hand.
    Do you swear the testimony that you give before this 
Committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but 
the truth, so help you, God
    Ms. Beatty-Arthur. I do.
    Ms. Bouchet. I do.
    Mr. Johnston. I do.
    Ms. McKenzie. I do.
    Mr. Truong. I do.
    Chairman Peters. Thank you. You may be seated.
    Our first nominee is Sherry Beatty-Arthur, nominated to be 
the Associate Judge on the Superior Court of the District of 
Columbia. Judge Beatty-Arthur has served as a magistrate judge 
from the Superior Court since 2020. Prior to her appointment as 
a magistrate judge, she served as an administrative law judge 
(ALJ) for the District of Columbia Office of Administrative 
Hearings, and earlier in her career, Judge Beatty-Arthur held 
positions at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the 
Public Defenders Service (PDS) for the District of Columbia, as 
well as private practice.
    She received her Juris Doctor (JD) from Howard University 
School of Law in 1998, her Bachelor of Arts (BA) from the 
University of Maryland College Park in 1995, as well as a 
Masters of Business Administration (MBA) from the University of 
Maryland University College in 2011.
    Judge, welcome to the Committee. You may proceed with their 
opening remarks.

  TESTIMONY OF SHERRI M. BEATTY-ARTHUR,\1\ TO BE AN ASSOCIATE 
       JUDGE, SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

    Ms. Beatty-Arthur. Thank you very much.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The prepared statement of Ms. Beatty-Arthur appears in the 
Appendix on page 28.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Chair Peters, Ranking Member Paul, and Members of the 
Committee, I am humbled and honored to appear before you today 
as you consider my nomination to be an associate judge of the 
Superior Court of the District of Columbia.
    I would like to thank the Committee staff for his time and 
dedication and preparing for this hearing. I would like to 
thank President Joseph Biden for nominating me. I would also 
like to thank all the members of the District of Columbia 
Judicial Nomination Commission (JNC), especially it's Chair, 
the Honorable Marie Johns for recommending me to the White 
House, and to the former Chair, the Honorable Emmett Sullivan 
for his continued support. I would also like to thank Chief 
Judge Anita Josey-Herring for her leadership and constant 
encouragement and former Chief Judge Robert Morin for 
appointing me as a magistrate judge to superior court in 2020.
    I am very proud to say I am a native Washingtonian, and my 
education and career has been in Washington DC or its nearby 
jurisdictions, but my story really begins in rural Alabama and 
North Carolina through my parents, Howard, and Wynell. My 
father came to Washington after serving this country in the 
U.S. Air Force (USAF) in the early days of Vietnam, and my 
mother traveled here from Alabama the day after her graduation, 
seeking new opportunities. My parents came here and made a good 
life for me and my brother, Tony. They taught us that if we 
worked hard in both school and our professional lives, anything 
would be possible. Frankly, they gave up everything so that we 
could have everything. My dad passed away in 2001, but I 
continue to carry his many lessons with me, especially about 
the importance of hard work. I would also like to thank my 
mother, Wynell Beatty, who is here with me today, for her 
never-ending encouragement and for constantly championing the 
importance of my education.
    I would also like to thank my brothers, Tony and Reggie, my 
in-laws, Errol and Violet Arthur, who are also here with me 
today. My sisters-in-law, Sheyna Arthur, and Justine Jaquez, my 
brother-in-law, Justin Jaquez, my nephews Kevin, Isaiah, 
Jeromy, and Jacob for cheering me on in all of my pursuits. I 
must thank all of my friends who keep me in constant prayer.
    I reserve a special thanks to my husband and best friend, 
the Honorable Errol R. Arthur, who is here with me today. Errol 
and I are birds of the same feather, and for 31 years he's been 
a constant and unwavering support. Errol and I have walked 
together in our lifelong pursuits in public service, and I 
would not be here without him.
    I also would like to say I am the proud mother of two 
spectacular children. I am joined by my son, Miles Arthur, who 
is a proud graduate of Morehouse College, and my daughter, 
Layla Arthur, who is a rising senior at Spelman College.
    It has been an honor and a privilege to serve at the 
Superior Court of the District of Columbia, where I began my 
career as a student attorney with DC law students in court 
almost 25 years ago. Thereafter, I began a legal career 
handling employment law cases at both the United States 
Department of Agriculture (USDA) and at the United States 
Securities and Exchange Commission.
    After that, I worked as a partner at Arthur & Arthur, 
professional limited liability company (PLLC), where I 
represented clients and family law, cases of small business 
development and other civil matters. Thereafter, I served as a 
Director of human resources (HR) for the Public Defender 
Service for the District of Columbia.
    After that, I served as an administrative law judge for 
District of Columbia at the Office of Administrative Hearings, 
where I heard thousands of cases in every jurisdiction, 
including public works, unemployment, compensation, licensing 
and enforcement, and rental housing. Since 2020, I have been a 
magistrate judge for the District of Columbia, where I have 
presided over, again, thousands of cases in paternity and 
support, juvenile new referrals, and an abuse and neglect.
    It has been an honor to serve the citizens of Washington, 
DC throughout my career. I am humbled by this opportunity, and 
if confirmed as an associate judge, I will continue to serve my 
community.
    I look forward to answering any questions you may have, and 
thank you for your time.
    Chairman Peters. Thank you, Judge.
    Our next nominee is Rahkel Bouchet. Judge Bouchet has 
served as a magistrate judge for the District of Columbia 
Superior Court since 2016, and is currently the deputy 
presiding magistrate judge.
    Prior to joining the bench, Judge Bouchet spent over 15 
years in private practice focusing on family and criminal law. 
She also previously served as the supervising attorney for the 
Child Welfare and Family Justice Clinic at Howard University 
School of Law from 2013 to 2015. Judge Bouchet received her JD 
from Howard University School of Law in 1997, and her BA cum 
laude from Howard University in 1993.
    Judge Bouchet, wonderful to have you here. You may proceed 
with your opening remarks.

   TESTIMONY OF RAHKEL BOUCHET,\1\ TO BE AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE, 
           SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

    Ms. Bouchet. Mr. Chair, and distinguished Members of the 
Committee, thank you for this opportunity to appear before you 
as you consider my nomination to be an associate judge of the 
District of Columbia Superior Court.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The prepared statement of Ms. Bouchet appears in the Appendix 
on page 54.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I am deeply grateful, humbled, and honored to appear before 
you. I would like to also express my sincere appreciation to 
the Committee Members and dedicated Committee staff for 
considering my nomination. I would like to thank the District 
of Columbia Judicial Nomination Commission, particularly as 
former Chair Judge Emmett Sullivan for recommending me to the 
White House, and I am grateful to President Joseph R. Biden for 
nominating me for this position. I want to thank Chief Judge 
Anita Josey-Herring for her support and leadership.
    I am grateful to God for being here, and I would like to 
begin by introducing my family, many of whom are here today 
with me. My mother, Attorney Margo Bouchet, upon whose bold 
shoulders I stand, for her guidance, love, and support. As a 
single mother, she gave me the foundation of faith and taught 
me to be a woman of integrity, to work hard and to strive for 
excellence.
    I want to acknowledge my maternal grandmother, Alma Pearl 
Rivero, the matriarch of my family, who had dreams of being a 
lawyer but never attended college. She passed away in December 
2020. I am proud that she witnessed her dreams manifested in me 
and my appointment to the bench as a magistrate judge. I know 
that she's here in spirit.
    I want to acknowledge my children, Dominique Jackson, a 
determined young woman, and a proud third generation from my 
alma mater, Howard University. She just completed her first 
year at Howard University College of Dentistry. My son, Stephen 
Jackson, a brilliant young man. He's a rising junior at 
Morehouse College, majoring in film and television, and a minor 
in Mandarin, and also a concentration in Spanish.
    I was a single mother during most of their formative years, 
and they have been my reason for being my inspiration and my 
greatest source of joy and pride, and I love you both. I want 
to also acknowledge my daughters, Erinn Fontno, a courageous 
and driven young woman, and Laurynn Fontno, an extremely 
talented culinary artist who have lovingly accepted Dominique, 
Stevie, and me into their lives.
    It has been such a blessing to watch my children blossom 
into the strong women and young man they are today. I hope that 
this moment is a testament to all my children as to what is 
possible when you walk in faith and refuse to accept 
limitations for yourself. I must thank my wonderful husband, 
Eddie Fontano, an exceptionally talented artist, for his 
unwavering support and unconditional love. Thank you for being 
my best friend, an amazing husband, and a loving father to all 
of our children.
    I want to acknowledge my brothers Tony and Terry Williams, 
my godparents Thomas and Mary Leonard, my aunt Sandra Bolden, 
and my uncle Emil Rivera, who are here today in support. I 
would also like to thank my extended family and dear friends 
for their love and encouragement.
    I must acknowledge former Chief Judge Satterfield for 
giving me the opportunity to serve as a magistrate judge, and 
former Chief Judge Robert Morin, for encouraging me to apply 
for this position. I want to acknowledge my court family, in 
particular, my magistrate judges colleagues. Without them, the 
Superior Court would grind to a halt.
    I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge our judicial 
administrative assistants in the magistrate judges' chambers, 
law clerks, and my colleagues on the bench who have mentored 
and supported me throughout my career. I must also acknowledge 
Attorney Gregory (AG) Copeland, whose advice and counsel set me 
on a course that led to this moment.
    I was born in Los Angeles, California, and initially moved 
to the District of Columbia to follow in my mother's footsteps 
and attend Howard University and Howard University School of 
Law. In 2007, I returned to the District of Columbia to start 
my private practice, appearing primarily in the DC Superior 
Court.
    During my years as a sole practitioner, I represented the 
district's most vulnerable families, and I had the honor of 
supervising the Child Welfare/Family Justice Clinic at Howard 
University School of Law, overseeing talented law students, and 
helping shape them into lawyers.
    In 2016, I was appointed as magistrate judge with the DC 
Superior Court, and I have had the honor of presiding over many 
of the district's high-volume courtrooms in the family, 
domestic violence, civil and criminal divisions, with the 
necessary humility and integrity to ensure that the law is 
upheld and that litigants have a fair and just experience.
    I am confident that I am well equipped to take on the added 
responsibility of being an associate judge because I bring 
diverse experience as a litigator and magistrate judge.
    Thank you for considering my nomination.
    Chairman Peters. Thank you, Judge.
    Our next nominee is Erin Johnston. Ms. Johnston is 
currently a litigation partner at Kirkland & Ellis, limited 
liability partnership (LLP) in Washington, DC where she has 
practiced since 2007. During her time at Kirkland & Ellis, Ms. 
Johnson has handled a wide range of complex commercial matters, 
including fraud, antitrust, securities, government 
investigations, and appeals. She has also maintained a robust 
pro bono practice representing many clients in the DC Superior 
Court.
    Ms. Johnston received her JD from New York University 
School of Law in 2007, and her BA laude from the University of 
California Los Angeles in 2003.
    Ms. Johnson, welcome to the Committee. You may proceed with 
your opening remarks.

  TESTIMONY OF ERIN C. JOHNSTON,\1\ TO BE AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE, 
           SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

    Ms. Johnston. Chairman Peters, Ranking Member Paul, and 
members of the esteemed committee, thank you for considering me 
for the role of associate justice of the DC Superior Court.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The prepared statement of Ms. Johnston appears in the Appendix 
on page 77.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I would like to thank your staff for their courtesy and 
professionalism. Thank you to the Judicial Nomination 
Commission, and especially its Chair, the Honorable Marie C. 
Johns for recommending me to the White House. I would also like 
to thank President Joseph Biden for nominating me. I am deeply 
grateful to the judges of the DC Superior Court and Chief 
Judge, Anita Josey-Herring for all of the generous 
encouragement I have received throughout this process.
    I am most grateful to my family. I am fortunate to have 
extended family across this country. Here with me today from 
California is my sister Stacey Gomez. She has been by my side 
in every important moment in my life. She was the first to 
envision my nomination to the judiciary, and I thank her for 
her steadfast belief in me and my potential. I reserve special 
thanks for my three children who are also here with me today. 
My children are my inspiration. They make me better, and they 
are my most fun cheerleaders every day.
    My mother worked hard to provide me with the educational 
opportunities available in this country that had not been 
available to her. It was those efforts that enabled me to find 
my way to the New York University School of Law. Since 
graduating from law school, I have lived here in the District. 
It has been a privilege to belong to such a vibrant community 
and to raise my children here.
    I have spent my professional career at the Washington D.C. 
office of Kirkland & Ellis. I have worked on large scale 
litigation involving complex and novel legal issues that 
reflect the vast array of subject matters that touch our 
courtrooms, from contract claims and torts, to statutory 
interpretation and criminal matters. I have taken several cases 
from inception through appeal, gaining extensive firsthand 
experience with every stage of the litigation process.
    The matters that have meant the most to me have been my pro 
bono work. I have spent nearly 2,000 hours on pro bono work 
over the course of my career, including handling several family 
law cases before the D.C. Superior Court. In choosing this 
work, I sought to represent families that otherwise would not 
have had access to counsel during what was often the most 
pivotal and challenging moments of their lives. I saw firsthand 
the impact of the justice system on the residents of the 
district. It would be a privilege to contribute to these cases 
from the bench at the D.C. Superior Court.
    The breadth and depth of my experience have prepared me 
well for the wide range of matters that the D.C. Superior Court 
faces each day. I have learned the value of hard work and 
preparation, how to communicate effectively with people from 
all walks of life, and the importance of the dignity of each 
person involved in the judicial process. In my practice in 
State and Federal courts across the country, I have seen judges 
who embody a reverence for the rule of law, listen with an open 
mind, move matters forward thoughtfully and effectively, and 
lead with steady compassion. If confirmed, this is the kind of 
judge I would endeavor to be. I would be grateful to serve the 
district by dedicating myself in every case to the rule of law 
and providing equal access to justice.
    Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you. I look 
forward to answering your questions.
    Chairman Peters. Thank you.
    Our next nominee is Ray McKenzie. Mr. McKenzie is currently 
a principal at Miles and Stockbridge in Washington, D.C. where 
he recently moved his practice after founding and running a 
boutique law firm specializing in white collar defense and 
compliance from 2019 to 2024.
    Prior to starting his own firm, Mr. McKenzie served as an 
Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA) in the U.S. Attorney's Office 
for the District of Maryland from 2015 to 2019. Earlier in his 
legal career, Mr. McKenzie worked at Skadden, Arps, in 
Washington, D.C., and served as a law clerk on the U.S. 
District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.
    Prior to law school, Mr. McKenzie taught fifth and sixth 
grade at public schools in Virginia--thank you, very important 
and challenging job. We appreciate that. Mr. McKenzie also 
received his JD from the University of Virginia School of Law 
in 2008, and his BA and Master of Teaching from the University 
of Virginia in 1998. He also earned his Master of Divinity from 
Samuel DeWitt Proctor School of Theology at Virginia Union 
University in 2003.
    Mr. McKenzie, welcome. You may proceed with your opening 
remarks.

    TESTIMONY OF RAY MCKENZIE,\1\ TO BE AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE, 
           SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

    Mr. McKenzie. Chair Peters, Ranking Member, and Members of 
the Committee, let me first begin by expressing my appreciation 
to God for allowing me the opportunity to be here today, 
appearing before you. Let me also sincerely thank each of you 
on the Committee and the Members of your staff for your hard 
work and dedication. Thank you for convening this hearing and 
considering my nomination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The prepared statement of Mr. McKenzie appears in the Appendix 
on page 97.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I must express my heartfelt gratitude to the District of 
Columbia Judicial Nomination Commission. It's Chair, the 
Honorable Marie Johns, its Vice Chair, the Honorable Ben 
Wilson, and its other members for their service to the citizens 
of the District of Columbia, and for recommending me to the 
White House. I also express my appreciation to the former 
chairman of the JNC, Honorable Emmett Sullivan, who encouraged 
me to apply to serve as an associate judge, as well as the 
judges on the superior court bench and other courts who have 
been sources of encouragement, information, and inspiration 
throughout this process.
    I also must share my profound appreciation and thanks to 
President Joseph R. Biden for nominating me for this position. 
It is a great honor to be nominated to the court of general 
jurisdiction for the city where my wife and I have lived for 
the last 16 years, and where we are raising our family. As a 
young man growing up on the south side of Richmond, surrounded 
by poverty and other challenges, but shielded and secured by 
faith and love, I could not have imagined I would come to these 
hallowed grounds as a judicial nominee. I am deeply and 
profoundly honored and humbled.
    I have the few of the most important people in my life with 
me here today. My father, the Reverend Dr. Ray McKenzie Jr., 
for whom I am named, is here with me in the flesh. My mother, 
Ingrid, who passed in 2000, is here with me in spirit. She and 
my father instilled in me the importance of faith, service, 
education, and perseverance, which have provided the foundation 
for the person I am although she could not be here today.
    I acknowledge my bonus mother, the Reverend Dr. Faith 
Harris, who has been a loving and restorative partner for my 
father and a supportive encouragement for me. I likewise am 
grateful that one of my siblings, David, is here with me today. 
I recognize the sacrifice he is taking to be here. I am 
grateful for our shared experiences growing up and beyond, and 
I know my late sister Rachel is smiling down on us from heaven.
    I would like to also acknowledge my nieces and nephews, 
Ana, Jess, Joshua, Malaka, Elijah, Alana, Halle, and Jason. 
Additionally, I am very pleased to have with me my godmother, 
Dr. Barbara M. Amos, whose counsel and guidance have been 
invaluable to me and my family throughout the years.
    I have reserved special honor and thanks for my wife, 
Crystal, and my children, affectionately known as the ``Three 
Es'', Ethan, Ella, and Elliot. They are here with us today. 
Without Crystal's love, support, and occasionally her helpful 
and constructive lectures, I would not be here today. Words 
cannot express my gratitude to you and my love for you. The 
joys and challenges of bringing our children and the patience 
they continue to teach me have made me a better man. Relatedly, 
I am pleased to have Crystal's mom, Sharon, who I call Mama 
Hill, with me here today. Thank you.
    Ultimately, I must express deep and sincere gratitude to my 
judicial role model and mentor, Honorable James R. Spencer, who 
hired me as a law clerk out of law school when he was the chief 
judge on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of 
Virginia. Judge Spencer was the consummate trial judge who 
demonstrated keen preparation, humility, and above all, 
fidelity to the rule of law. I will endeavor to demonstrate all 
these attributes should I be confirmed as an associate judge 
for the Superior Court of the District of Columbia.
    In closing, I must note that the law is a second career for 
me. I spent the first seven years out of college as a public 
school educator. Since deciding to take on this new adventure 
in the law, I have had the blessing of serving in a variety of 
roles that I believe have prepared me for this position. The 
opportunity to now return to public service as an associate 
judge on the Superior Court of the District of Columbia is awe 
inspiring. I will draw upon those very experiences as a Federal 
prosecutor, defense attorney, and public school teacher in this 
new role if I am confirmed.
    Thank you for considering my nomination. I look forward to 
answering your questions.
    Chairman Peters. Thank you.
    Our final nominee is John Truong. Mr. Truong is currently a 
deputy chief in the civil division of the U.S. Attorney's 
Office for the District of Columbia, where he has served since 
2013. From 2008 to 2013, Mr. Truong served as assistant U.S. 
attorney in the office's criminal division, where he prosecuted 
misdemeanor and felony crimes in the D.C. Superior Court. 
Earlier in his legal career, Mr. Truong also worked as an 
associate at the law firm Morgan Lewis, and as a law clerk for 
the District Court for the District of Columbia.
    Mr. Truong received his JD from American University in 
1997, his MA in 2003, and his BA from the University of 
Southern California in 1993. Mr. Truong, welcome to the 
Committee. You may proceed with your opening remarks.

 TESTIMONY OF MR. JOHN C. TRUONG,\1\ TO BE AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE, 
           SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

    Mr. Truong. Chair Peters, Ranking Member Paul, and the 
Members of this Committee, I thank you for the opportunity to 
appear before you today for consideration of my nomination to 
be an associate judge of the Superior Court of the District of 
Columbia. I also want to thank your dedicated and hardworking 
staff for the hearing today. I am tremendously grateful and 
honored to be nominated by President Biden earlier this year 
and by former President Trump in 2020. I also want to thank the 
D.C. Judicial Nomination Commission and its chairs, the 
Honorable Marie Johns, as well as a former Chair, Judge Emmett 
Sullivan, for recommend me to the White House.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Truong appears in the Appendix on 
page 127.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I can say with great humility and honesty that I would not 
have attained my many accomplishments without Judge Ricardo M. 
Urbina of the United States District Court for the District of 
Columbia, for whom I had the privilege to clerk. His mentorship 
and friendship have guided me throughout my professional and 
personal life. I also want to thank former U.S. attorneys 
Phillips and Jessie Liu, and the current U.S. Attorney, Matthew 
Graves. I am very fortunate to have served under each of these 
extraordinary leaders.
    I am very grateful for the support of my family and 
friends. Some are here today, and some are watching this 
hearing remotely. I am the proud husband of Sabrina Vasa, an 
accomplished attorney, and an amazing mother. In fact, today is 
also a very special day as it's Sabrina's birthday. Happy 
birthday, honey. I love you. We are truly blessed to have two 
loving daughters, four-year-old Priyanka, and two-year-old 
Anjali, who are the most fun and funny tiny humans I know. They 
are the love and joy of my life, and they are my greatest 
achievement.
    I also want to thank my younger brother, Kent, who is my 
role model and my sister-in-Law, Dr. Bui, for their love and 
support. I am a proud uncle of my niece, Grace, who is a rising 
senior at George Washington University (GWU), and my nephew, 
Ben, a rising senior in high school. They all travelled from 
California to be here with me today. I reserve a special thanks 
to my mother-in-law, Elizabeth Preeti Vickers, who is kind and 
generous with her time and love, and is a dotting grandmother. 
She traveled from Nebraska to be here with us today.
    Ultimately, who I am as a person is because of my parents, 
Brian Truong, and Mai Nguyen. My parents made a courageous 
decision to separate our family to save our lives, not knowing 
whether we would see each other again. My father and I escaped 
from Vietnam, first in a fishing boat, landed in a refugee camp 
in Hong Kong, and eventually immigrated to the United States. A 
year later, my mother and my younger brother traversed that 
same dangerous journey, and the entire family was thankfully 
reunited as ``boat people'' refugees in this country. My 
parents came to this country with little personal possessions 
and did not know the language of our adopted home, but they 
were filled with hope and faith. They instilled in me the value 
of education, good work ethic, and perseverance. My parents 
worked hard and made sacrifices so that I can be here today.
    I have been a part of the D.C. legal community for more 
than 25 years. I began as a Federal judicial law clerk and went 
on to private practice where I worked in complex civil 
litigation for 6 years. I later joined the U.S. Attorney's 
Office for the District of Columbia.
    During my 19 years as a civil and criminal assistant U.S. 
Attorney, I gained a broad spectrum of legal experiences, 
including five years when I worked exclusively in the criminal 
division, where I prosecuted misdemeanor and felony crimes in 
DC. In 2022, I was promoted to become a deputy chief for the 
civil division, where I supervise and counsel assistant U.S. 
attorneys in all aspects of Federal district court litigation.
    It has been a great honor for me to represent the United 
States to enforce the law and to defense its interests in 
courts. I hope to now have the opportunity to serve the members 
of this community in a new role, if confirmed, to be served as 
an associate judge.
    Thank you, again, for considering my nomination. I look 
forward to answering any questions that the committee may have.
    Chairman Peters. Thank you.
    There are three questions that this Committee ask of every 
nominee. I am going to ask each of you just to briefly respond 
with a yes or no. Other questions will require a more detailed 
answer, but this is the straightforward part. Ms. Beatty-
Arthur, we will start with you, and then we will just work down 
the table.
    First question, is there anything you are aware of in your 
background that might present a conflict of interest with the 
duties of the office to which you have been nominated? Judge.
    Ms. Beatty-Arthur. No, Senator.
    Ms. Bouchet. No, Senator.
    Mr. Johnston. No, Senator.
    Ms. McKenzie. No, Senator.
    Mr. Truong. No, Senator.
    Chairman Peters. Second. Do you know of anything, personal 
or otherwise, that would in any way prevent you from fully and 
honorably discharging the responsibilities of the office to 
which you have been nominated?
    Ms. Beatty-Arthur. No, Senator.
    Ms. Bouchet. No, Senator.
    Mr. Johnston. No, Senator.
    Ms. McKenzie. No, Senator.
    Mr. Truong. No, Senator.
    Chairman Peters. Last, do you agree without reservation to 
comply with any request or summons to appear and testify before 
any duly constituted committee of Congress if you are 
confirmed?
    Ms. Beatty-Arthur. Yes, Senator.
    Ms. Bouchet. Yes, Senator.
    Mr. Johnston. Yes, Senator.
    Ms. McKenzie. Yes, Senator.
    Mr. Truong. Yes, Senator.
    Chairman Peters. Great. Thank you.
    Judge Beatty-Arthur and Judge Bouchet, as magistrate judges 
on the D.C. Superior Court, you are all very familiar with the 
impact of the pervasive vacancies that are on the court. Things 
that I talked about in my opening comments. I would like each 
of you, if you would please describe the challenges the court 
currently faces due to these vacancies, and how you and your 
colleagues have adapted. Ms. Beatty you want to start?
    Ms. Beatty-Arthur. Sure. I have been on several high-volume 
courtrooms, specifically paternity and support, which hears 
thousands and thousands of cases. Then I moved on to juvenile 
new arraignments, which are similarly situated. The idea that 
you have to keep in mind is, even though the numbers are high 
when people come to court, they don't, they are not concerned 
about the high numbers. They plan for their day in court. I 
must go there and give them their appropriate time.
    I feel like the judge has the responsibility to set the 
tone in the room, specifically. I always come to court 
prepared. I let the parties know what my expectations are. I 
don't typically allow for many continuances because 
continuances, of course, slow down the court as well. The 
challenge is that it does not matter how many cases there are, 
business must continue. I am well versed on how to handle those 
additional challenges. Thank you.
    Chairman Peters. Yes, Judge Bouchet.
    Ms. Bouchet. I was appointed to the bench in 2016, and I 
have been a magistrate judge for the past eight years. I have 
presided over many of the high-volume calendars in the District 
of Columbia, the civil, family, domestic violence, and criminal 
division.
    As a magistrate judge, we have played a substantial role in 
addressing the vacancies. In an effort to address the backlog 
to ensure that the court meets the needs of the District of 
Columbia, I have found that coming to court prepared and 
familiar with the record, understanding the issues that are 
before the court affords me the time to allow the parties to 
have a fair opportunity to be heard.
    When you set expectations of the parties, especially the 
attorneys, they come to court prepared as well. I am confident 
that the experience and the skills that I have developed as a 
magistrate judge will allow me to help the superior court as an 
associate judge if I am confirmed. Thank you.
    Chairman Peters. Thank you.
    My next question will be directed to Ms. Johnston, Mr. 
McKenzie, and Mr. Truong. We will just start with you, Ms. 
Johnston, and then move down the table. If confirmed, you will 
decide matters that impact the freedom, the livelihoods of the 
families and individuals that are going to come before you.
    My question for each of you is, how will you ensure that 
each person who comes before you has a meaningful opportunity 
to be heard, and especially those who may not be represented by 
counsel?
    Ms. Johnston, you can begin, and then Mr. McKenzie, and Mr. 
Truong.
    Ms. Johnston. Thank you. I believe that it's important, 
especially with unrepresented parties to have strong 
communication skills, and to speak in straightforward terms and 
avoid legal jargon when communicating with any litigants that 
are appearing in court, but especially those who do not have 
counsel with them.
    I think that it's important for judges to come to each 
hearing, fully prepared, and with a mastery of the facts so 
that they can efficiently focus on the key issues, and provide 
an effective resolution to the case for the parties that appear 
before them.
    Chairman Peters. Thank you. Mr. McKenzie.
    Mr. McKenzie. It's very important to have good 
communication skills in communicating, particularly, with pro 
se litigants or litigants who are not represented.
    I have had the great privilege over the last three or four 
years to serve as an arbitrator for the American Arbitration 
Association (AAA) in consumer matters. In many of those cases, 
the parties are not represented, or one side is and one side 
isn't.
    What I endeavor in each of those cases to do is to 
understand fully the law that applies, learn the facts from the 
parties, and be very explicit and clear in what arguments are 
important, what issues I will be considering in a particular 
hearing. I think people need to be heard when they come to 
court, and I will endeavor to do that if confirmed.
    Chairman Peters. Thank you.
    Mr. Truong. I share my fellow nominees' thoughtful 
responses, Senator. I want to add that in addition, if 
confirmed, I would commit to the ideas of due process, which 
means that I would make sure that those represented and 
unrepresented, too, have the opportunity to be heard.
    Meaning, to explain myself clearly, make the courtroom 
proceedings understandable to the lay person, and commit to the 
idea of respecting the litigants, and for those unrepresented 
appearing before me.
    Chairman Peters. Thank you.
    Senator Lankford has deferred his questions. Senator Butler 
you are recognized for your questions.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BUTLER

    Senator Butler. Thank you, Mr. Chair, for holding the 
hearing.
    You noted in your opening remarks and our nominees have 
spoken to the vacancies of the Superior Court of The District 
of Columbia truly does impede the city's residents from 
receiving timely access to justice, and I am glad that we are 
here today to do some work to address that issue.
    I am particularly proud to see that so many of these 
exceptional nominees have California roots. Ms. Bouchet as a 
native, Angeleno, Ms. Johnston as a University of California, 
Los Angeles (UCLA) graduate, and Mr. Truong, University of 
Southern California (USC). I am sure if we dug deep enough, we 
find some California background in our other two nominees as 
well. Needless to say, no matter what State or geography they 
come from, they are incredibly qualified to meet the moment of 
disseminating justice in the District of Columbia.
    With that, I would like to focus my questions on the 
caseload and the tremendous backlog that the residents of the 
district are facing relative to experiencing justice in their 
cases. We know that the Superior Court of the District of 
Columbia serves about 671,000 people in Washington, D.C., and 
the latest statistics show that overall new case filings are 
increasing by 41 percent. Nearly 45,000 filings.
    To that end, I would like to pose to each of you, and in 
this instance, Mr. Truong, we will start with you and work our 
way back. What do you believe are some of the biggest 
challenges that you would face in transitioning to the D.C. 
Superior Court, and what is your plan to ensure a smooth 
transition?
    Mr. Truong. Thank you, Senator. Your question really 
identifies a critical issue confronting superior court at the 
moment. If confirmed to serve as a judge, one of the things I 
believe that can help with the many cases is to move cases 
through the courtroom efficiently.
    With that in mind, I commit to hard work and to prepare 
myself as much as possible for each case, for each issue, and 
to set expectations for the parties appearing before me. One of 
those expectations is that if cases are scheduled for a 
hearing, the hearing will go forward. I believe those 
expectations will make sure that the case will move through my 
courtrooms efficiently, and that should be one of the many 
things to address the case backlog.
    Mr. McKenzie. Thank you, Senator, for the question. I 
believe that there are both external and internal factors that 
judges can employ in order to work efficiently and move cases 
through their courtrooms.
    By that I mean, externally, communication with the lawyers 
and the litigants about what is expected. I believe judges who 
have robust standing orders that set forth clear expectations 
for what will occur in the courtroom is important.
    Those are external factors, in addition to what Mr. Truong 
said, which is folks should have the expectation if a hearing 
is set for a date, it moves forward. There, of course, are some 
due process concerns, and you have to consider whether that's 
good cause for not doing so.
    I think, internally, judges have to hire the right staff 
that are going to be hardworking, mission-focused on getting 
justice to the litigants that appear before the court, and also 
believe you can systematize some things such that they run 
smoothly and efficiently through chambers.
    Ms. Johnston. Senator, the backlog issue that you have 
raised is certainly one of the biggest challenges that any of 
the D.C. Superior Court judges are facing. I think it will be 
very helpful that in my practice, I have had a lot of 
experience dealing with heavy caseloads. I have developed the 
management skills and demonstrated the work ethic that I 
believe will be necessary to address this issue were I to be 
confirmed to the bench?
    Ms. Bouchet. Thank you, Senator. As a magistrate judge for 
the past eight years, I have presided over many of the high-
volume calendars, and I think that that uniquely qualifies me 
to step in the role of an associate judge.
    As the deputy presiding magistrate judge, I am often called 
upon to preside over multiple calendars in different divisions 
in a singular day, and quite often many of the divisions within 
a week. I come to court prepared, and I think that being 
prepared and efficient are the most proactive measures to 
address the cases. Thank you.
    Ms. Beatty-Arthur. Thank you, Senator. I appreciate the 
question, and I agree with my colleagues as well. As a 
magistrate judge, both Judge Bouchet and I both understand that 
the magistrate judges have had to roll up their sleeves to 
assist.
    Quite frankly, the last two years, I was assigned to 
juvenile new referrals, and the caseloads increased 
substantially between 2022 and 2023, but they have to be heard 
within 24 hours. It does not matter how tired I might be or how 
long the day has been, I have to stay there and hear every case 
because they have to come through my courtroom.
    The idea of working hard is not foreign to me. I am 
prepared to do that, and we will continue to do so.
    Senator Butler. Thank you all for those thoughtful 
responses. My last question I would like to direct to Judge 
Bouchet and Mr. McKenzie. You both have backgrounds that 
involve our young leaders, Ms. Bouchet at Howard University and 
Mr. McKenzie as a classroom educator.
    There are instances on the rise where our young leaders are 
finding themselves interacting with our criminal justice system 
and our court system at large. What lessons have you derived 
from your prior experiences working with our young leaders that 
prepare you to meet justice with them in this moment?
    Ms. Bouchet. I was proud to serve as the supervising 
attorney of the Family Justice Clinic at my alma mater, Howard 
University School of Law. It was an opportunity to train the 
young minds of tomorrow's leaders. When I see individuals who 
appear before me, I hope to serve as a message of what is 
possible for them. In my experience, supervising the students 
has also allowed me to have a certain level of understanding 
and compassion as I communicate with individuals when they 
appear before me.
    Mr. McKenzie. I guess the biggest takeaway, and I will keep 
this brief, from teaching is showing my students they yearn for 
boundaries and providing boundaries I think is very important.
    When folks find themselves perhaps in the wrong position, 
on the wrong side of the law, they need to know one, that I am 
an inspiration. I have been where they have been, but also, I 
am here to help them get back to the right path. They need 
rules, and guidelines, and boundaries in order to find 
themselves back on the right path.
    Chairman Peters. Thank you, Senator Butler.
    Senator Hawley, you are recognized for your questions.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR HAWLEY

    Senator Hawley. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
    Congratulations to the nominees. Thank you for being here. 
Ms. Johnston, if I could start with you. You work at a large 
corporate firm here in town, I think. Is that right?
    Ms. Johnston. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Hawley. You, according to the materials you 
submitted, you have represented among other clients, The Boeing 
Company since 2013. Do I have that right?
    Ms. Johnston. That's correct.
    Senator Hawley. According to the same materials for much of 
this representation, you served as the primary or the lead 
counsel for Boeing. Is that correct?
    Ms. Johnston. In certain matters I did.
    Senator Hawley. Is that litigation still ongoing?
    Ms. Johnston. No, it's not.
    Senator Hawley. There's a case in particular I want to ask 
you about. It's a case that featured breach of contract claim, 
fraud claims, and trade secret claims by a company called 
Alabama Aircraft Industries. They allege that Boeing stole 
proprietary information when the two companies were working 
together on a joint bid for an Air Force contract.
    Now, a Federal jury had already determined that Boeing owed 
this company $2.1 million for violating the bidding contract 
and for breaching a non-disclosure agreement. Boeing had 
previously in 2006, paid a $615 million settlement to the 
Department of Justice (DOJ) to settle claims that it had 
illegally obtained competitors' information with lucrative 
government contracts.
    As I am sure you are aware, Boeing has been at the center 
of major concerns about whistleblower retaliation, safety with 
its planes. In fact, we have heard testimony right here in this 
Committee about all of that. Here's what I am getting at. 
Boeing has engaged in corporate behavior in a pattern going 
back years now that shall we say, is less than model. Do you 
have any thoughts about your representation of this company? 
Any regrets, any concerns?
    Ms. Johnston. My work as an advocate, I have been duty 
bound to zealously advocate for my client's best interests. 
That is what I have done. As a neutral judge, I am very mindful 
that my role instead would be to apply faithfully and 
impartially the law to the specific facts that appear before 
me. That is what I would do.
    Senator Hawley. No moral qualms at all?
    Ms. Johnston. I believe that it has always been a strength 
of mine to be able to see the shared humanity in every one of 
my clients, no matter the issue. I understand that as a judge, 
my role would be to fairly and impartially apply the law, no 
matter the parties or the issue that is before me. That is what 
I would do.
    Senator Hawley. Shared humanity. This is a corporation 
though, isn't it? It's one of the biggest corporations in the 
world.
    Ms. Johnston. It is.
    Senator Hawley. One of the most profitable corporations in 
the world. I assume you chose to represent them voluntarily. 
You were not forced to represent Boeing.
    Ms. Johnston. It was the case I was assigned to at my firm.
    Senator Hawley. You continued to do it. You served as lead 
counsel. I thought there's multiple pieces of litigation in 
which you served as primary lead counsel for Boeing. Correct?
    Ms. Johnston. There are multiple Boeing matters that I have 
had.
    Senator Hawley. Let me ask you about a different 
corporation that you have represented. The 3M Corporation, huge 
multinational conglomerate. In this case, the plaintiff was an 
individual named Jonathan Vaughn. He was an Iraq war veteran. 
He alleged that he had suffered hearing loss stemming from his 
use of defective earplugs manufactured by your client. Vaughn 
was awarded $2.2 million in that case.
    Here's a report from the case. The jury decided that 3M's 
earplugs were to blame for his current hearing impairment, 
while also determining the earplugs were unreasonably 
dangerous, according to the verdict form. 3M misrepresented the 
quality of the earplugs and was negligent in their design.
    The report goes on to note that at the time of this 
verdict, this was the 9th of 15 cases against 3M to go against 
them in litigation over these earplugs. Just any conclusions or 
reflections on your involvement in that case?
    Ms. Johnston. Senator, I have had a varied practice 
handling cases that span the spectrum of legal issues and 
representing a wide range of parties throughout my career. I 
believe that the litigation matters and the variation in the 
work that I have done has given me a very strong and versatile 
litigation skillset and a comfort in the courtroom that would 
serve me well, were I to be confirmed to be a judge on the D.C. 
Superior Court.
    Senator Hawley. So, you are not concerned is what I take 
from it. You do not have any regrets about representing either 
of these corporations in these various matters?
    Ms. Johnston. I believe that I have had a strong litigation 
practice throughout my career.
    Senator Hawley. I heard that part, but I am asking if you 
have any regrets, if you have any qualms. Sounds like you do 
not, which is fine. Obviously you are a very talented person. 
You have done terrific work. You were made partner at a very 
early age, so you have a lot of skill. I am just trying to 
figure out why you have chosen to use it and for these 
particular clients.
    Ms. Johnston. I do not have regrets about my career. I 
believe that I have developed a strong litigation skillset that 
would serve me well as a judge.
    Senator Hawley. Fair enough. I have concerns. Obviously, I 
do not love the representation. These big corporate clients, 
these huge corporations, they have so much influence in this 
capital. They have so much influence in our economy. They have 
probably every law firm in America lined up to represent them.
    I just think sometimes we have to ask ourselves, do these 
people doing these kinds of things or ripping off people like 
Jonathan Vaughn, I mean, do they really need our 
representation? Obviously, every client's entitled to a 
vigorous defense. Sure. I am an attorney myself. We still have 
to ask ourselves as attorneys, should we be representing them? 
Do we want to do that? Obviously, it's your judgment. I am not 
suggesting you have done anything wrong. It's a 100 percent 
your judgment and you did your job well, but I have to say, it 
concerns me a little bit.
    I am almost out of time, Mr. McKenzie. I just want to ask 
you one thing really quickly here before my time expires. You 
wrote a letter in 2021 asking then Vice President Pence to 
invoke the 25th Amendment. I just want to quote you to make 
sure I get this right. That's the removal from office 
provision, the unfitness from office provision of the 
Constitution.
    You urged then Vice President (VP) Pence to invoke the 25th 
Amendment against then President Trump to declare to the 
leaders of Congress that, ``The President's unable to discharge 
the powers of his office.'' You went on to say that then 
President Trump, ``was unfit for office, and a reckless and 
wanton threat to the Constitution.''
    Does that still reflect your views?
    Mr. McKenzie. Senator, I do want to correct the record. I 
did not write the letter. I, along with hundreds of other 
folks, signed onto the letter because we were concerned about 
the events of January 6th.
    Senator Hawley. OK. You signed the letter though.
    Mr. McKenzie. Absolutely.
    Senator Hawley. And does that still represent your views?
    Mr. McKenzie. I signed a letter, Senator, that I was 
concerned about January 6th.
    Senator Hawley. Yes. You have not changed your view at all, 
that the ex-President is unfit for office, reckless, and wanton 
threat to the Constitution?
    Mr. McKenzie. Under the judicial code of ethics, if that 
matter were to come before me it would be inappropriate for me 
to state my position at this time. I am precluded from stating 
that position.
    Senator Hawley. I am just trying to figure out if your 
views changed. I think you have answered my question. I think 
your answer is you stand by it. You signed it, you stand by it. 
Is that fair to say? I am not trying to get how you rule on a 
case. I am just trying to figure out--you signed a letter. I 
just want to make sure that you have not changed your views.
    I think you have answered my question. I think you said you 
stand by it. Don't let me put words in your mouth, but is that 
correct? You signed it, you stand by it. Is that fair to say?
    Mr. McKenzie. It is correct that I signed that letter.
    Senator Hawley. OK. We will leave it at that.
    Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Chairman Peters. Thank you, Senator Hawley.
    Senator Carper, you are recognized for your questions.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CARPER

    Senator Carper. Welcome to the Committee on Homeland 
Security and Governmental Affairs, which a long time ago I had 
the privilege to chair and to serve with these fellows and with 
a guy named Tom Coburn that was, I think, your predecessor, if 
I am not mistaken. We have a tradition of being a bipartisan 
committee. We do not see enough of that in the House and Senate 
these days, especially in the House. But hopefully you will see 
it here today.
    I want to thank our distinguished nominees for being here 
this morning, for your willingness to serve on the D.C. 
Superior Court. I am a recovering Governor. There are 
recovering Governors. My staff, my colleagues would say I am 
not really recovered.
    In our State, in a lot of States, Governors nominate people 
to serve on a variety of courts. That's true in Delaware. We 
have advisory committees, you know, who recommend people for 
us. But at the end of the day, in Delaware, the Senate ends up 
taking the hand-off from the Governors.
    It's a pretty good approach, and we try to do it in a 
bipartisan way. We try to do it in a way that we do not waste 
time and that we do not leave the people of Delaware without 
the kind of judiciary that's needed to help people in their 
lives, businesses, and so forth. I come to today's hearing with 
that in mind.
    But every time this Committee holds a hearing on DC 
judicial nominees, my colleagues, they hear me share my concern 
about extensive judicial vacancies on local DC courts. These 
concerns persist to this day because too many vacancies still 
plague the district courts. Last month, the chief judges of 
both the DC Superior Court and the Court of Appeals, sent an 
open letter, an open letter to the U.S. Senate, urging us to 
immediately fill the vacancies on both courts.
    Despite judicial nominees regularly passing out of this 
Committee many with bipartisan support, as I said earlier, 
there is frequently still months-long delay before they are 
confirmed on the Senate floor itself. As my colleagues have 
heard me say more than a few times, justice delayed is justice 
denied.
    Currently, there are six nominees to the DC Superior Court 
that are still awaiting a vote on the Senate floor who have 
passed out of this Committee. I am glad that Senator Schumer 
has filed cloture on two of those nominees, and that these 
nominees should be confirmed, and could be confirmed soon as 
this week. Hallelujah.
    With that said, only one DC judicial nominee has been 
confirmed this entire Congress. I think that's disgraceful. I 
think that's really disgraceful, and it's unacceptable that the 
local DC courts have vacancies that last years because the 
Senate fails to act in a timely way, the system as it stands, 
is not working. We need to reform it.
    I introduced, some of you know, the District of Columbia 
Courts Judicial Vacancy Reduction Act to do just that by 
applying a 60-day congressional review period to DC judicial 
nominees to streamline this nomination process. Faster 
confirmation process in the U.S Senate would help with a 
vacancy crisis and better equip local courts here to serve the 
people of the District of Columbia.
    It's with this in mind that I would move into my questions 
for the nominees. First question. Again, going back to the time 
I served as Governor of Delaware, considering potential 
candidates to serve on Delaware's highly regarded Supreme Court 
and court of chancery.
    I look for a number of characteristic or attributes with 
interest in sound, moral character. I was interested in 
nominees with a complete knowledge of the law, a willingness to 
listen to both sides of an argument, judicial temperament, and 
the ability to make difficult decisions with sound reasoning.
    Could each of you please take a minute to discuss the 
importance of having these attributes as a judge, and how, if 
confirmed, you would bring these qualities to the District of 
Columbia Superior Court as an associate judge? Ms. Beatty-
Arthur, please.
    Ms. Beatty-Arthur. Thank you very much. I think it's 
critical what you are describing. We spent a lot of time today 
talking about the backlog, but still being a good judge and 
full of the appropriate demeanor and character is essential.
    I think that when I think about, for example, my judicial 
philosophy, it needs to be at the forefront that everyone 
deserves an opportunity to be heard. But important with that is 
the ability to objectively apply the law to the facts, and to 
run a courtroom with dignity and respect.
    Also, another idea that it's important to be mindful of is 
that a lot of the people that appear in front of us are pro se. 
It's important to be able to use plain language. It's to be 
able to understand when they arrive at the court. I think all 
of those attributes are critical to be a good judicial officer.
    Senator Carper. Great. Thank you for that. Ms. Bouchet.
    Ms. Bouchet. Yes. My judicial philosophy is grounded in the 
principles of fundamental fairness, judicial integrity, 
neutrality, affording the parties who appear before me, a fair 
opportunity to be heard, to make their arguments, to also apply 
the law faithfully and objectively to their cases, and to 
render timely decisions.
    When parties appear before me who are unrepresented, I take 
the time to make sure that they are aware of the legal 
resources that are available to them so that they can make 
sound legal decisions as I am unable to provide counsel to 
them.
    Senator Carper. Thanks for those comments. Ms. Johnston.
    Ms. Johnston. Senator, to me, the proper role of a judge is 
to faithfully apply the law to the specific facts at hand, and 
to make sure to always do so with a dedication to the rule of 
law, with an open mind and impartiality, and with dignity and 
respect for all of the parties involved in the litigation 
process.
    Senator Carper. Good. Thanks. Mr. McKenzie.
    Mr. McKenzie. Thank you, Senator. I think all of those 
attributes that you mentioned in the lead-up of your question 
are key.
    People come to court because they cannot settle disputes or 
they have gotten into some sort of trouble, but they need to be 
recognized as humans and as people deserving of respect. I 
think judges being able to do that is very important.
    Senator Carper. Thank you. Mr. Truong.
    Mr. Truong. Thank you, Senator. I share my fellow nominees' 
insightful observations. I would like to add that, if confirmed 
as a judge, I will commit to the ideals of impartiality, the 
ideals of fairness, and I will approach each case with an open 
mind, without prejudgment. I believe that is the ideals of 
judicial philosophy.
    Senator Carper. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    If I could have 10 more seconds there. I will never forget 
a conversation I had with one of the people I was interviewing 
for a judgeship in Delaware a long time ago. He invoked the 
golden rule. He said one of the jobs of a judge is to make sure 
that he or she treat other people in the courtroom the way they 
would want to be treated. I think for me, when I am trying to 
figure out what to do, I usually default to the golden rule, 
and I think in this case it's a pretty good guide as well.
    Thanks, Mr. Chair. Thanks to all of you for your 
willingness to serve.
    Chairman Peters. Thank you, Senator.
    Senator Marshall, you are recognized for your questions.

             OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MARSHALL

    Senator Marshall. Thank you, Chair Peters, and welcome to 
our nominees this morning.
    My first two questions are yes/no questions. We are limited 
on time. I hope you can give me a yes or no answer, and if you 
do not, I will have to interrupt you if it's a long one. The 
first one is, do you believe non-citizens are lawfully allowed 
to vote in the District of Columbia elections? Do you believe 
non-citizens are lawfully allowed to vote in District of 
Columbia elections? We will just go down the row here, Ms. 
Beatty-Arthur.
    Ms. Beatty-Arthur. I am not familiar with the case law that 
supports that, so I would not be able to give you an educated 
answer with that.
    Senator Marshall. Ms. Bouchet.
    Ms. Bouchet. Yes, likewise. I am not aware of any law that 
gives them the authority to vote. Thank you.
    Senator Marshall. OK. Ms. Johnston.
    Ms. Johnston. That is not an issue that I have studied, but 
if it were to come before me as a judge, I would certainly 
evaluate the relevant precedent to apply it to the facts at 
hand.
    Senator Marshall. Mr. McKenzie.
    Mr. McKenzie. I am not aware of any law rule in that 
regard, so I cannot say yes or no.
    Senator Marshall. Mr. Truong.
    Mr. Truong. Senator, similarly, I am not aware of the legal 
issues on that.
    Senator Marshall. OK. The follow-up questions. Do you 
believe legal immigrants should be allowed to vote in DC 
elections? Maybe we will start this way and go backwards. Mr. 
Truong.
    Mr. Truong. Thank you, Senator. Again, I am not aware of 
mandates or DC law on that issue, so I am unable to answer that 
question at this time.
    Senator Marshall. Mr. McKenzie.
    Mr. McKenzie. My decision on that, if it were to come 
before me, would be based on the law and controlling precedent. 
I am not aware of it as I sit here today.
    Senator Marshall. Ms. Johnston.
    Ms. Johnston. I am not familiar with any law on that issue 
and would need to review that law before making a decision if 
it were to come before me as a judge.
    Senator Marshall. Ms. Bouchet.
    Ms. Bouchet. As a sitting judge, I am not permitted to 
speak as to policy. If the law was in place and a case came 
before me, I would apply the law to the facts before me. Thank 
you.
    Senator Marshall. Ms. Beatty-Arthur.
    Ms. Beatty-Arthur. Similarly, I am also a sitting judge, 
and I am precluded from making any assessments as to the 
appropriateness of that until it becomes a law.
    Senator Marshall. My next question for Mr. McKenzie. This 
last October, a young person testified before the House 
Judiciary Committee about being the victim of an armed robbery 
on the streets of DC. The criminal responsible was sentenced to 
just one year in prison, despite the criminal having robbed six 
victims and two businesses.
    After his release, the criminal went on to rob two more 
persons at gunpoint. I guess the bigger picture I am after 
here, Mr. McKenzie is, what kind of message does that send to 
criminals in DC, and if confirmed, will you be tough on 
sentencing for violent repeat offenders?
    Mr. McKenzie. Senator, I believe as a father of three, a 
husband of one, public safety is a paramount issue. I am 
concerned about crime everyday living in the city. What I will 
commit to is, if I am confirmed to this position, I will take a 
look at the facts of the case, look at the law that applies, 
and I will impose a fair and just sentence as required by DC 
law.
    Senator Marshall. Ms. Bouchet, would you answer that 
question, too? What kind of message does this send to criminals 
in DC, and if confirmed, will you be tough on sentencing for 
violent repeat offenders?
    Ms. Bouchet. Crime and public safety are concerns of mine. 
I was a single mother with young children, so I appreciate the 
significance of it. I believe the role of the court to address 
crime and public safety is to adjudicate the criminal cases 
that are before them. I would, if confirmed as an associate 
judge, apply the standard guidelines pursuant to our criminal 
code.
    Senator Marshall. I want to continue down this path of my 
personal concern about crime in DC. I am concerned when my 
family is here to walk more than a block or two from the 
Capitol. I am concerned about my staff walking, the safety of 
my staff, walking to and from the Capitol as well.
    In 2023, here in DC, there were 274 homicides, 185 sexual 
assaults, 959 carjackings, 1,400 assaults with deadly weapons, 
6,829 motor vehicle thefts. Just over the last 18 months, 
Members of Congress and their staff have been assaulted, 
carjacked, robbed, and stabbed.
    This last October, the Senate Sergeant of Arms (SSA) put a 
bulletin out recommending that Senate staff drive with their 
windows up, to avoid traveling alone, in order to prevent 
getting carjacked in our nation's capital. Again, 7,000 car 
thefts last year. That's quite a few each day.
    In January, 2023, the DC Council passed a bill that rewrote 
DC criminal code. It eliminated life sentences and got rid of a 
mandatory minimum sentencing for every crime other than first 
degree murder. Under this rewrite, the maximum penalty for any 
individual convicted of using a gun to commit an act of 
violence dropped from 15 to four years. I guess the question to 
all, if you have the time, several of you mentioned this; what 
is your level of concern for crime in the District, and what is 
your role in here? Maybe we will start with Mr. Truong and just 
go down if you got a second.
    Mr. Truong. Thank you, Senator. As a father of a four-year-
old daughter and a two-year-old daughter raising a family in 
Washington, D.C., the crime issue is a forefront issue in my 
family. However, if confirmed as a judge in D.C., I am 
committed to following the guidelines of the applicable laws 
and impose a just consequence when the case is presented to me.
    Senator Marshall. Thank you Mr. McKenzie, you basically 
answered the question already, but anything to add?
    Mr. McKenzie. No, Senator.
    Senator Marshall. Good answer. Ms. Johnston, go ahead.
    Ms. Johnston. As a resident mother raising three young 
children here, I think the public safety in this city is one of 
the most important concerns for the district. If given the 
opportunity to serve as a judge on the DC Superior Court, my 
role would be to swiftly and effectively endeavor to resolve 
cases as quickly as possible so that the parties involved can 
have an appropriate resolution.
    Senator Marshall. Ms. Bouchet, you answered parts of the 
question. Anything you would like to add?
    Ms. Bouchet. I would like to thank the Committee for having 
our nomination hearing. Our court needs more able bodies to 
quickly adjudicate the criminal cases that come before it. I 
think that that is the most powerful tool that we will have to 
address public safety in the District of Columbia.
    Senator Marshall. Ms. Beatty-Arthur.
    Ms. Beatty-Arthur. I am in complete agreement with my 
colleague, Judge Bouchet. That is the best way to assist, and I 
will shout it from the rooftop. I am very proud to be a native 
Washingtonian, but I would be absolutely remiss if I did not 
address the crime problem.
    Chairman Peters. Thank you.
    Senator Lankford, you are recognized for your questions.

             OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LANKFORD

    Senator Lankford. Thank you. Thank you to all of you.
    It's a long process to get to this day. It's a long process 
past this day, as some of you have seen as well, and there's a 
lot that's engaged in this. I really appreciate you being here. 
I appreciate your families being here, and for all of you 
introducing your family, it's great to be able to see a very 
full room today with a lot of family members literally sitting 
behind you as I am sure they have been behind you a lot.
    Mr. Truong, I am tempted to ask every one of my questions 
to you because of the smiling four-year-old over your shoulder 
that every time the camera comes on you, it's fantastic. You 
have no idea what's happening behind you, but it's awesome. You 
will get a chance to watch the video of it later. I am tempted 
to do that, but I am not going to ask you every single question 
on it, but you have been here before on that. Thank you for 
continuing to be patient as we go through this process.
    Mr. Truong. Thank you, sir.
    Senator Lankford. I really do appreciate that. For several 
of you that mentioned your faith, and your own personal 
journey, and your personal life, thanks for the transparency of 
that as well to be able to make that very clear.
    A couple things that I want to just be able to bring up. 
Almost every one of you have either used the term or reaffirm 
that justice delayed is justice denied, and have talked about 
how quick you will move cases. That is one of the prime issues 
for me. It's not just that we have someone there. That if 
someone actually comes that--I will just say it, a lawyer who 
did not do their homework, does not get a slap on the wrist 
from the judge.
    That the judge makes it very clear, we expect you to do 
your homework because I did my homework, and the client that 
you are representing needs justice and needs to be heard. 
Avoiding continuances. Almost all of you have mentioned, and I 
do appreciate that. I would tell you from our side of the dais, 
that's extremely important, and is one of the things that we 
would expect judges in the DC Court to actually do. Is to make 
sure that everyone does their job, to be able to make sure 
everyone has a fair day in court, and they have the opportunity 
to be heard.
    All of you have also mentioned things about fairness to the 
individual. I would just reiterate. You did not have to say it, 
but let me make it clear. Fairness to the victim is also 
extremely important as well. To the potential victims that are 
on the street that they also want to know that they are being 
treated fairly also in the process.
    There is an expectation when people come before you, you 
are representing not only DC, but for the millions of visitors 
that come through DC. That they have an expectation that there 
are judges that are both not delaying cases, but they are also 
equally and fairly applying the law to be able to protect every 
person that's here, and to make sure everyone has their 
opportunity to be able to heard in court. I do appreciate those 
answers that several of you have already given on that.
    I do need to drill down just to be able to clarify some 
things as we have gone through several issues with our staff. 
As we have talked through several things before on this, I want 
to drill down on a couple things. Ms. Arthur--by the way, I 
loved your opening statement on that. That was great. 
Introducing your family, and your faith, and the journey that 
you have had here. Getting a chance to be able to work down the 
hall from your husband will be an interesting journey as well 
on that. That will always be interesting; getting a chance to 
be able to talk cases over dinner and what actually happens 
next.
    You had a statement that you made at one point that I 
wanted just be able to give you the opportunity to respond to. 
You were asked in a talk several years ago just about judicial 
activism, and in that talk, you made the statement, ``I am 
certain that in some unwritten place, in the back of my mind, 
my race is affecting my decisions every day when I have cases 
that involve Black people.''
    So as a person, as just as an entity, I get that statement 
and that perspective. You also made the same statement about, 
``I did not really understand my blackness until I had a black 
son.'' Now, I have several black friends, and they talk openly 
on that journey with their sons and what is like, especially 
with law enforcement interactions.
    I want to give you an opportunity to be able to talk about 
that. Because the reason I say that is if an Asian family is in 
front of you in your court, if a Hispanic family is in front of 
you in court, whoever it may be, I do not want that statement 
to sit in front of them to think; I cannot get a fair hearing 
because I am going to be treated differently than someone else 
in the court.
    I am going to give you an opportunity to respond to that.
    Ms. Beatty-Arthur. Thank you, Senator. But I think what's 
important to note, and I do not recall the exact language I 
used at that talk, but I think what's important to note is that 
judicial activism is never appropriate in the courtroom.
    The statement that I did not really understand, I think 
what you mentioned was the blackness until I had a Black son--
--
    Senator Lankford. Right.
    Ms. Beatty-Arthur. I think it pushed it to the forefront, 
my discussion and thoughts, about being Black. But no matter 
what, when I wake up tomorrow, I will be a Black woman. That is 
still important to me, but who I am does not affect the how I 
handle my cases.
    Between the Office of Administrative Hearings and the 
Superior Court, I have heard thousands of cases, and I push any 
thoughts or ideas about race to the side because every person 
that appears in front of me has an important moment regardless 
of what their race or ethnicity is.
    Judicial activism is inappropriate in the courtroom 
setting. I understand your question, but that's not who I am as 
a judge, and that's how I provide myself in the courtroom 
setting.
    Senator Lankford. OK. That's fair. Thank you for that.
    Mr. Bouchet, several Members that are sitting in front of 
me have had some political activity in the past and donations 
that they have done personally on that. You are one of the 
folks that's here that previous times, previous to being a 
magistrate judge, you have political donations.
    How do you separate your politics from being on the bench 
and trying to say--everyone has a political perspective. 
Everybody does. How do you keep those two things separate when 
it is known what your political perspective is, but you are 
also sitting on the bench trying to be fair and equal?
    Ms. Bouchet. Thank you, Senator. Quite simply, I do not 
consult my personal feelings when I am on the bench. I have, as 
the deputy presiding magistrate judge, as a magistrate judge, 
for the past eight years, I have presided over more than 27,000 
cases and party individuals from all parties have appeared 
before me.
    My role is to consider the facts objectively, apply the 
law, and render a timely decision. That's what I have done as a 
magistrate judge. That is what I intend to do if I'm confirmed 
as an associate judge. Thank you.
    Senator Lankford. OK. Thank you.
    Ms. Johnston, Mr. McKenzie was asked a question earlier 
about a letter that he had signed onto in the past. By the way, 
there's a special place in heaven for sixth grade teachers. I 
just have to tell you that as a former youth pastor myself, 
there's no time in a boy's life more interesting than sixth 
grade. For teachers that teach sixth grade, that's an 
impressive time for you to engage on that.
    Mr. McKenzie answered a question about a letter that he had 
signed onto earlier. You have a letter that you had signed onto 
right after the Dobbs decision. In that letter, it makes a 
statement. ``The court has failed to uphold the promise, at the 
very core, the Constitution, the promise of liberty, 
dispassionate, fair, and equal treatment for all under the 
law.''
    Obviously, the court decision for the Supreme Court in the 
Dobbs decision was really not a decision about abortion so much 
as who should decide on that. It should that be in the court, 
or should that be in the legislature, States, Federal, whatever 
it may be?
    I want to press down on this a little bit just on that 
perspective, because I understand personal perspectives on 
abortion. You and I probably have differences of agreement on 
that, but it's the statement about the Court has failed to 
uphold the promise of the Constitution when really the decision 
was about the Court should not decide this, the people should 
decide this. That's a different constitutional statement on it.
    I want to give you the opportunity to respond to that.
    Ms. Johnston. Thank you, Senator. My personal views would 
not be a factor in my decisions as a judge, and I want to be 
very clear that Dobbs is the law of the land. As a judge, my 
role would be to faithfully apply all binding precedent, 
including Dobbs, to any case that were to appear before me. 
That is what I would do.
    Senator Lankford. I appreciate it. It's not an unknown 
statement on this, and I see them over time. I apologize. We 
have had issues, for instance, in Washington, D.C., where there 
were five children that were found, the bodies that were 
identified, that looks like it was from a late-term partial 
birth abortion, which is not legal in Washington, D.C. Those 
bodies were identified.
    Then there's been this ongoing conversation about what's 
the follow-up. The abortion questions, not so much a question 
that's only Federal, or local, or State, or for the district, 
but it does come in criminal cases as well in trying to be able 
to figure out what to do in a case, as we saw several years ago 
in Philadelphia, where late-term partial birth, illegal 
abortions were being done, and they had to be able to follow 
through on that.
    That could be a case coming before you as well.
    Obviously, you are in Washington, D.C., and it will be 
important that the law is applied no matter what the law is 
based on what preferences are.
    Ms. Johnston. Yes. As a judge, I would be duty-bound to 
follow the law wherever it takes the case, and that is a duty I 
would take very seriously.
    Senator Lankford. Great. Thank you.
    Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Chairman Peters. Thank you. I would like to thank all of 
our nominees for joining us here today, and for your 
willingness to take on these very important and challenging 
positions. The nominees have filed\1\ responses to biographical 
and financial questionnaires,\2\ and without objection, this 
information\3\ will be made part of the hearing record with the 
exception of the financial data,\4\ which is on file and 
available for public inspection at the Committee offices.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The information on Ms. Beatty-Arthur appears in the Appendix on 
page 30.
    \2\ The information on Mr. Bouchet appears in the Appendix on page 
56.
    \3\ The information on Ms. Johnston appears in the Appendix on page 
79.
    \4\ The information on Mr. McKenzie appears in the Appendix on page 
99.
    \5\ The information on Mr. Truong appears in the Appendix on page 
129.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The hearing record will remain open until 12 p.m. tomorrow, 
June 5th, for the submission of statements and questions for 
the record.
    This hearing is now adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 11:19 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                            A P P E N D I X

                              ----------                              

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                 [all]