[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 12, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1803-S1805]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       NOMINATION OF NEOMI J. RAO

  Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, tonight, the Senate is debating another 
Trump judicial nominee who is attempting to run away from appalling 
statements they wrote in the not-so-distant past. This time, it is 
Neomi Rao, who is up for a lifetime appointment to the powerful DC 
Circuit Court of Appeals.
  While studying at Yale, Ms. Rao wrote that sexual assault victims 
were partly to blame for having been assaulted.
  She ridiculed feminism and women's rights activists. She attacked 
groups that promoted multiculturalism and minority rights. She 
belittled those who fought for LGBTQ rights. She wrote that warnings 
about what we now identify as climate change are, in effect, fake news. 
And that's not all.

[[Page S1804]]

  After these writings came to light, she stuck to the same script as 
the other Trump nominees have done who found themselves in the same 
position.
  They say: It is all way in the past. I have grown up. I no longer 
hold those views.
  Except in Ms. Rao's case, she cannot plausibly claim the views she 
put into writing back then would have no bearing on how she would 
decide cases as a judge today. That is because you can see those 
extreme views reflected in the work she is doing right now as the head 
of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.
  This is an office that doesn't get a lot of time in the spotlight, 
but the individual in charge of that office has more power to shape 
Federal rules than almost anyone outside the Oval Office.
  During Ms. Rao's time as the head of this program, she has taken a 
buzz saw to protections for women's health, for sexual assault victims 
on college campuses, for LGBTQ Americans, and for Black and Latino 
Americans.
  Under her watch, the Trump administration has allowed polluting 
corporations to poison Americans' air and water, propped up dirty 
powerplants that belch carbon into the skies, and added to the extreme 
dangers of climate change.
  During her nomination hearing, she called--and this was her 
description--some of what she wrote ``cringeworthy.'' She wrote a 
letter to the Judiciary Committee saying she was sorry, and that's all 
well and good, but it doesn't change the fact that she has helped turn 
those same extreme views--those same extreme views--into Federal policy 
under President Trump.
  To help spell this out, as they say on so many television shows: Go 
to the tape.
  In the long essay titled ``The Feminist Dilemma'' published in the 
mid-1990s, Ms. Rao laid out her views on a range of issues dealing with 
women's rights and sexual violence. At the time, our country was waking 
up to the fact that most sexual assaults are not random acts of 
violence committed in dark alleyways; they are committed by someone the 
victim knows.
  The term ``date rape'' was relatively new to a lot of people. In this 
essay she wrote: ``Although I am certainly not arguing that date rape 
victims ask for it,'' she did exactly that--several times. She put the 
burden on women to prevent their assaults.
  She also described ``The dangerous feminist idealism which teaches 
women that they are equal.'' That is an exact quote--``dangerous 
idealism which teaches women that they are equal.''
  She went on, ``Women believe falsely that they should be able to go 
anywhere with anyone.'' That is a quote. ``Women believe falsely that 
they should be able to go anywhere with anyone.''
  Now, as I noted already, Ms. Rao has tried to separate herself during 
her nomination from those thoughts--what she wrote as a younger 
person--but she continues to double down on these views and their 
influence in her current position.
  A few years ago, there was an effort to strengthen Federal rules to 
reduce sexual assaults on campus and compel schools to do a better job 
of protecting women. With Ms. Rao's help, Education Secretary Betsy 
DeVos and Donald Trump are now rolling those protections back.
  Ms. Rao has also taken steps to roll back rules designed to fight 
wage discrimination and sexual harassment against women in the 
workplace. She worked to make it harder for women to get no-cost 
contraception under the Affordable Care Act.
  Now I am going to turn to her views on the rights of other groups. 
LGBTQ Americans, Black, and Latino Americans are just several examples.
  Here she has attacked so-called multiculturalists, writing: 
``Underneath their touchy-feely talk of tolerance, they seek to 
undermine American culture.'' When you read that sentence, it seems 
like she believed the American culture in need of protecting is 
actually one of intolerance.
  Now, she protested that ``homosexuals want to redefine marriage and 
parenthood,'' to which I say: Anyone like Rao, who defines marriage and 
parenthood by limiting the definition of love, is just wrong and, 
frankly, un-American.
  She even blasted African-American and Latino fraternities and 
sororities, arguing they were the ones who didn't understand the true 
meaning of Dr. King's ``I Have a Dream'' speech.
  In a book review, she praised an author for writing:

       Perhaps it is time to stop thinking of blacks--and having 
     them think of themselves--as a category. Let them rise or 
     fall as individuals.

  A nominee for the Federal bench ought to be able to recognize that 
the design of racism has been to have society and governments at all 
levels in this country discriminate against African Americans as a 
category and to prevent individuals and their families from rising from 
this hardship.
  Again, Ms. Rao can try and try and try some more to distance herself 
from these writings, but she cannot distance herself from the work she 
does right now in her current job.
  Civil rights activists scored a major victory in a recent Supreme 
Court case, Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. The 
Inclusive Communities Project. The case dealt with what have come to be 
known as the ``disparate impact'' regulations. The Court held that 
housing policies that inadvertently discriminate against minorities 
violate the Fair Housing Act. That type of ``disparate impact'' 
regulation exists across Federal law. But right now, with Ms. Rao's 
help, Donald Trump is working to undo these protections. Here I quote 
from the Washington Post:

       The Trump administration is considering a far-reaching 
     rollback of civil rights law that would dilute Federal rules 
     against discrimination in education, housing, and other 
     aspects of American life.

  This article continues:

       Past Republican administrations have done little to erode 
     the concept's application, partly out of concern that the 
     Supreme Court might disagree, or that such changes would be 
     unpopular and viewed as racist.

  Apparently, that is not a big enough concern to stop Ms. Rao and the 
Trump administration.
  Now, briefly, I would like to look at her writings on climate and 
environmental protection.
  She mocked what she called the ``three major environmental bogeymen, 
the greenhouse effect, the depleting ozone layer, and the dangers of 
acid rain.''
  In an extraordinary twist of logic, she suggested that people who 
warned about climate change were clinging to a ``dangerous 
orthodoxy''--her quote--``with no reference to the prevailing 
scientific doubts.''
  Her work at the Trump administration shows no change in perspective.
  Fuel economy standards that reduce carbon emissions and save drivers 
money at the pump have been axed by the Trump administration and Ms. 
Rao. The Clean Power Plan--gone under with the Trump administration and 
Neomi Rao. Rules cracking down on mercury pollution, which causes brain 
damage to kids, weakened by the Trump administration and Ms. Rao. Rules 
designed to protect workers from exposure to dangerous chemicals on the 
job--rolled back again by Ms. Rao and the Trump administration. The 
list can go on.
  This nominee's record shows, in my view, that an apology is not 
enough--even a written one--because the shocking and offensive views 
she put into words in the past are reflected by her work in the 
present.
  It is all right here in her CV as a Trump official. She is 
responsible for those policies that lead to more discrimination, that 
are taking rights and protections away from women, Black Americans, and 
Latino Americans.
  She doesn't even have a long record of legal experience which she can 
fall back on and cite qualifications. Her qualifications seem to be her 
extreme views and membership in the far-right Federalist Society--a 
well-funded outside group that the Trump administration has empowered 
to fill the judiciary with extreme nominees from well outside the 
mainstream.
  Actions Ms. Rao has been green-lighting have been challenged in 
court, and rulings against them have made clear that the Trump 
administration is willing to break the law to get their preferred 
ideological outcome.
  For example, just last week, a Federal judge slammed Ms. Rao's 
actions to undo efforts to crack down on wage discrimination. The judge 
said Ms. Rao's decision was arbitrary, it was capricious, and 
unsupported by any analysis.

[[Page S1805]]

  Perhaps that is why, during her nomination hearing, she refused to 
recuse herself from cases involving issues she worked on during the 
Trump administration.
  So here is my bottom line. The Senate has seen this before--Trump 
nominees with extreme, offensive, and what are essentially incendiary 
writings from the past. In Ms. Rao's case, there are current examples 
of how she has not left those views in the past.
  When it was Ryan Bounds nominated to the Ninth Circuit, this body--
the U.S. Senate--stood up and said no. Mr. Bounds' views were extreme. 
More importantly, he knew it, and he hid them.
  In my view, it is time to take a stand once more in the Senate, where 
Ms. Rao's views are on display for all to see. I am going to be a no on 
the nomination of Neomi Rao. I urge my colleagues to join me.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________