[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 69 (Wednesday, April 21, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Page S2091]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       NOMINATION OF VANITA GUPTA

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, now on another matter, over the past 
few months, Senate Republicans have made clear we believe a President 
is entitled to choose qualified, mainstream nominees to staff the 
executive branch and receive prompt and fair treatment from the Senate. 
I would say the 50 Senate Republicans have treated President Biden's 
nominees considerably more fairly than Senate Democrats treated the 
last President's, but the nominee we are considering this week is way 
outside the mainstream.
  I will strongly oppose confirming Vanita Gupta to serve as Associate 
Attorney General, and I would urge colleagues to do the same. Ms. Gupta 
has spent her career, in large part, as an activist for leftwing 
causes. Her work for high-profile liberal interest groups and the Obama 
Justice Department have left a record of astoundingly radical 
positions. Those far-left positions were loud and proud until this 
prospect of promotion seemed to change the nominee's tune.
  Previously, this nominee stated that ``states should decriminalize 
simple possession of all drugs.'' She said ``states should 
decriminalize simple possession of all drugs.'' Ah, but now Ms. Gupta 
claims her position has ``evolved.''
  At her confirmation hearing, she refused to say she would accept 
any--any--limitation on abortions, up to and including partial-birth. 
That puts her at odds with nearly 70 percent of Americans across the 
political spectrum.
  Recently, Ms. Gupta has insisted she can be trusted to oppose efforts 
to defund law enforcement, but she told the Judiciary Committee just 
last year that State and local leaders should ``heed calls'' from 
groups demanding that they decrease--decrease--police budgets.
  This nomination has revealed a lengthy trail of radical claims and 
hasty backtracks, but there are also questions of temperament. The 
nominee has repeatedly amplified leftwing fearmongering toward judicial 
nominees and sitting Federal judges. She has levied ad hominem attacks 
on Members of this body. And during the confirmation process, she 
employed the loosest possible interpretation of her oath to deliver 
honest testimony, even drawing the ire of the liberal Washington Post 
for transparent flip-flops and misleading Senators about her own public 
statements.
  This nominee contrasts sharply--sharply--with the resume and 
reputation of Attorney General Garland, whom I voted to confirm. The 
White House needs to make a better choice for this key post. The Senate 
should create that opportunity by voting no today.

                          ____________________