[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 91 (Tuesday, May 25, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3390-S3392]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Nomination of Kristen M. Clarke
Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, it is a real honor to be rising today to
speak in advance of the vote on Kristen Clarke's nomination to serve as
the Attorney General of the Department of Justice.
If she is confirmed, Kristen Clarke will be tasked with overseeing
the Justice Department's work to protect the civil rights of all
Americans.
I have known Kristen Clarke for years. I have worked with her. I know
her, and I can tell you that there can be no one better for this job.
To say that Kristen Clarke has an impressive resume is a gross
understatement. She started her career at the Justice Department in the
Civil Rights Division. She worked with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund.
She led the Civil Rights Bureau for the State of New York Attorney
General's Office and most recently served as president and executive
director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.
No one could blame Kristen Clarke, after this entire career of
service and all that she has given, if she decided to take a step back
and find a less demanding job, perhaps a far more lucrative job. But
Ms. Clarke has dedicated herself to the highest principles of our
Nation--indeed, to the founding ideals of our country, formed with the
Bill of Rights, focusing on this idea of civil rights for all.
This is not just her job. This has been her calling. This is her
consistent conviction--to serve, to sacrifice for our Nation's most
sacrosanct ideals.
She has chosen to serve this country now at a time when we need her
leadership more than ever. She is an asset to our country, and I
believe she will serve with extraordinary distinction as a guardian of
our civil rights.
We need her experience. We need her expertise. We need her heart, her
commitment, her deep thoughtfulness
She is the daughter of immigrants, and after growing up in public
housing, in a low-income household, Ms. Clarke made it to some of our
most prestigious institutions and made it her cause to make the best
out of herself. She is an incredible success story. She is a person who
has overcome tremendous odds and advanced herself, not just for
personal excellence but for public service. This makes her, in my book,
a champion.
Yet there are still those in this confirmation process who want to
say that Ms. Clarke is the wrong person for the job. They are actually
using smear tactics and lies to try to misrepresent who Ms. Clarke is
as a person. There is a saying, ``Let the work I have done speak for
me,'' and I wish folk would listen.
She has prosecuted hate crimes. She has defended people's voting
rights. She has fought against religious discrimination. She has
dedicated her career to the cause of equal justice under law.
Ms. Clarke is the right person for this job. She is exactly who we
need. At a time when we are confronting rising hate crimes in America,
dramatically more instances of vandalism and violence against Asian
Americans, against Jewish Americans, against transgender Americans, we
need someone leading the Civil Rights Division who will stand up for
all Americans, who has experience prosecuting hate crimes and makes it
clear in this Nation that all are created equal and endowed by their
Creator with fundamental civil rights. That is who she is now and who
she has been for her entire career.
There are folks and forces working to strip away and weaken and
undermine these fundamental rights. We see efforts to weaken our
democracy, to threaten our principles. We need someone who will stand
up and affirm who we are as a people--a nation that believes in robust
voting rights, a nation that believes in the equal dignity of all
people, a nation that believes in protecting religious liberty. We need
a champion now as much as ever. We need Kristen Clarke leading the
Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice.
And it is not just me saying that. It is just not Democrats saying
that. There are over 70 bipartisan former State attorneys general. We
see police leaders, law enforcement leaders endorsing her, prosecutors
endorsing her, the Anti-Defamation League and 69 different local,
State, and national Jewish organizations, all agreeing that Kristen
Clarke is the right person to stand for us, to work for us, to fight
for us, to champion for our precious civil rights at the Department of
Justice.
So many different individuals from all across the political
landscape, from all different backgrounds, and so many organizations
representing all of our diversity are speaking out in a chorus of
conviction about not just how good
[[Page S3391]]
Kristen Clarke is but how urgent her nomination is because of who she
has shown herself to be time and again: an unassailable, impressive
career of service, service, service. She is and has been a servant
leader for all of her career; a person of profound integrity; someone
whose passion, whose sacrifice, whose struggle in the pursuit of
justice has already made this Nation better.
I will say something on a personal note in closing. I have worked
with Kristen Clarke for years now on things that we have done together,
like a bipartisan criminal justice reform bill.
I had the occasion years ago of meeting her when she was out in
Washington with her son. He was a young guy, not that tall. Then,
during her hearings in the Judiciary Committee, I saw her again present
herself in an extraordinarily powerful manner, with grace and
expertise, but I saw that young man now had grown up. He is a big guy.
And it would be a leap of ego for me to say that I saw myself in this
young man because he is probably a lot smarter than I was when I was
his age and clearly is a better athlete, even though I will say for the
record that the older I get, the better I am in sports.
But I think about her career, and then I align it to what she has
done in raising a young Black man in America. While I couldn't project
myself onto him, I thought a lot about my mom in her. My mom raised my
brother and me in a nation that strove to be who we say we are, a
nation of liberty and justice for all. But where she knew we were
falling short, she didn't raise us to be bitter; she raised us to be
better. She raised us by setting an example, a woman who--from sitting
in at a lunch counter to desegregate a restaurant, to helping organize
the March on Washington, she showed me by example. As James Baldwin has
said, children are never good at listening to their elders, but they
never fail to imitate them.
I want you all to know that in Kristen Clarke, we have an
extraordinary American, an extraordinary person, and a great mom. And I
know what she has done with her life. She has lived perhaps with the
greatest principle of all, which is for us in this generation to make a
better way for the next, for us to make a more perfect Union, for us to
understand that the arc of the moral universe is indeed long but we
must bend it more towards justice.
I tell my colleagues and urge you to confirm her to this sacrosanct
and urgent position today because I am confident to the core of my
being that she will not just make us proud, she will not just defend
those who are having their rights trampled or their dignity
marginalized, but that she will make a better way for an America that
fulfills its promise, still not yet achieved, for us to be a nation
with liberty and justice for all.
Thank you, Mr. President.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island
Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, here we go again. Just a few weeks
ago, the Senate debated Vanita Gupta's nomination for Associate
Attorney General, so let's review the bidding from that.
Gupta was eminently qualified for her role. She had support from the
foremost law enforcement leaders and groups in the country. She had
proven herself handling high-level government responsibilities. But
Republicans set their hair on fire trying to take Ms. Gupta down. They
grasped for something, anything, to dent her prospects. Eventually they
landed on contorting an 8-year-old op-ed, even calling her accurate
responses to their questions about it lies. It wasn't pretty.
Now we are back on the floor with Republican hair aflame again, this
time over the nominee to run the Justice Department's Civil Rights
Division, Kristen Clarke. Like Ms. Gupta, Ms. Clarke is eminently
qualified. She knows civil rights law inside and out. She has run one
of the Nation's leading civil rights organizations. She is a superb,
well-trained, experienced lawyer.
Conservatives have endorsed her, like President George W. Bush's DHS
Secretary Michael Chertoff and former Republican National Committee
Chairman Michael Steele. Law enforcement organizations like the Major
Cities Chiefs Association and the International Association of Chiefs
of Police support her.
She ought to have flown through committee and been a quick vote here
on the floor, but, no, it is hair-on-fire time again. Why all the coifs
aflame? Look behind the smokescreens and remember that the No. 1
strategy of the Republican Party for 2022 is to keep voters from
voting. And guess what. Ms. Clarke will run the voting rights section
of the Department, and Ms. Gupta, who used to run that same Civil
Rights Division, will supervise her as Assistant Attorney General.
Behind the ruckus over Ms. Gupta and now Ms. Clarke is a dark money
operation out to suppress the vote. It has the trade craft of a covert
operation--cutouts, front groups, secret money--and that covert
operation is now focused on preventing, as our colleague Senator
Warnock says, ``some people'' from voting. And Ms. Clarke and Ms. Gupta
will be the lawful, legal opposition to the dark money, voter-
suppression apparatus.
Here is what we know. When Trump was in power, this covert op ran a
dark money-funded apparatus within the Federalist Society to select
Federal judges. For 4 years, the Federalist Society's operation was the
gatekeeper to the Federal bench. Virtually every judicial candidate who
passed through this dark money-funded turnstile was approved by big,
anonymous donors out to control the courts. Donors got to approve
judges and Justices who would have their backs.
That dark money turnstile was step 1. Step 2 was dark money-funded
political campaigns for Senate confirmation of the nominees who got
through the turnstile. For Trump's three Supreme Court nominees, this
was done by the Judicial Crisis Network, headquartered literally down
the hall from the Federalist Society--not just the same building, the
same hallway, but they also share staff. In each Supreme Court
confirmation, a $15 million or a $17 million check from a secret donor
would fund the advertising campaign.
Step 3 is dark money-funded front organizations appearing before the
donor-selected Justices in orchestrated flotillas with common donors
behind them, undisclosed to the Court.
When Trump lost, of course, step 1 and step 2 lost their salience and
closed up shop. But with Trump judges still on the court, these front
groups are still at it. In one case before the Supreme Court right now,
50 organizations--50 organizations--that filed briefs received funding
through rightwing groups involved in this operation.
Dark money funding can't be traced back to its original donors,
obviously, because it is dark money, but a 2019 Washington Post
investigation revealed that one guy, Leonard Leo, while executive vice
president of the Federalist Society, from 2014 to 2017 coordinated $250
million--a quarter of a billion dollars--across a network of the front
groups engaged in this court capture operation. Recent testimony in my
Courts Subcommittee raised that number to over $400 million--nearly
half a billion dollars--through 2018. Four hundred million is a lot of
money, but a captured court, that is a pearl beyond price.
This Leo operation worked wonderfully during the Trump Presidency.
Donors got their judges. Judicial Crisis Network and Leonard Leo got
their dark money. But then that Post investigation came out, and
Trump's polling started to tank. So, like a burned agent, Leonard Leo
bugged out.
Where did he bug out to? Well, Leo surfaced early last year with a
group called the Honest Elections Project. These phony-baloney front
groups love to have the name that is the exact opposite of what they
are actually doing. So this one is called the Honest Elections Project,
and it has been running voter suppression activities in key
battleground States, sending threatening letters to local election
officials, and filing lawsuits to restrict voting--and, of course, all
dark money-funded.
But poke a little further and you discover that the Honest Elections
Project is a legal alias of something called the Judicial Education
Project, which is--you guessed it--the sister group to Judicial Crisis
Network--yep, Leo's judicial confirmation attack-ad organization. And,
of course, behind this covert op was dark money, much of it run through
DonorsTrust, the identity-laundering, dark money ATM established by the
Kochs' donor network. Before it took on this Honest
[[Page S3392]]
Elections Project alias, more than 99 percent of the Judicial Education
Project's 2018 revenue was a single, anonymous $7.8 million donation
that came through, of course, DonorsTrust. There is no way to know who
cut that check
What does all this dark money finagling and front group subterfuge
tell us? As a reporter for the Guardian observed, the Honest Elections
Project, so-called, melds two goals of the rightwing dark money
operation: One, pack the Federal judiciary, and two, bring voting
rights cases before the packed courts. Rigging elections by keeping
``some people'' from voting is now a Republican priority, and if Trump
judges will help, so much the better.
Just recently, we actually learned more about the covert voter
suppression operation. The watchdog group Documented and the magazine
Mother Jones uncovered a video of a presentation by the dark money
group Heritage Action to its top donors. In the video, the presenter
brags about getting what she called ``key provisions''--``key
provisions''--into voter suppression legislation in dozens of capitals
around the country.
She tells the donors, and I am quoting here, ``In some cases, we
actually draft them for them''--they actually draft the laws for the
State legislatures--``or,'' she said, ``we have a sentinel''--a
sentinel; what a creepy word--``we have a sentinel on our behalf give
them the model legislation so it has that grassroots, from-the-bottom-
up type of vibe.'' Big donors love that grassroots, from-the-bottom-up
type of vibe.
There is lots of dark money that fuels this covert op. Heritage
Action says it plans to spend $24 million in eight battleground States
to ``create an echo chamber'' of relentless lobbying for voter
suppression bills. They say they will be coordinating with known Koch
network groups like the Susan B. Anthony List, Tea Party Patriots, and
FreedomWorks.
This operation is the kind of stuff that we might want our
intelligence services to do in enemy countries to create disruption and
discord and provide secret influence. The idea that creepy billionaires
are running covert operations in and against our own country, that
ought to make you cringe.
Not only is this behavior morally corrupt, it may have broken rules.
One State legislature has already floated an ethics probe into Heritage
Action's sentinels jamming phony bills through their chamber.
So back to Senate Republicans getting their hair on fire over Kristen
Clarke and Vanita Gupta. These two women scare the daylights out of
this dark money operation behind Republican voter suppression. Ms.
Clarke knows the Voting Rights Act cold; she won voting rights cases
against voter suppression laws all over the country. Put Jim Crow 2.0
up against a Department of Justice Civil Rights Division led by Kristen
Clarke, and that dark money voter suppression operation has a problem.
So the big dark money donors behind this covert operation will raise
whatever ruckus they can--first, to try to stop Vanita Gupta, which
didn't work, and now to stop Kristen Clarke, which won't work--all in
an effort to protect their dark money scheme to prevent some people
from voting. You have to look behind the smokescreen sometimes to
understand what is going on. It is not pretty, but it is the truth.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be able to
conclude my remarks before the vote begins.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.