[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 212 (Wednesday, December 8, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9011-S9013]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                    Nomination of Rachael S. Rollins

  Mr. CRUZ. Mr. President, I rise today to strongly oppose the 
confirmation of Rachael Rollins to be U.S. attorney in Massachusetts.
  Many Americans have probably never heard of Rachael Rollins, but they 
are becoming very familiar with the kind of lawlessness and dangerous 
crime that radical, leftwing district attorneys like her have 
generated. Under

[[Page S9012]]

their watch, we have seen looting and larceny and violent crime rates 
rise in cities all over the country the past couple of years.
  Ms. Rollins is part of a web of leftwing district attorneys across 
the country who see it as their job not to prosecute crime; rather, to 
protect criminals. There is Ms. Rollins in Boston, Chesa Boudin in San 
Francisco, Kim Gardner in St. Louis, Kim Foxx in Chicago, Larry Krasner 
in Philadelphia, and John Chisholm in Milwaukee, among others.
  What has happened with these prosecutors who refuse to prosecute 
crime?
  Well, all too predictably, crime rates have skyrocketed.
  Last year, the murder rate went up nearly 30 percent overall, and it 
went up 40 percent in cities with populations between 100,000 and 
250,000.
  We have seen horrific crimes and tragedies that could have been 
prevented if these DAs had simply done their jobs.
  Take John Chisholm, the DA in Milwaukee, who released Darrell Brooks, 
a repeat and dangerous criminal, on $1,000 bail.
  What was the crime he was charged with?
  Using his vehicle--a red SUV--to run down a woman, the mother of his 
child.
  Released on $1,000 bail, what happened?
  Brooks, as we all know, drove that same red SUV through a Christmas 
parade, murdered six people, including an 8-year-old boy.
  That man should not have been on the streets, should not have been 
behind the wheel. The DA knew he was a violent criminal who used that 
SUV as an instrument of violence and, for $1,000, the leftwing DA let 
him go. Had Brooks not been out on such a low bail, this horrific 
tragedy wouldn't have occurred; that 8-year-old boy would still be 
alive.
  Our communities don't need prosecutors who endanger the very 
communities they are supposed to serve by refusing to prosecute or 
detain criminals. They don't need leftwing prosecutors who let violent 
criminals walk the streets.
  The damage that these so-called prosecutors can do has, thankfully, 
been somewhat limited by the fact that, when they choose not to 
prosecute criminals, the Federal Government has the ability, in many 
instances, to step in and charge criminals federally.
  But Joe Biden and Senate Democrats are working to change that by 
elevating one of these radical, leftist, soft-on-crime district 
attorneys, Rachael Rollins, to be the U.S. attorney in Massachusetts--
the chief Federal prosecutor in the entire State of Massachusetts.
  Let's talk a bit more about what exactly Rachael Rollins believes 
prosecutors should do and what her record is.
  Rachael Rollins has been vocal and aggressive against prosecuting 
crime. She has been very clear that she came into the job of district 
attorney as a crusader.
  She has said--and these are her words:

       If you want to change the criminal legal system, become a 
     prosecutor [because they have the] power to determine 
     charges, what crimes to decline to prosecute or divert, [and] 
     how to fashion bail hearings.

  She has been quite open in what her intentions are. Ms. Rollins tells 
us that what matters about a prosecutor is not taking bad guys off the 
street; it is not seeking justice for the victims of crime. No. It is 
the power to say: ``I won't prosecute these crimes.''
  (Ms. ROSEN assumed the chair.)
  And with Ms. Rollins, it is not hypothetical because she is a 
district attorney. And as the Boston DA, she went so far as to write 
down in ``The Rachael Rollins Policy Memo,'' a list of 15 crimes whose 
prosecution should ``always be declined'' or ``dismissed without 
conditions.''
  Charges on this list of 15 crimes should be declined or dismissed 
prearraignment without conditions. The presumption is that charges that 
fall into this category should always be declined.
  So you have a DA saying these are the crimes we don't prosecute, 
``always be declined,'' ``dismissed without conditions.''
  So you may say: ``OK. Maybe this is like some sort of criminal 
justice reform. Maybe this is low-level, nonviolent marijuana 
possession. A teenager got caught with a joint; we are not going to 
prosecute them.'' Reasonable people can actually disagree on that. We 
can have an intelligent conversation back and forth about that.
  But the beauty of it is that we don't have to speculate because she 
put it in writing. These are the 15 crimes. They are upside down, as 
are her policies. These are the 15 crimes where charges should be 
dismissed prearraignment without conditions:
  No. 1, trespass. Now, I want you to think about it. If you don't want 
to see people trespassing on your property, well, under Rachael 
Rollins, the Democrats' U.S. attorney, we don't prosecute trespass.
  What else?
  Shoplifting. Has anyone watched the videos of the people breaking 
into stores and stealing and stealing and stealing and looting? Do you 
know what? Joe Biden and Senate Democrats--they are bringing that to a 
neighborhood near you.
  Shoplifting, we don't prosecute. That is what she said. Shoplifting, 
olly oxen free. If you see a TV you like, pick that damn thing up and 
run out of the store because your friend, the fake prosecutor, is not 
going to charge you.
  Larceny. Really, larceny? Larceny, we don't prosecute.
  Disorderly conduct. You are a single mom coming home at night. A 
drunk vagrant is yelling, screaming, cursing at your kids. Do you know 
what? Not a crime here. We don't prosecute that.
  What else?
  Receiving stolen property. OK. This is at least intellectually 
consistent. If you are going to legalize shoplifting, rob the hell out 
of the stores, at least the fence can be on the back end. You can steal 
that TV and go straight to the fence. By the way, I guess you can do it 
in a parking lot. Set up a van right there. ``We fence stolen 
property.'' You run in and grab it, I will fence it right here. DA? 
``All good by us.''
  Driving with a suspended license. Well, sometimes that might be OK.
  What was it suspended for? Was it suspended for DWI? Was it suspended 
because you are a drunk who has killed people? Were you suspended 
because you are this homicidal maniac in Milwaukee who murdered six 
people?
  Do you know what? This DA says: ``Hey, driving with a suspended 
license, no problem at all, no longer a crime.''
  Breaking and entering into a vacant property without property damage. 
So any property that is vacant, you can break in, and you are fine. 
Locks don't matter. Burglar alarms don't matter. By the way, if a 
burglar alarm goes off, what the hell do you do? You show up, ``Hey, 
you don't prosecute it. I'm staying right here.''
  You may say: ``Well, at least it is something reasonable, without 
property damage, right?'' Well, now, except the problem is No. 8 on the 
list: breaking and entering into a vacant property with property 
damage.
  So it doesn't matter. Break into the place, loot it, trash it, 
destroy it. All is good in Joe Biden's criminal-friendly America.
  No. 9, wanton or malicious destruction of property. By the way, don't 
believe the Democratic talking point: ``This stuff isn't violent.'' 
Really, wanton or malicious destruction of property? Not a crime in Joe 
Biden's America.
  Threats, threats of violence. I want you to imagine right now you 
have got an angry vagrant making threats of violence against your 
children. You call the DA and say: ``My family is being threatened. 
Protect our safety.'' And what does she say? ``Not a crime.''
  Oh, well, stinks to be you. Threats are just A-OK.
  Minor in possession of alcohol. Hey, great. Kids, drink up. Actually, 
the beauty of it is, in Joe Biden's America, the kids can get drunk; 
they can drive; they can have their license suspended; and apparently 
they will get a gold star at the end of it. Minors in possession of 
alcohol. We have got Senate pages here. Just go down to the U.S. 
attorney's office. They are serving margaritas.
  Marijuana possession. OK. As I said, we can debate marijuana 
possession. Reasonable people can disagree on that. Now, it doesn't 
specify the quantity. A teenager with a joint? You can say that that 
may be a good candidate for diversion to something else. Drug dealer 
with several kilos of pot in the

[[Page S9013]]

back, maybe you ought to be prosecuting that.
  Oh, and, by the way, how do we know she doesn't just limit it to kids 
with a joint? Well, what is No. 13 on the list? Possession with intent 
to distribute.
  So, drug dealers--in Joe Biden's America, drug dealers, it is legal. 
You can sell booze to kids. You can sell drugs to kids. You can sell 
stolen televisions to kids. She doesn't prosecute drug dealers.
  But look, at least it is just pot and come on, we know--you know, in 
States--in a lot of States pot is not that bad, right? It is just pot.
  Uh-oh. No. 14, nonmarijuana drug possession. So for any Democrats 
ready to go home, saying, ``Hey, we just like pot because we are 
Democrats,'' nope. Heroin, cocaine, LSD, fentanyl drug dealers who are 
poisoning our kids, in Joe Biden's America, we don't prosecute you.

  And No. 15 is really the crowning jewel of this--resisting arrest. So 
I want you to envision what this says. You can break and enter into a 
vacant property and do damage. You can have a homeless person trespass 
on your front lawn, set up a tent, threaten your children, sell them 
drugs, and if a police officer shows up and tries to arrest them, they 
can violently resist arrest. And what does the DA say? ``All good by 
me. Not a crime.''
  Madam President, this is, in a word, nuts. This is crazy.
  And do you know what? This is what the Democrats support.
  I will tell you why. The Democrats are counting on the news media 
refusing to cover this. The Democrats are counting on ABC, NBC, and 
CBS--this is not news. The Democrats are counting on CNN will not cover 
this.
  Every single Democrat in this body has voted for Rachael Rollins. 
They had to bring Vice President Harris out to break the tie.
  And, you know, Democrats, when they go home, they like to say: ``We 
are not for abolishing the police.''
  No. Do you know what? When you vote to confirm a lawless so-called 
prosecutor who says ``I won't prosecute crime,'' you have abolished the 
police. Cops can arrest them, but the DA will let them go. And what 
does she say? ``Dismissed . . . prearraignment . . . without 
conditions.''
  This is radical and extreme, and I want to make a challenge to Senate 
Democrat colleagues. Some of you are in purple States. A few of you are 
in red States. Some of you are in bright blue States. I challenge any 
of you in the bluest State of the Union to go home to your 
constituents, get any gathering in a townhall, and put this chart in 
front of them. Ask your constituents: Do the people of Nevada agree 
that we shouldn't prosecute trespassing or shoplifting or drug dealing 
or resisting arrest or violent threats? Do the people of Virginia agree 
that these are not crimes and shouldn't be prosecuted?
  And I promise you, in all 50 States, there is not a State too blue 
where your constituents would agree on this. And so what our Democratic 
colleagues are counting on is that people won't know.
  You know, before the vote, I spoke with several Democrats. I tried to 
tell several Democrats, this is a bad vote. This is a vote you are 
going to regret. This is a vote your constituents are going to be mad 
at you for. One of those Democrats said: ``Well, the majority leader 
asked me to do it.''
  You know, crack the whip, party unity, party discipline. The order 
from the Democrats in the White House is this is the chief Federal law 
enforcement officer in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. God help you 
if you don't want violent criminals robbing your store. God help you if 
you don't want drunken homeless people setting up tents in your front 
yard. God help you if you don't want drug dealers selling drugs to your 
children because Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have said those are all A-
OK. And if you don't believe me--because in this bizarre partisan world 
nobody believes the other side--read the memo, ``The Rachael Rollins 
Policy Memo.'' She wrote it. She put her name on it in writing. This is 
what it says.
  If we lived in a time of sanity--Senators on both sides--Democrats 
listening to this would say: ``Hold on a second. That doesn't make any 
sense at all. Let's tap the brakes.''
  By the way, one Democrat could stop this nomination--one. Every 
individual Democrat, you had the choice. It means every one of you is 
also the deciding vote. So when you go back to your home State, you 
singlehandedly decided this lawless, so-called prosecutor should be 
confirmed.
  I will tell you this, you can never again claim you oppose abolishing 
the police because this vote is front and center: trespassing, not 
prosecuted; shoplifting; larceny; disorderly conduct; receiving stolen 
property; driving with a suspended license; breaking and entering with 
property damage; loss and malicious destruction of property; threats; 
minors in possession of alcohol; marijuana possession; possession with 
intent to distribute; nonmarijuana drug possession.
  I don't ever want to see a Democrat standing up here talking about 
fentanyl: Fentanyl is terrible. I don't want to see another Democrat 
talking about the opioid crisis, saying: ``People are dying in New 
Hampshire. People are dying in my State.'' They are, and you are about 
to vote for a prosecutor who won't prosecute the drug dealers selling 
those opioids and poisoning our children and won't prosecute resisting 
arrest. So, if a cop comes, take a swing.

  To my colleagues on the Democratic side of the aisle, there is still 
time for you to stop this nomination. I implore of you: Listen to your 
constituents and do the right thing.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. KAINE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the vote not 
begin until following my remarks.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.