[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 95 (Wednesday, June 4, 2025)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3217-S3218]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Unanimous Consent Request--Executive Calendar
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I come to the floor today concerned that
the Senate's advice and consent role is being undermined. It is being
undermined by obstruction from Senate Democrats that threaten to keep
the Justice Department from functioning as the American people expect
and the American people deserve.
The Office of Legislative Affairs serves as the crucial bridge
between the Justice Department and this Congress. This relationship is
essential not only for the legislative process, but for maintaining
constitutional oversight and accountability.
The Office of Legislative Affairs ensures that we, as lawmakers, have
the timely information needed to craft legislation, conduct oversight,
and fulfill our constitutional duties.
When we seek answers, whether it is on criminal justice or
immigration or national security, it is the Office of Legislative
Affairs that takes our questions and returns the responses. This
function can't run on autopilot.
Yet, today, the Office of Legislative Affairs is hobbled. It lacks a
Senate-confirmed Assistant Attorney General to lead that office. Why?
Because Senate Democrats have decided to impede the confirmation of all
justice nominees without exception. That is not the constitutional role
of advice and consent. That is obstruction.
Every Senator has the right to raise concerns about nominees. That is
our constitutional role. That is our duty. And holds of specific
nominees for specific reasons at times is very appropriate. It is an
appropriate tool for any Senator to use.
I have even used that tool, and I have also done it on nominees. But
the process demands fairness; it demands common sense. We should weigh
each nominee individually, not slam the brakes on an entire Agency,
especially one for keeping Americans safe.
So I am here at the floor because the nomination of Patrick Davis has
been pending on the Senate Calendar now for 2 months. This is
regrettable because he is an exceptionally qualified nominee. And this
Senator should know because he worked for this Senator.
Mr. Davis brings a strong record of public service and a deep
understanding of the legislative process gained from his time working
for me on the Senate Judiciary Committee. I am confident he will lead
the Office of Legislative Affairs with diligence, with fairness, and
with integrity. He should be confirmed today, and I am here to ask my
colleagues to do just that.
Obstructing his nomination serves absolutely no one. Many Senators--
myself included--have outstanding requests to the Justice Department
that we expect answers to. I understand that some Senators may complain
that they haven't received a response to their own outstanding request.
I have made such complaints myself over the years under both Republican
and Democrat administrations.
But I don't believe that obstructing this particular qualified
nominee who can help get the responses we need will address their
concerns.
I also understand that some Senators are unhappy with the current
administration and are using Justice Department nominees to make their
displeasure known. To these colleagues, I will simply say that the
obstruction of qualified nominees to lead the Office of Legislative
Affairs makes it harder for the Department of Justice to engage with
Congress and harder for Congress to do its job.
This, ultimately, ends up hurting the American people. I am asking
this body to uphold a fair confirmation process so that the Justice
Department can effectively engage with Congress. Blocking the
confirmation of Patrick Davis does not serve the Senate; it does not
serve the interest of justice; and it does not serve the American
people.
Mr. President, I am here to ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the consideration of the following nomination: Executive
Calendar No. 92, Patrick Davis, to be Assistant Attorney General; that
the Senate vote on the nomination without intervening action or debate;
that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the
table; and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's
action.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there an objection?
The Democratic leader.
Mr. SCHUMER. Reserving the right to object, I will object for two
reasons.
First, a few weeks ago, I announced I am placing holds on all DOJ
political nominations because the Attorney General refuses to answer
fundamental questions about Donald Trump seeking a luxury plane from
Qatar to use as Air Force One. This is a grave national security
threat, as everyone knows.
The bottom line is very simple on this plane: The President of the
United States accepted a luxury jet from a foreign government to use as
his personal Air Force One. It wasn't just unethical. It reeked of
corruption, of bribery, and threatened our national security.
That whole plane will have to be taken apart piece by piece to make
sure listening devices aren't in it and be even more expensive. And yet
the Justice Department didn't just look the other way; they approved
it. That is so typical of this Justice Department and something that I
think if a Democratic President did it, the Senator from Iowa would be
the first on the floor to stand here and object.
Now we hear silence--silence. They won't even answer serious
questions about this. This plane should be withdrawn, and I have
introduced legislation to do that.
But that is not the only reason. Donald Trump has turned the Justice
Department upside down. It is politicized. It is weaponized. It is
hollowed out. Donald Trump and his acolytes in the Justice Department
are less interested in prosecuting criminals and more interested in
prosecuting Trump's perceived political opponents.
This is an absolute disgrace. Both sides in past administrations,
Democrat and Republican, have worked together to uphold the rule of law
at DOJ. But now, the rule of law has been replaced by loyalty tests.
Career public servants who have dedicated years to prosecuting
criminals are just shoved aside because when Donald Trump asks them to
break the law, to undo the law, to set aside rule of law, they refuse.
Investigations and prosecutions are dictated by political convenience
and not justice. And now Republicans want the Senate to quietly
rubberstamp a political nominee for the DOJ by unanimous consent--no
hearing, no debate, no scrutiny.
On an important position like this, this should happen regularly that
there should be debate. But with this Justice Department, as horrible
as it is, as political as it is, as destructive of American values as
it has been--no way.
The nominee is a former staffer for the very same Senator making the
request. Now, as my colleague noted, in the past he has been up there
when other administrations made ethical violations and did the wrong
thing in his judgment. But now there is just silence from my colleague
and from all of the Republican Senators.
And they know what is going on. They know what is going on. But blind
obeisance to Donald Trump is wrong when it comes to something as sacred
as this: rule of law and a Justice Department that seeks to enforce the
law, not just go after political enemies.
If Donald Trump and Republicans want to poison and politicize our
justice system, I am not participating. I object.
I add one more point with deep regret. What is happening to the
Judiciary Committee and the Justice Department is shameful. Inspectors
general have been dismissed with no accountability. Again, my colleague
who used to uphold the inspectors general and praised them--tons of
them are dismissed now.
The American Bar Association has been sidelined. And today, up in the
Justice Department, unqualified judicial nominees--some barely out of
law school--are being rushed through confirmation. This is not how the
Senate should work.
It didn't work that way when there was a Democratic President and my
friend was chairman of the Judiciary Committee.
There should be no special treatment--none; not for political allies;
not for former staffers; not for anyone. What Trump and Bondi are doing
to the Justice Department and the rule of law is dangerous. It
undermines the public trust and erodes the rule of law.
[[Page S3218]]
The Senate should not be complicit. I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
The Senator from Iowa.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I am sorry to hear the objection. I
would like to correct the one thing that Senator Schumer said, that
Patrick Davis didn't have a hearing before the committee. We did hold a
hearing on Patrick Davis.
I yield the floor.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I continue to object for the many reasons
that I have listed.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________