President Biden’s pick for attorney general easily cleared a key confirmation hurdle on Monday, with the Democrat-led Senate Judiciary Committee voting 15 to 7 to advance his nomination, now heading to a final vote before the full Senate in the near future.
Judge Merrick Garland, a Harvard Law School graduate and judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, was picked for the top law enforcement post more than four years after his ill-fated nomination as former President Barack Obama’s pick for the Supreme Court. Garland will inherit a sweeping investigation into the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, the day Congress had assembled to certify Biden’s win over former President Donald Trump, and his opening remarks to the committee last week prioritized the Capitol siege prosecutions, domestic terrorism, and civil rights.
GARLAND DOESN’T PROMISE TO PROTECT DURHAM OR RELEASE REPORT
Democratic Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin urged his colleagues to vote for Garland during a committee meeting on Monday, saying, “He’s a man of extraordinary qualifications. His life has been dedicated to public service and advancing values that are vital to the Justice Department’s functioning — integrity, independence, fidelity to the rule of law, and a commitment to equal justice for all.”
Sen. Chuck Grassley, the top Republican on the committee, also voted for Garland’s nomination but listed out a host of “concerns about the direction of the Department of Justice” before casting his vote in favor. The Republican senator said that it would be up to Garland to “keep the Justice Department nonpartisan and apolitical” and to “stand up to efforts to turn the Justice Department into the progressive wing of the Democratic Party.”
All of the Democrats on the committee voted for Biden’s pick. Beyond Grassley, Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham, Thom Tillis, and John Cornyn also voted for Garland, while GOP Sens. Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, Ben Sasse, Josh Hawley, Tom Cotton, John Kennedy, and Marsha Blackburn were opposed.
On Monday, Grassley pointed to a number of issues that he remained concerned about, including that Garland repeatedly declined to promise that special counsel John Durham would be allowed to finish his inquiry into the origins and conduct of the Trump-Russia investigation. The judge testified that he would need to speak with the federal prosecutor before making a decision, though he said he didn’t currently have reason to think it wasn’t the right move to keep Durham on.
“I don’t have any information about the investigation as I sit here today, and another one of the very first things I’m going to have to do is speak with Mr. Durham and figure out how his investigation is going,” the judge said last week. “I understand that he has been permitted to remain in his position, and sitting here today, I have no reason to think that that was not the correct decision.”
Grassley said Monday that “any actions taken to end, cover up, or otherwise undermine the Durham investigation should be interpreted as premeditated and political.” The Republican senator said that he was choosing to believe that Garland was a man of honor, adding, “I hope my trust is not misplaced.”
Durham announced his resignation as the U.S. attorney for Connecticut effective Sunday at midnight but remains a special counsel. In a move typical with incoming administrations, Biden asked all Senate-confirmed U.S. attorneys for their resignations. A DOJ official said Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss was also an exception, with acting Attorney General Monty Wilkinson asking him to stay on as he investigates Hunter Biden, the son of the president.
Garland testified last week that he had not discussed the federal investigation into Biden’s son with the president, emphasizing that Biden has repeatedly said the Justice Department’s prosecutorial decisions would not be made by the White House. Hunter Biden has reportedly been under criminal investigation for years as federal authorities scrutinize his taxes and potentially his foreign business dealings, and the 51-year-old’s financial transactions with China might be at the forefront.
Grassley also said he was concerned about religious liberty, the right to bear arms, and the Biden DOJ’s litigation positions, its thoughts on prosecutorial discretion, and the potential that it might reinstitute an Obama-era “slush fund” policy.
“I trust that he understands the importance of religious liberty,” Grassley said, adding that “Judge Garland’s answers on the right to bear arms have not been encouraging.” The senator also argued that “just because the Trump Justice Department took a position doesn’t mean that position was wrong” and worried that the Biden DOJ would abuse prosecutorial discretion in areas such as illegal entry to the country and the death penalty, saying that “the role of the president is to take care that the laws be followed, and, of course, this applies to the attorney general.”
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Last week, Garland said he did not regret pursuing the death penalty against Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh but testified that he had grown to have doubts about capital punishment during his 20 years on the bench and would have no problem if Biden instituted a federal moratorium on it.
