he's with the graves garrett law firm. and i give you right now matthew whitaker. [ applause ] >> good morning, everyone. i'm glad to join you today. as my fellow republican attorneys, i used to think you could fit us about in a phone booth, but i know that we are mighty and so many of us do important things all over this country. so thank you for being here. so this morning was supposed to be a two-person presentation on immigration policy. what we did right in the previous administration and what you're seeing play out on your television screens every day, what they're doing wrong in the biden administration. joining me was going to be gene hamilton, anyone who knows gene knows he's forgotten more about immigration law and policy than i ever knew. and -- but he was not able to make it up from georgia. he's watching on c-span. he's promised me that in real time, as i say wrong things or something needs to be emphasized, he will text me and tell me what i need to correct. so we're going to have a real time kind of record c

gun laws? should a state be required to receive pre-clearance from federal officials before adopting gun restrictions? general clarke: this is not an area that i work in in the civil rights division. but i do know that the right to vote is unique, it is special, something their supreme court has routinely said that congress has broad enforcement powers in the 14th and 15th amendments, to protect. sen. lee: and those broad powers also extend to other rights that people have. it is important for us to remember that our nation is built on this principle of respect for the sovereign entities that our states are. and for the ability of each sovereign state, for the people through their elected representatives, to be able to adopt laws that they deem fit. because the sovereigns in our republic are the people. the people have yielded some of their sovereignty to the states in other areas, they have yielded to the federal sovereign. the supreme court of the united states has made this clear in a number

this is a conflict between law in violation of law. so what to i was the participant as the representative of judge steven supreme court judges in these proceedings in the european court of human, in the european a court in luxembourg. and i could see what was presented by polish government, what was presented by european commission and other countries which participate in these proceedings. and as i said, these conflict, this situation is black and white. and we are, as the democrats protecting european, valid on the, on the white position. and the government is, is violating obviously the rule of law. you wouldn't imagine what is happening in poland every day with judges who are trying to implement directly european law, which are trying to ask the questions for preliminary rolling to the european court of justice. they are simply repressed already, if it's black and white. me how says hunger is prime minister victor all been signed the declaration welcoming the polish court's ruling and said that the, i quote the i am received at th

this law supersedes over national law or any law. it doesn't matter if it's written in the constitution or if it's a convention or an unwritten law, this is the only way to create a legal space in which law is equal to everyone. so no one questions this. and i also don't think that it's the core of the problem that it's a judicial one. the core of the problem is a political one, because kuchinski and the routing party in poland, and on with his ruling party, simply dream of a different political system, which is not in line with what the european union defines as a requirement for membership in the european union, this is the condition of course, and not the question of if national churches agree with what has been ruled in luxembourg and so on. peter, a recent european commission dossier on respect for rule of law across the block express concerns about several countries. we're not talking just about poland and hungary here, democratic backsliding, as it's been called. what has changed politically since member states side up to the

as law enforcement official i again will pledge to enforce the law. >> history quickly because my time is about up here but on the supply chain issue as you know that, under unprecedented strain. and we've got agricultural producers across the country including my home state of south dakota continue to harvest their crops and worry the supply chain is to constrain access to their process. as commissioner how would you work with stakeholders to improve validity and resolve this issue and perhaps you could quickly touch on how some of these union rules play into that and are helping contribute to these systemic delays. >> senator, could not agree more that supply chain especially at the time were in right now is critical and so addressing the movement of goods through the ports in any way possible to expedite that is something that is going to be important. obviously this is going to require working withthe board of directors . it's going to require close relationships and continued work with groups like prozac and other business groups. both large and small. i don't think there's a simp

abominably law that terminal person laws, but also the muslim laws. and, but the interesting thing now is that international human rights law is ra they use as a trojan horse introduce single leaves legal head gemini, that is now playing, and penned us towards the electoral bass. in a country serene. usually when you want to sell a law to the people or what you want to win the hearts and minds you bring about someone who can build bridges, the choice of gallagher that to you and, and sarah has been absolutely controversial from day one. why do you think there was a box that is putting the bunk totally of this committee? ah, because i think our departure is politics this now it's about for working and the most in sentiment. and that is the only way forward for them to continue with this country right now. countries almost collapsing with regard to economy, the constituency that elected roger pasha, based on the single of buddhist ideology that they talked about. because the slogan of one country, one law he started actually can bait. so the president i

this is a conflict between law in violation of law. the participant, the representative of supreme court judges in these proceedings. in the european court -- in the european court in luxembourg. and i could see what was presented by the polish government, what was presented by the european commission and other countries which participate in these proceedings. this situation is black-and-white. we are, as the democrats, protecting them on the white position and the government is violating the rule of law. you would not imagine what is happening in poland every day with judges who are trying to implement directly european law, which are trying to ask the questions for a preliminary ruling to the european court of justice. they are simply repressed. adrian: it is black-and-white. victor or ron sign -- congolese president welcomed the ruling. he said the primacy of e.u. law should only apply in areas where the e.u. has competence. the framework for this is laid down in the e.u.'s founding treaties. constitutional courts and tribunals have

the texas voter id law that mr. greenbaum referred to was found to be intentionally discriminatory by the district court and was ultimately found to be -- to have a discriminatory result. and it surgically chose it edification -- chose identification so as to have that impact. it included carry license as acceptable forms of id but not state employee ids or state university ids, which were disproportionately held by black and latino voters in texas. sen. hirono: those legislatures and acting these laws know very well whose votes they are suppressing. that is why they are doing it. i think it is so nefarious. voting is a fundamental right. i am a naturalized u.s. citizen. one of the first things i did was -- did when i turned 18 was vote. we should do everything we can to make sure everyone can exercise their right to vote. thank you very much for what you are doing. thank you, mr. chairman. sen. durbin: thank you, senator hirono. seeing no other senators seeking recognition, i will in closing ask each one more quest

laws and that's why the vast majority of the public supports i.d.ou say there was evidence. >> yeah. well, talk to the ag's office. i mean, when you're doing election law, it's important to have safeguards so people have confidence in the outcome. >> i asked arizona's current top election officer, now a democratic candidate for governor. the evidence of fraud here in arizona is -- >> there's a few cases here and there but not the kind of widespread fraud that folks are alleging that would change the outcome of the election. the permanent early voter list was put in place by a republican majority legislature and has enjoyed widespread bipartisan support for years in our state. >> how worried are you about voter confusion with the changes in election laws? >> i certainly think that's a huge problem that we're going to see. and that will impact voter turnout. >> do you vote in every election? >> yes. ever since i turned 18, i've been, you know, going to the election poll. >> percy deal has lived his entire life on the navajo reservation. he's gotten us

says will be required to look and review existing laws as well as to recommend and draft new laws thatinto this concept of one country, one law. that is very much in keeping with one of the pillars of gotabaya rajapaksa's presidential campaign, to bring the country under one umbrella. for minorities, they are looking at this with mixed feelings, waiting to see what exactly it contains and what exactly the government's plans are. one concern though, right at the outset, is the leadership of that presidential task force, a controversial figure. >> a notorious monk has been appointed as the chairperson of this task force. it is worrying because the monk has been instigating violence against minorities in the country in the past and was at the forefront of some of these racist attacks that happened in the past. in the last few weeks, he has come on state media and has been talking about a new set of attacks that have happened in sri lanka, which is worrying, because a person who has been delegated to execute power, it looks like gotabaya rajapaksa's delegated powers to this notorious monk.

for the rule of law also means the rule of law for the congress of the united states. article i was the first article for a reason. we have a role to play in making sure that our democratic institutions are defended. i thank you for your service to our country and i look forward to your deliberations so that the congress of the united states can play its rightful role in defending our institutions and adopting legislation that will strengthen our institutions and preserve and protect our democratic republic. with that, mr. chairman, i yield back. >> the gentlelady yields back. mr. gohmert. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, judge garland, for being here. you said a moment ago you couldn't imagine a parent being labeled a domestic terrorist. but parents all over the country believe that's exactly what you labeled them by your memo indicating you were going to get involved in board meetings, school board meetings, because of the threat of domestic terrorism. so if you can't imagine a parent being labeled a domestic terrorist, i would encourage you to redo your memo s

he's with the graves garrett law firm. i give you right now matthew whitaker. >> good morning, everyone. i'm glad to join you today as my fellow republican attorneys. i know that we are mighty and so many of us do important things all over this country, so thank you for being here. this morning was supposed to be a two-person presentation on immigration policy. what we did right in the previous administration and what you're seeing play out on your television screens every day. and joining me was going to be gene hamilton, who anyone who knows gene knows he's forgotten more about immigration law and policy than i ever knew. but he was not able to make it up from georgia. he's watching on c-span and he promised he will text me and tell me what i need to correct. i know some of you can do it as well. it was an honor of a lifetime to be once at the department of justice as the united states attorney for the southern district of iowa in the bush administration. i never thought i would come back to the department of justice. wh

of the law decides which laws they will enforce? mr. magnus: well, senator, actually there is quite a bit of discretion in policing and there are decisions made based on the resources available about which laws will be enforced and how they will be enforced. this has especially been the case during covid, when the ability to even put people into jail safely -- sen. cornyn: so a police officer or i.c.e. agent can decide which laws to enforce as a matter of discretion? mr. magnus: senator, there certainly are circumstances where police officers are trained and in fact for it is -- in fact encouraged to use good discretion in the manner in which they enforce laws. sen. cornyn: are you familiar with the concept of pull and push factors when it comes to illegal immigration? for example, the push factors of poverty, violence, people wanting to come to the united states for a better life, but also the pull factors, including the perception that there will be no consequences associated with illegal immigration? do you agree with me that the

you have been defending this law? what other capacity would you have served if you had stayed in litigation when you are sued? if you are being sued as an agent of the state, correct? >> know we are being sued because we had enforced house before five for they sued us as an agent of the state we would have been able to invoke sovereign immunity. everyone agrees that kentucky was not there in district court. forty and 41 that concession being made it cannot be the case that kentucky is jurisdictionally prohibited from coming in. the only reason we are having this discussion is the attorney general wears two hats per just like the state officials were two hats. just like the hats that were discussed in bender this is not a novel thing, we filed the course direction and buffoon hill to bring us here. if i can in closing just point out that after reading the sixth circuit decision i think one would be forgiven for not understanding the sovereign interest that are are at stake. we had discussion about state sovereignty now

by introducing such a law, for any descent from locals will be stamped out under this law. singapore has learned their lesson quick response, very quick. i sorry, i didn't understand. he thinks that singapore is causing the line of democracy and legitimacy and social justice by introducing such a law. definitely, i think this is one of the most undemocratic laws to ever be introduced in single hamis asked as the law apply to domestic political leaders. he do not agree with whatever party or person is empower. definitely. yes. the automatically designated . and john, this a final question from john, john, this law is one way in which freedom of expression is cracked down on this when using russia and is led to the imprisonment of journalists. have you seen any initial impacts so far? so, you know, one of important things about the law is that it is, it is extra legal. the court's contract, she overturned any of these positions by the government, the government issues direct directive. so there is definitely already been independent media outlets that have said that they're shutting do

i did not go to a law school, i went to yell law school. -- yale law school.ome of my friends on the other side of the aisle are probably better lawyers than me. my dear friend said this report did not have jurisdiction because there was no proper defendant. i will take my >> sure, senator. i suffer from the same disease of what law school i went to, but i will say, i mean i think the there have been various mischaracterizations from i think both witnesses and senators today about what was before the supreme court. the providers were not just seeking an injunction against the eight defendants, at least two of whom i think if we had time to talk about why they were entirely proper defendants. the providers were also asking to lift the emergency stay that the fifth circuit had imposed, that had actually blocked the district court from answering some of the procedural questions that senator lee and professor mascot has suggested deprived the court of jurisdiction. so i think the story about the spak center is a little more complicated. and the notion that the the

the law? >> no one is above the law. >> i agree. are you aware that black and brown people are stopped and searched for minor infractions? >> i've read that and i'm not surprised to learn it. >> are you aware that white nationalists have infiltrated rank and file police departments, according to fbi? >> i'm not sure i know the specific reference you cite about the fbi. i know there are problems in some police departments with respect to domestic violence extremists in the ranks and i know many police departments are trying to work on that. >> i would like to seek unanimous to enter this report detailing white supremacy in police forces. >> without objection. >> thank you. are you aware from the statistic we have we know plaque people with killed at three times the rate of white people? >> i don't know the actual statistic but i wouldn't be surprised if that were the case. i'm happy to accept your representation. >> thank you. again, i ask for unanimous con sent to introduce a harvard school of

we have law enforcement in the communities and judges and prosecutors. we are just simply saying look at the funding where we are being double policed in our communities and that is all we are asking about and then we can use this money and use it in other aspects but we are doing the work in the faith-based community and that is where the work starts because you see the extremism where the politics have taken people's religion and the belief in the word of god and madee it religion. they drive this extremism i think what you are talking about is something i completely agree with -- >> guest: the terminology is incredibly important. from a solution based perspective martin luther king jr. used to talk about the idea ofse not defeating your enemies but transforming your adversariesmi into allies. we've gotten into this zero-sum mentality for this issue to go forward with got to change that and the aspiration must be not to deceit one another but to transform and help shape the perspective when you talk about what led to the passage of the civil rights act

we are not saying get rid of law enforcement, that sounds crazy. we are simply saying look at the funding. we are being double policed in our communities. that's all we are asking. we can take the money and use it in other aspects to make the community a lot more peaceful and yes, we are doing the work here in the faith-based community and that is where the work that i see start. where you see the extremism, where politics has took the religion of people, christianity not a religion, they took the belief in the word of god and made a religion and now you see the extremism that non-like president trump used to drive the extremism up to capitalism. host: you put a lot out there. guest: that's a lot of issues. number one, i completely agree with reallocation, not defunding. reallocation of focus, not defunding. i think that that terminology and distinction is critically important and number two, you are absolutely right, we have to approach social change, particularly those of us who are activists, from a solutions-based perspective. martin luther kin

that might be called for by a law. the inquiry is about discriminatory effects. >> i didn't want to interrupt him but senator klobuchar, i that because [inaudible] thank you senator. >> thank you mister chair, i just want to get some basic facts here. in the supreme court decision in shelby county, the majority wrote that it's a process for preclearance, this is the court decision that makes sense among the current conditions, it doesn't rely on the pass, how do the updates on the john doe's rights act respond to this? do you agree it's relevant in our current condition that this year alone over 400 million has been introduced to rollback voting rights and at least 31 of them have been voted into law? >> thank you. it's tethering the -- also these hearings that congress has been conducting, since 2019 to be important because they provided an opportunity for congress to hear about those current conditions on the ground across the country. the bill also provides stronger protections for native americans and alaskan nativ

airport law enforcement can only enforce state and local law. depending on the nature of the incident, airport law enforcement officers may only be able to conduct a cursory investigation and turn the case over to federal authorities. let me be clear, airport law enforcement attempts to hold unruly passengers accountable for their dangerous behavior while operating in accordance with state and local law. in some instances, airline crew members are reluctant to stay around to press charges, even when they have been assaulted. unless crew members press charges, airport law enforcement officers may not be able to legally detain the unruly passenger. we're committed to being part of the solution and encourage the implementation of the following recommendations. first, airline gate agents is the first line of defense should be extra vigilant for signs and deny boarding to those individuals they suspect are intoxicated. second, when an incident occurs, airline crew members should make statements to airport law enforcement and press charges to enable c

the rule of law is an issue i take seriously. one of the things i'm concerned about with respect to airline safety is something we have hard on it homeland security. what is the impact of airline safety with the new developments in afghanistan and the potential for al qaeda and other nefarious groups that want to harm the united states? what impact does that have on the airline industry, and what concerns does it generate for you when you look at it through the prism of this misbehavior on airlines today? i have heard concerns from stakeholders in the aviation community that this could amount to a perfect storm, jeopardizing the safety of workers and travelers, and our national security. i would like to hear from the panel about how their organization perceives these threats, and how unruly passengers are required the diversion of resources and are intended to address -- the air marshals have to spend an extraordinary amount of time dealing with misbehavior. maybe we will miss signs we should have seen for people really intending

patchwork of state laws today.ot every college athlete will be approached by professional service providers and third parties with good intentions. without a uniform standard to educate or protect them from bad actors, many will sign deals that are clearly one-sided and perhaps even harmful. additionally, some athletes are unlikely to be aware of the tax potential implications of these arrangements and may find themselves saddled with unanticipated tax bills i may be unable to pay. students who received financial aid could unknowingly lose their eligibility for aid due to the income they receive from an il deals. we want every college athlete to have baseline protections and uniform educational information at their disposal so they can make informed nil decisions. the patchwork of state laws has left college athletes subject to different standards than their peers in neighboring states. as of today, 35 states have passed laws, introduced legislation, or issued executive orders to govern name, image, and likeness. t

within the law . that might not be the direction you'd like to see something go on a national level but you have to have a clear affiliation on what it means to be affiliated. really that goes back to the question earlier about is it okay for boosters and supporters of an institution. you need to understand what you think an affiliated organization is for an individual and make it clear what that is so the student-athletes and institutions know and have the right enforcement mechanisms in place to help th keep everybody within those guardrails . >> that goes back to who should enforce rdthe rights and you heard doctor livingston say okay, we need some kind of national enforcement entity. what's your view on that? >> i think reform would be what we would support. that type of enforcement would be third-party, not in the aa again. the legislation would not be third-party directly but in terms of boosters, you keep saying boosters are paying for the best culture so in order to win recruiting boards there

i warn that undermining the two-state solution, based on international law and u.n. resolutions, will open the way for other alternatives imposed upon us by the situation on the ground. as a result of the continuation of israeli occupation of our state, the absence of a just solution for the plight of 7 million palestinian refugees, uprooted from their land in 1948, the systematic theft of palestinian land, and the ongoing crimes of the occupation and the demolition of homes as a means of collective punishment, the killings and detention of thousands, including women, sick people, and children, the imposition of an inhumane blockade, an unjust blockade on the gaza strip, and the annexation measures under numerous pretexts and names, including the plan that they have invented and that we fully reject. all of this, coupled with the force of displacing palestinians from their land, as part of a policy of racial discrimination and ethnic cleansing, pursued by the occupation in the absence of a deterrent international response. our people will not surrender to the reality

federal law prohibits it. so it's very difficult to track who owns which guns and how many they have including prohibited offenders who are barred from having firearms. the other key here is that our country as a wash in guns and for private gun transfers, there is no requirement that people undergo a background check and you talk about the background check and in our country or that the u. s. being a watch with guns, i should say. we have a comment from 10 di talking about the culture of guns if you will. if truth be told, the horse has already bolted in the u. s. as far as gun violence is concerned. as long as americans continue to glorify guns and violence in their movies and entertainment, as well as believing that guns are a necessary tool for protection. and it's the last cause. so quite mistake they're shannon, but i'm curious, the culture itself. how big of role does that play? you know, we know that there's the 2nd amendment. we know that, you know, we hear americans loved their guns and their statist

law that mr. greenbaum referred to was found to be intentionally discriminatory by the district court. and found to be having a discriminatory result. it's surgically chose identification so is to have that impact. it famously included carry licenses as acceptable forms of i.d. but not state employee i.d.s. or university i.d.s. these were disproportionately held by black latino voters. >> those legislatures enacting these kinds of laws, they know very well whose vote their suppressing. that is why they're doing it. i think it is just so nefarious. it is -- voting is fundamental right. i am a naturalized u.s. citizen. one of the first things i did when i turned 18, was votes, because i consider so foundational. -- thank you very much for what you are doing. thank you. mister chairman? >> thank you, senator hirono. seeing no other senators, one more question. >> the holder decision, and the supreme court, your phone in your testimony, expressly invited the congress to update the formulas necessary f

>> there are different case laws for both, and we would be following the federal case law in making our choices. >> mr. attorney general, they outlined the guidelines for a sitting president and said you cannot do that. 27 years later, that was updated to reaffirm that principle. 21 years later, we have seen a former president test the bounds of presidential authority. and i'm wondering, would you commit to revisiting that principle whether or not a president, while sitting, should be indicted? >> the office of legal counsel memorandum, particularly when they've been reviewed and reaffirmed by attorneys general and assistant attorneys general of different parties, it's extremely rare to reverse them. we have the same kind of respect for our precedence as the courts do. i think it also would not normally be under consideration unless there was an actual issue arising and i'm not aware of that issue arising now. i don't want to make a commitment on this question. >> i don't want to talk about any specific case, but just in general, should a former president's suspected crimes, once they'r

we assist state and local law enforcement in all ways and we enforce federal laws which prohibit threats of violence in -- by telephone, by email. >> you as a long time federal judge with a distinguished legal career, you understand that not every crime, assuming it is a crime, is a federal crime, correct, >> absolutely. >> unless there is a nexus to interstate commerce they are in the purview of state and local authorities, correct? >> we have authority with respect to the mail, the internet. >> let me give you an example. if somebody says to the school board member if you do that, i'm going to meet you outside and punch you in the nose. is that a federal offense? >> no that's not a federal offense. >> i agree. why in the world would you cite the national security division in this memo is being one of the appropriate entities of the department of justice to investigate and perhaps prosecute these offenses? >> my memo itself doesn't mention the national security division. it is mentioned in another memo that was released by the department. the national security division like all the othe

wade is the law of the land. this law clearly violated roe v. wade, and it's deeply disappointing and devastated that our courts have abandoned the people of texas at a time like this. >> what does it say -- obviously texas is your heart. you know the state, despite the politics of it. it's been in the news over the last month. what do you make of what has become of your state when it comes to these sort of laws? >> you know, i think it says a lot to other people. when you look at this law, our voting rights law, the fact that anyone in texas can carry a gun now without a permit, the fact that we have a governor who is mandating that our schools can't keep our kids safe, requiring the wearing of masks, there are a lot of people, and we're hearing more and more these stories of individuals who are not wanting to come to texas, salesforce, of course, offering to pay the moving costs and relocate every one of their texas employees. this will ultimately have a ripple effect. maybe not with some companies like elon musk, but it definitely have s havi

what about gun laws?hould a state be required to receive preclearance from federal officials before adopting gun restrictions? gen. clarke: this is not an area that i work in in the civil rights division but i know that the right to vote is unique. it is special and it is something the supreme court has routinely said that congress has broad enforcement powers under the 14th and 15th amendments to protect. sen. lee: sure, and those broad powers also extend to other rights that people have. i think it is important for us to remember that our nation is built on this principle of respect for the sovereign entities that our states are, and for the ability of each sovereign state, for the people, through their elected representatives, to be able to adopt laws that they deem fit because, of course, the sovereigns in our republic are, in fact, the people. the people have yielded their sovereignty to the states. in other areas, they have yielded it to the federal sovereign. the supreme court has made this clear i

indeed, airport law enforcement responds when called, but can only enforce state and local law. dmrordz to pursue cases, they need crew members to stick around. they need them to provide statements.ll whether those are processed locally or referred on to federal government, including the fbi. >> thank you. >> we really need, from the airlines, a clear communication to the pilots, to the flight attendants, to the gate agents that when these incidents occur, their first priority is to write the report, report the incident, and make sure local law enforcement has everything that they need. so i agree the airlines have tried very hard to be supportive ofry crews in these events, but that clear communication to the crew that'sev this is their fir order of business t after the incident has notes been made an cannot made moret clear and thoe procedures can be communicated morepr clearly to all of the crs and the agents of the gate. >> misste buyers, you know, in response to miss nelson's comments, what does the airline do when a crew members or a flight, they send ay message t the stat

the rules of law remain under attack right now. if we have no accountability for these abuses and there are different sets of rules and different types of people, our democracy is in serious trouble. as the committee chair, i will not allow further harm to the rule of law in the course of our work. mr. bannon will comply with our investigation or he will face the consequences. maybe he is willing to be a martyr to his disgraceful cause, fighting what happened on january 6, by demonstrating his complete loyalty to the former president. i want our witnesses to understand something very plainly. if you are thinking of filing -- following the path mr. bannon has gone down, you are on notice that this is what you will face. the process we have begun tonight is a great one. it seldom happens and we would rather avoid it altogether. it is not reserved just for steve bannon. if other witnesses defy this committee and failed to cooperate, we will be back in this room with a new report, with the names of whoever mistakenly believes they are