▶ 0:20:36>> good morning. Senate judiciary committee is called to order. Welcome. We welcome a panel of three nominees. Mr. nicholas ganjei, aaron peterson, and Mr. david fowlkes. I want to thank each of you for your willingness to serve and I will come to our families who are here in support.
▶ 0:20:58We are participating in a process with a storied history under the senate's earliest rules, the judiciary committee stood as one of the three original committees of the united states senate. For more than 150 years, this committee has all nomination hearings, upholding a tradition that reaches far beyond any single nominee.
▶ 0:21:19These proceedings represent a solemn duty and trusted to this committee to safeguard the integrity of the federal judiciary, an institution that remains the backbone of our constitutional republic. For more than two centuries, our courts have served as a stabilizing force in american life. They have defended liberty in times of crisis, checked overreach in moments of political passion, and upheld the rule of law when it was least popular to do so.
▶ 0:21:46And today, under president trump, we are witnessing a welcome return to that tradition. A return to judges who read the law, who respect the separation of powers, and to understand that the judiciary is not a political weapon but rather a constitutional trust.
▶ 0:22:05We need to renew our constitutional heritage, even now, some courts continue to stretch beyond their constitutional role, issuing sweeping injunctions, expanding statutes past their text, and inserting ideology into matters reserved for the elected branches. Through the nomination of rule of law judges, we are restoring courts to their rightful place, interpreting the law as written, not as wished.
▶ 0:22:32And that return to constitutional values shows the character and caliber of the nominees come in before this committee. We see men and women who have dedicated their lives to the rule of law, who have prosecuted criminals, defended communities, and shown through years of public service that fidelity to the constitution is not an abstract promise but rather a lived commitment. Which brings me to introduce the first nominee on today's panel, nicholas ganjei.
▶ 0:23:02Nick is exactly the kind of nominee who reflects the best of this moment. Nick has spent nearly 20 years on the front lines of federal law enforcement. He has prosecuted cartel traffickers, violent offenders, predators of children, human smugglers, and corrupt actors who have threatened our communities. He has tried cases, overseen offices, managed teams, and now as the U.S.
▶ 0:23:28Attorney for the southern district of texas, he leads one of the busiest, most consequential U.S. attorney offices in the nation. Whose record is enormous in scope and unmistakable in character. Under his leadership, federal prosecutors in houston and across south texas have dismantled transnational criminal organizations, stop human trafficking pipelines, taken down large-scale drug rings, and protect the children from predation.
▶ 0:23:58He has enforced immigration law faithfully in a district where more than 70% of federal sentencing matters involve immigration offenses. He has done the work quietly, diligently, professionally, that keeps americans safe. He has also served this body dutifully and patriotically.
▶ 0:24:20Indeed, nick's one feeling is his choice for whom to work, and for three years, nick was my chief counsel on the senate judiciary committee. I hope this committee will forgive him, that momentary lapse in judgment. But I can tell you, in that role, I saw firsthand the qualities that define him.
▶ 0:24:44Exceptional judgment, deep integrity, respect for the constitution, and humility in the exercise of public power. He was a leader on criminal justice issues, on border security, on judicial nominations, and on some of the most complex matters that come before this committee. I trusted his counsel then and I trust his character now. President trump nominated nick because he embodies the trait we should demand from every federal judge.
▶ 0:25:17Seriousness, independence, commitment to the rule of law, and a lifetime of service and dedication to the american people. I have every confidence he will support -- serve the southern district with honor, and I wholeheartedly support his nomination. With that, I recognize ranking member durbin for his opening statements.
▶ 0:25:35Sen. Durbin: Thank you very much. Congratulations to the nominees, families and friends who have gathered here today. We have three district court nominees before the committee. I want to apologize in advance that I have a meeting with the leadership at 10:30, so I have to step out. I hope I can return, personally asked questions at that time. I want to raise an issue that doesn't relate exclusively to these nominees, but basically all the members of the judiciary.
▶ 0:26:05Sen. Durbin: The job of a district court judge is not an easy task. The dockets are busy. The questions are complicated. But more recently and especially this year, the work has become even more difficult as jurists across the country face increasing personal attacks and even threats of violence. The uptick in threats is not random. The attacks against individual judges by this administration and impassioned followers have been recorded.
▶ 0:26:35Sen. Durbin: In march, the president demanded the impeachment of a federal judge simply for ruling against him and his administration. The president called the judge a "radical left lunatic, troublemaker and agitator." the president added "this don't like many of the crooked judges, I'm forced to appear before him be impeached." the president is not the only member of this administration to use this kind of inflammatory language.
▶ 0:27:05Sen. Durbin: Earlier this month, deputy attorney general todd blanche, the former personal lawyer of the president, told the federalist society the administration is engaged in "a war against rogue activist judges." when the deputy attorney refers to litigation as a war, you can understand how the president's supporters can consider threats of violence is a natural first step.
▶ 0:27:30Sen. Durbin: Last month, the white house deputy chief of staff stephen miller referred to a district judge's order blocking the trump administration's deployment of the national guard as "legal insurrection." Mr. miller claimed the so-called left-wing terrorism is "shielded by far left democratic judges, prosecutors, and attorneys general." the president renominated -- who was nominated for his record should be explained.
▶ 0:27:59Sen. Durbin: Taking this criticism from the white house is hard to imagine. But this was a judge that was actually chosen by president trump his first term. Maga loyalists in congress have eagerly piled on. So far this year, republican congressmen have filed impeachment resolutions against at least eight district court judges for high crimes and misdemeanors, and the crime they are accused of, disagreeing with the president.
▶ 0:28:25Sen. Durbin: In response to this unprecedented attack on the judiciary, chief justice john roberts issued a rare statement. "for more than two centuries, it's been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning judicial decisions. The normal appellate review process was meant for that purpose. As a result of the surge in threats, many judges now require additional security, including my judges in my home state of illinois.
▶ 0:28:53Sen. Durbin: The administration's unlawful immigration raids in chicago have led to numerous lawsuits, controversial decisions. This litigation in turn has led to a rise in threats against several judges who actually handle these cases. As I've said many times before and will repeat each time given the opportunity, violence or threats of violence, whether from the right or left of the political spectrum, are never acceptable. I would like to quote from a statement from the chicago chapter of the bar association.
▶ 0:29:27Sen. Durbin: The statement reads "expressions of public sentiment whether criticism or praise are not threats to judicial independence. Recent threats of violence directed at chicago federal judges for simply doing their job however are an acceptable and have no place in our discourse." I couldn't agree more. More than six months ago, as the justice department for a briefing on the marshall service efforts to protect our judges. I'm still waiting for that to take place. It should be a priority of this committee.
▶ 0:29:58Sen. Durbin: The threats and challenges our federal judges face growers every day. Let's do something about it on the judiciary committee. I yield.
▶ 0:30:12Sen. Grassley: Because senator cornyn have other engagements, I will call on senator sullivan first.
▶ 0:30:20Sen. Sullivan: Thank you, Mr. chairman, senate colleagues on the judiciary committee, it's an honor to be here today to introduce a distinguished alaskan before this committee, aaron peterson, who has been nominated by president trump to serve as a judge on the united states district court for the district of alaska. As you all know, the vetting process for federal judge is rigorous and time-consuming, as it should be.
▶ 0:30:49Sen. Sullivan: I want to thank aaron and his family for their patients as this process has moved forward. As part of this nominating process, aaron was interviewed by the alaska federal judiciary council, a bipartisan group of alaskans who volunteered their time to interview federal judge candidates.
▶ 0:31:12Sen. Sullivan: The recent controversy about a federal judge in alaska who was not my first choice, ended up being a real disgrace to alaska and the federal judiciary, made it clear to me that we needed a much better vetting system in alaska for federal judges. Establishing the alaska federal judiciary council. Aaron is the first nominee interviewed by that counsel. I convened this, as I mentioned, for better vetting.
▶ 0:31:40Sen. Sullivan: I actually took some advice from our senators from texas and senator durbin, who have similar committees, to nominate quality candidates. I know this alaska federal judiciary council process will improve the selection of alaska judicial candidates. I want to publicly thank all the members of the council who put time and effort into this over the last year.
▶ 0:32:07Sen. Sullivan: When I first met aaron, I was impressed by his integrity, his respect for the rule of law, and his deep commitment to public service which also includes military service. Alaska has more veterans per capita than any other state in the country, and aaron is one of those proud alaskan veterans. He served in security forces in the U.S. air force after 9/11, deploying in the middle east and around the globe to protect airfields and airmen.
▶ 0:32:38Sen. Sullivan: His legal experience is broad and deep in alaska. After receiving his juris doctorate from gonzaga university school of law, he came back home to serve as a law clerk for alaska's superior court judge michael spann. He went on to serve as an assistant district attorney or the anchorage district attorney's office where he prosecuted serious criminal cases including homicides and sex crimes. Alaska is a great state.
▶ 0:33:11Sen. Sullivan: My colleagues have heard me brag about it many, many times. One thing we are not proud of in our state is our very high rates of sexual assault and domestic violence. It is a scorch on our state. Barron's experience in prosecuting these cases and working closely with the victims will be a huge asset to the federal court in alaska.
▶ 0:33:36Sen. Sullivan: Alaska is a unique state with many federal laws that specifically focus on our uniqueness. The trans-alaska pipeline authorization act, the alaska native claims settlement act, the alaska national interest lands conservation act. These are massive, complex loss exclusively focused on alaska.
▶ 0:33:56Sen. Sullivan: Even more recent laws like the 2017 tax cuts and jobs act, 2020 cares act, the recent budget reconciliation bill signed into law by president trump in july have entire sections in the federal law focused on alaska. All of these laws have significant and important promises and commitments made by the congress to alaskans and our alaska native people.
▶ 0:34:23Sen. Sullivan: But what has been a pattern for decades is that federal agencies charged with carrying out these laws often ignore these commitments to alaskans. Supreme court justice elana kagan said it recently and best in the two recent cases before the supreme court called sturgeon one and sturgeon to. Both were decided 9-0 by the U.S.
▶ 0:34:47Sen. Sullivan: Supreme court in alaska's favor in analyzing the statutes I just cited above. Justice kagan concluded federal laws reflect the simple truth that alaska is often the exception, not the rule, and is very different from the rest of the country in terms of loss. For a federal judge in alaska, it's imperative that he or she have a deep understanding of these federal laws and their application.
▶ 0:35:18Sen. Sullivan: Aaron definitely does. He has been an assistant attorney general in both the civil and criminal divisions in the department of law for over 10 years. He is currently the senior assistant attorney general in the natural resources section of the alaska department of law. He is the primary litigation counsel on anything to do from fisheries to water rights, access to federal lands. Aaron is a lifelong alaskan.
▶ 0:35:45Sen. Sullivan: He knows and understands our great state and federal laws that reflect on alaska. I think he will be a great federal judge. I urge his nomination be sent to the senate floor with positive votes from all of the members of this committee. Thank you again, Mr. chairman. It's an honor to introduce aaron.
▶ 0:36:06Sen. Grassley: Thank, senator sullivan. Senator cornyn.
▶ 0:36:13Sen. Cornyn: Hard to improve on senator cruz's introduction of nick gandy but I will say a few nice words about him. First of all, congratulations, nick, to you and your family. I know you are very proud of this great day. I'm always happy to see more texans represented on the federal bench. As senator cruz pointed out, Mr.
▶ 0:36:37Sen. Cornyn: Ganjei is a highly accomplished lawyer having served as a federal prosecutor in multiple districts including as interim U.S. attorney in the southern district of texas, the district into which he will now be in article three judge after his confirmation. During his time as a prosecutor, he worked on important topics like stemming the tide of illegal immigration, combating human trafficking and drug trafficking, protecting children from malicious offenders.
▶ 0:37:07Sen. Cornyn: His impressive legal credentials paired with his loot extensive legal experience as a prosecutor and his long-standing dedication to advancing the role of law in texas and around the country make him an excellent addition to the federal bench. Again, congratulations on your nomination. I look forward to supporting your confirmation both here and on the floor of the U.S. senate. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 0:37:35Sen. Cornyn: >> thank you, chairman grassley, senator durbin for holding this very important hearing today. Good morning to my distinguished colleagues that serve on this committee. This difficult committee.
▶ 0:37:49Sen. Cornyn: It's an honor to be here with my friend and colleague from the state of arkansas, senator cotton, to introduce president trump's nominee to serve as judge on the united states district court for the western district of arkansas. I would also like to say hello to his family and friends who are in attendance to support him. We are very happy to have them.
▶ 0:38:15Sen. Cornyn: A native of harrison, arkansas, calais is a graduate of arkansas state university and the university of arkansas law school. After graduating, he served as deputy prosecuting attorney for benton county where his work ethic and leadership elevated him to division chief. He then transitioned to the U.S.
▶ 0:38:39Sen. Cornyn: Attorney's office of the western district of arkansas and has almost two decades their marked by extensive and impressive accomplishments. His experience at the U.S. attorney's office includes stints as assistant united states attorney, rising to deputy criminal chief, then rising to criminal chief, that his first assistant united states attorney, eventually serving as the united states attorney since january of 2020.
▶ 0:39:10Sen. Cornyn: Throughout his career, clay has earned the respect of his colleagues, law enforcement, partners, and the community has served for his integrity, professionalism, and leadership. He has built a reputation as a principled prosecutor who approaches every case with steady judgment, fairness, and unwavering commitment to the rule of law. I know we will approach each case put before him with the same dedication and intellect he has demonstrated throughout his career.
▶ 0:39:40Sen. Cornyn: His expertise and temperament will undoubtedly serve him well as a judge, which is why senator cotton and I applaud president trump for selecting him to fill this post. It's clear he is not only qualified, but extremely well suited for the role. I strongly support his nomination and urge my colleagues to do the same. Thank you, senator grassley. >> thank you, chairman grassley, senator durbin, members of the ditch yearly committee.
▶ 0:40:09Sen. Cornyn: I'm pleased to join senator boozman to introduce a civil servant and fellow arkansan, Mr. david clay fowlkes. I would first like to thank clay for his many years of public service and for agreeing to continue the service as the president's nominee to be a united states district judge for the western district of arkansas. I'd also like to thank his family who are joining today, thank them for their support and encouragement throughout this process.
▶ 0:40:35Sen. Cornyn: As an ectopic prosecutor with experience handling cases ranging from misdemeanors to murders, clay has a lengthy track record that underscores his respect for the rule of law. Upon graduating from the university of arkansas school of law, after serving in the benton county prosecuting attorney's office, he began working at the united states attorney's office in the western district. Clay has spent nearly two decades in these U.S. attorney's office serving as the assistant U.S. attorney, criminal chief, now as the U.S. attorney for the western district.
▶ 0:41:07Sen. Cornyn: Under his leadership, the office has prioritized safety and law enforcement, specifically clay has started a response team alongside federal and state agents to current fentanyl distribution, investigate every drug poisoning debt, and hold drug dealers accountable. In addition to his effort to crack down on it was a drug trafficking, clay has also placed special emphasis on keeping kids safe and allow them to live their childhoods to the fullest.
▶ 0:41:35Sen. Cornyn: Thanks to his leadership and efforts, his office has prosecuted more than three times the national average of child abuse and exploitation cases. Clay has also been recognized with numerous awards for his accompaniment throughout his career. These include the whole coalition excellence in law enforcement award, and a recognition from the dea for outstanding efforts in drug trafficking prosecutions. Again, I like to thank him for his many years of working to get criminals off the streets and to keep arkansas communities safe.
▶ 0:42:04Sen. Cornyn: I strong support his nomination to be the next united states district judge for the western district of arkansas. I encourage my colleagues to do the same. Thank you.
▶ 0:42:17Sen. Grassley: Come to the table. Before you sit down, I would like to have you repeat the oath. Are you ready?
▶ 0:42:47Sen. Grassley: Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give before the committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? Each of you have answered in the affirmative. Thank you. Now, we will start with Mr. fowlkes. Please sit down.
▶ 0:43:08Sen. Grassley: This is your opportunity to speak to anything you want to say to the committee but also your opportunity to introduce family and friends, whatever the case might be, your respective roles. Proceed, Mr. fowlkes.
▶ 0:43:24Mr. Fowlkes: Thank you, chairman grassley. As you've heard, my name is clay fox, serving as the visor's attorney in the western district of arkansas. I want to begin by thanking the committee for your time and attention to this matter today. Thank you especially to senator grassley and recommend for durban. Thank you to every member of the committee for your attention today and for the opportunity to speak to you here today. I want to also thank president trump for this nomination.
▶ 0:43:51Mr. Fowlkes: This is not only the honor of my lifetime to be nominated for this, the highest honor of my career, but it also exceeded my wildest expectations for my career and for my life. I'm deeply grateful and thankful to president trump for his support and for his nomination. I also want to think senator boozman and senator cotton for their kind words of introduction and for their support for this nomination and throughout this process.
▶ 0:44:16Mr. Fowlkes: I also want to thank them and give them my deepest gratitude for their commitment to making arkansas a better place for our citizens. Before I begin with introducing my family, I also want to take a moment to thank god for this opportunity, as well. There is no question in my mind, I would not be here today speaking with this distinct committee if it were not for his strong hand of intervention on my behalf. As it says in john 3:27, man can receive not one thing unless it is given to him from heaven.
▶ 0:44:47Mr. Fowlkes: I'm so grateful for his blessings. I'm also so thankful that my family is able to join me here today. I'm joined by my wonderful, beautiful wife of 23 years, breanne, not only has she done an amazing job raising our family but she is also a very skilled and talented registered nurse, works at a hospital in northwest arkansas.
▶ 0:45:06Mr. Fowlkes: Her skills as a nurse are only surpassed by her skills as a mom, and god has blessed us with three amazing children who I'm also proud to say are joining us here today my son is 17 and are twins are both 12. They both -- they all three exceed at academics and sports, playing in the band back home in western arkansas. I'm also joined by my parents today, david and karen. Both of jonesboro, arkansas. I'm so grateful they're here to support me.
▶ 0:45:37Mr. Fowlkes: I'm also grateful for the many sacrifices they made for my sister and I in raising us. They were careful to raise us according to god's word and his will, but they also instilled in both my sister and I a strong work ethic from a very young age. I'm so thankful for both of them. My dad retired after 40 years of service with the united states army and the united states department of agriculture. Senator grassley, he would be have to talk about soybeans and corn any time. I'm so thankful that they are here to date in support of this.
▶ 0:46:07Mr. Fowlkes: Also very blessed to have the most amazing in-laws who are also here to support me today. Danny and linda from jonesboro, arkansas. So grateful for their unending support of our family. So thankful they are here today. Senator kennedy has stepped out, but they both read senator kennedy's book and are admirers of his despite the arkansas-louisiana rivalry. I'm also joined by several friends in the audience today, other family members. So grateful for all of them for their support.
▶ 0:46:37Mr. Fowlkes: I'm also incredibly grateful for the many friends and family members back home in western arkansas who are praying for me this morning and have expressed their support for me. I want to end by saying, I'm incredibly grateful for the men and women of the united states attorney's office in western arkansas. It is my honor and privilege to serve alongside them. I tried to begin every day with the goal of thinking about what can I do today to make arkansas a better and safer place for our citizens? I know that every member of the U.S.
▶ 0:47:07Mr. Fowlkes: Attorney's office in western arkansas shares that goal and shares the commitment that they have expressed over and over again to making arkansas a better and safer place. I'm so grateful to them for their support and to be able to serve alongside them. Thank you, senator grassley.
▶ 0:47:22Sen. Grassley: Thank you. Mr. ganjei.
▶ 0:47:25Mr. Ganjei: Thank you, chairman grassley, ranking member durban for scheduling this hearing. I want to thank president trump for the great honor of this nomination. I also want to thank senator cruz and corning for their very generous introductions, and thank them both for the recommendation of me to the white house, as well as their support through the confirmation process. 64 years ago, my father came to this country with nothing but his life savings of $100 and a deep abiding faith in the american dream.
▶ 0:47:54Mr. Ganjei: He started out working as a busboy, later hand drying cars at a car wash. He eventually moved west where he met my mother, herself a child of immigrants, growing up without hot water or indoor plumbing in a dusty wyoming mining town. They are both here this morning. Today, one generation later, their son sit before the world's greatest deliberative body, being considered for a lifetime appointment to the federal bench.
▶ 0:48:21Mr. Ganjei: Very few countries with something like this would be possible, and/or else but america would something like this be a common occurrence. This country has given me and my family gift of incalculable value. I have sought to repay this debt to the extent it can be repaid through a lifetime of public service. The next chapter of which will hopefully be as united states district court judge. Thank you for your time. I greatly appreciate the opportunity to speak to you this morning. I look forward to answering your questions.
▶ 0:48:49Sen. Grassley: Thank you. Mr. peterson.
▶ 0:48:52Mr. Peterson: Chairman grassley, ranking member durban, members of the committee, thank you for scheduling this committee. I'm thrilled to be here. I want to thank president trump are giving me the honor of this nomination. It truly is the professional honor of a lifetime. I want to thank senator sullivan both for his support throughout this process and for that very kind introduction. I would also like to thank senator murkowski for her support during this process. I want to recognize some of the people who traveled here to support me.
▶ 0:49:23Mr. Peterson: First and foremost, my brilliant and beautiful wife. We've been married over 21 years. She has been with me every step of the way. I definitely would not be anywhere near this opportunity without her unwavering love, patience, and support. She supported me throughout my career while pursuing her own very demanding careers as a math teacher and as a mother to our two children. Our 12-year-old daughter and our nine-year-old twins.
▶ 0:49:53Mr. Peterson: I want to thank her for all the sacrifices that she has made to make this a possibility. I also want to thank her sister reg and for watching our kids while we are here. Good luck, reagan. My father also traveled here from alaska. He wouldn't have missed this. He has been at every important life event for his children and grandchildren. My father moved to alaska from southern california in 1975. He planned to stay for a few months and have an adventure.
▶ 0:50:24Mr. Peterson: He has been there for 50 years. Fortunately, my mother agreed to go to alaska with him, also from southern california. I thank god every day that they chose to live there and that I got to be born and raised in the last frontier. Unfortunately, my mother can travel here today but I know she is extremely proud watching back home. My sister lindsey also came here and is at the hearing.
▶ 0:50:58Mr. Peterson: My uncle, he was army lt. Col. Retired larry peterson, is also here. On a professional level, I want to thank judge michael spann for whom I had the privilege of clerking. Judge stanton was truly an honor, a pleasure to work for him. When I told him I was thinking about this opportunity, he had been the U.S. attorney for many years in alaska and he encouraged me. I want to thank him for that encouragement.
▶ 0:51:27Mr. Peterson: Judge spann approaches work diligently, with humility, and always respecting every litigant that appeared before him. I took so much away from that clerkship and carry those lessons with me every day since. Finally, I want to thank attorney general steve cox and all of fantastic people that have had the pleasure to work with over the years at the alaska department of law. It's been an honor and pleasure to serve my home state alongside all of those extremely dedicated public servants. I welcome the committee's questions.
▶ 0:51:56Sen. Grassley: Thank you. Now we will have questions. I will start out. I will start with you, Mr. ganjei. The committee has received multiple letters from criminal defense and civil rights attorneys who have litigated against you. Each of them praise your professionalism and the fidelity to the law.
▶ 0:52:23Sen. Grassley: Several members of this committee and their staff's have also worked with you during senator cruz's chief counsel both as a prosecutor and as a senate staffer. You've had to work with people to disagree with you to serve the american people. So this may seem like a softball question, but your answer will kind of tell us how you will approach it as a person with a robe. What lessons will you take from these experiences to the bench?
▶ 0:52:54Mr. Ganjei: Senator, I think the single most important thing in the way the court treats any litigant is to treat them with respect. Not only treat them with personal respect, but help them understand that you are taking their case seriously. It is tempting to treat a case may be as routine matter. You see hundreds of these specific types of cases a year, but to the litigants in front of you, it is the single most important case of their life.
▶ 0:53:27Mr. Ganjei: If fortunate enough to be confirmed as a district judge, I would approach each legal dispute with care, with attention, and I want everyone to walk out of the courtroom -- they may not win -- but they would feel they have been given their day in court.
▶ 0:53:42Sen. Grassley: Thank you. Now to Mr. fowlkes. You have had a long career as a local and federal prosecutor, even including being a U.S. attorney. You have received many awards for your service. You have tried over 20 cases to verdict, I've been told. Can you explain your judicial philosophy and how your experience as a prosecutor has prepared you to serve as a judge?
▶ 0:54:10Mr. Fowlkes: Thank you, senator. My spirits as a prosecutor has meant everything in preparation for this moment. I have learned deep and lasting lessons from every single judge that I was able to practice in front of, from meticulous preparation, to understanding the case and law, treating parties with respect at every opportunity.
▶ 0:54:32Mr. Fowlkes: I have learned something from every single judge that I have tried cases in front of or practiced in front of, that I would intend to take with me and further my career, if I'm fortunate enough to be confirmed by the senate. As far as my judicial philosophy, I agree with what colleague Mr. ganjei said. It is so important for a judge to be the most prepared individual in the courtroom.
▶ 0:54:54Mr. Fowlkes: It is so important for a judge to correctly identify the applicable law and to correctly find the proper facts and the true facts, apply the law to those facts, and make a decision that is independent and that is fair and just, and that demonstrates deep respect for the law. I think I would be the judicial philosophy I have learned throughout my career as a prosecutor that I would take with me to the bench.
▶ 0:55:18Sen. Grassley: Thank you. Mr. peterson. You spent nearly 15 years in public service at the alaska department of law. You know serve as assistant attorney general and the natural resource section. Please tell us how your career has prepared you for the unique type of cases that you would preside over as a federal judge in alaska.
▶ 0:55:46Mr. Peterson: Chairman grassley, as senator sullivan mentioned, alaska has many federal statutes that are specific to alaska. There are large, important pieces of legislation that are critical to the success of alaska. One of those that he mentioned was the alaska national interest in conservation act. I have litigated that act specifically for several years.
▶ 0:56:14Mr. Peterson: I have deep familiarity with the laws that are specific to alaska , are unique and come before district judges in alaska, where nobody else in the country would have no reason to know much about them. The deep familiarity I have with those laws, with my history of litigating them, I think, prepares me for many of the cases that will come before the district court.
▶ 0:56:47Mr. Peterson: Also as a prosecutor, I traveled all across alaska prosecuting cases, serious felonies in anchorage, all across the state from juneau to dutch harbor to delta junction, even appearing on the arctic ocean for a sentencing hearing. I have a wide cross-section of experience in the arenas that are likely to come before the district court. Hopefully, I can preside over those matters if I'm fortunate enough to be confirmed.
▶ 0:57:16Sen. Grassley: Thank you. Senator hirono.
▶ 0:57:22Sen. Hirono: Thank you, Mr. chairman. Welcome to each of you and your families. Good morning. I asked the following two initial questions of all nominees that come before the committee of which I sent relevant to their fitness to serve. I will ask these questions and I like to ask all of you to respond individually, starting with Mr. fowlkes. We will go down the line.
▶ 0:57:44Sen. Hirono: Since you became a legal adult, have you made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?
▶ 0:57:53Mr. Fowlkes: No, senator.
▶ 0:57:55Mr. Ganjei: No, senator.
▶ 0:57:57Mr. Peterson: No, senator.
▶ 0:58:04Sen. Hirono: Mr. ganjei, you recently reposted on your official U.S. attorney x account a homeland security post that compared capturing undocumented immigrants to a pokémon game, using the game's catchphrase "got to catch them all." you reposted the video of the ice officers catching immigrants
▶ 0:58:36Sen. Hirono: Set to the pokémon theme song and you commented, "give their social media got a raise." it is troubling, problematic enough that all of us are seeing videos of ice agents masked, no identifying marks or anything, engaging in raids in communities, sowing fear and chaos.
▶ 0:59:07Sen. Hirono: To those individuals who are the subjects of these raids, do you think that being portrayed as a game, do you think that is appropriate? Do you think it is appropriate to repost this kind of video, knowing that you are going to be sitting as a judge, possibly having some of these people come before you? Do you find it amusing?
▶ 0:59:28Mr. Ganjei: Senator, my understanding of that video, it is specifically about ice's worst of the worse initiative. They specifically cite eight or nine individuals, one convicted of murder, one convicted of manslaughter, one convicted of a unspecified homicide.
▶ 0:59:47Sen. Hirono: Actually, I'm asking, we know that ice agents are not just going after the worst of the worst. What they are supposed to be doing. We know there are U.S. citizens also being caught up. We know there is fear in many communities because of these raids. I'm asking you whether you consider this a source of amusement to the point where you would repost this kind of a video? You can answer yes or no.
▶ 1:00:16Mr. Ganjei: Senator, again, the video, as I understand it, was talking about the worst of the worst initiative. Having murderers and those that sexually prey on children off the street is a good thing.
▶ 1:00:28Sen. Hirono: Excuse me, this is not an opportunity for you to physically extol the regime's line. Obviously, I don't consider it appropriate, what the ice agents are doing, sowing fear and chaos in our communities, to the point where communities are rising up and protesting and doing everything they can to protect members in their community.
▶ 1:00:59Sen. Hirono: Do you come Mr. ganjei, agree that the constitution provides due process rights to all persons regardless of citizenship status?
▶ 1:01:08Mr. Ganjei: Senator, due process applies to everyone.
▶ 1:01:12Sen. Hirono: As a judge, you would apply to due process to everyone regardless if they are U.S. citizens or not.
▶ 1:01:18Mr. Ganjei: Yes, senator.
▶ 1:01:20Sen. Hirono: Throughout your career as a prosecutor -- last question -- you condemned attacks on law enforcement officers, even issued a warning in your district, saying let it be known, if you lay a hand on an officer in the southern district of texas, we will do whatever we can to put you in federal prison. You are very much against attack on police officers.
▶ 1:01:49Sen. Hirono: Did the riders on the january 6 attack law-enforcement officers? ?
▶ 1:01:54Yes Or No Mr. Ganjei: My understanding from news reports is there were some.
▶ 1:01:59Sen. Hirono: I'm sorry, what? Did they attack law-enforcement officers or not on january 6?
▶ 1:02:06Mr. Ganjei: Senator, my understanding from news reporting is that, yes.
▶ 1:02:11Sen. Hirono: You also said that people who attack law-enforcement officers are attacking the american system of justice. Would you say that the rioters on january 6, who were all parted by president trump, where they attacking the american way of justice?
▶ 1:02:27Mr. Ganjei: Senator, I cannot offer --
▶ 1:02:31Sen. Hirono: Yes or no. I would say that since you say the people who attack police officers are attacking the american system of justice, I would say the january 6 rioters fit that mold. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:02:53Sen. Grassley: One from a criminal defense attorney, one from a public defender, and one from a civil rights attorney, each represented criminal defendants in cases before Mr. ganjei. All three letters praised his competence, ethics, and professionalism as a federal prosecutor.
▶ 1:03:16Sen. Grassley: One of the letters described the nominee as "the human being that we should all strive to become and the attorney most who practiced hope to be." all of these records have similar sentiments. Without objection, these three records will be placed in the report. Senator kennedy.
▶ 1:03:45Sen. Grassley: Whoever is on the republican side, I have to go up to finance. I will be back. Just take your turn. I think I will be back before the meeting is over.
▶ 1:03:59Sen. Kennedy: Thank you, Mr. chairman. Mr. ganjei, how long did you work for senator cruz?
▶ 1:04:06Mr. Ganjei: I work for senator cruz for three years.
▶ 1:04:11Sen. Kennedy: Did you work closely with him?
▶ 1:04:14Mr. Ganjei: I would say so, yes.
▶ 1:04:17Sen. Kennedy: Is a true that senator cruz can burp the alphabet backwards?
▶ 1:04:25Mr. Ganjei: [laughter] senator, I've been instructed not to reveal that.
▶ 1:04:31Sen. Kennedy: Is it true that, growing up, senator cruz had an imaginary friend who his parents actually preferred?
▶ 1:04:42Mr. Ganjei: [laughter] senator, I have no such knowledge.
▶ 1:04:47Sen. Kennedy: What article of the constitution calls for checks and balances?
▶ 1:04:54Mr. Ganjei: Senator, I think checks and balances is inherent in the first three articles of the constitution which gives to all of them different powers and response abilities.
▶ 1:05:05Sen. Kennedy: Ok. Mr. peterson, welcome. Tell me how you amend the U.S. constitution.
▶ 1:05:15Mr. Peterson: Senator, you amend the U.S. constitution pursuant to the procedure found in article five.
▶ 1:05:21Sen. Kennedy: Could you speak into the microphone?
▶ 1:05:24Mr. Peterson: The constitution's amendment pursuant to the procedure in article five. That is two thirds vote of both the house and the senate and then ratification by three quarters of the states. There is also a constitutional convention method, but that has never been used.
▶ 1:05:42Sen. Kennedy: Ok. Mr. fowlkes, how are you? What is the warrant requirement?
▶ 1:05:56Mr. Fowlkes: The warrant requirement states that any person who is going to be arrested should have a warrant, the police should seek a warrant for that person to arrest them. There are exception to the warrant requirement including exigent circumstances which are usually followed up in arkansas with a probable cause complaint, affidavit and warrant in support of that.
▶ 1:06:16Sen. Kennedy: What about to search someone, do you have to have a warrant? Let me amend that, does the warrant requirement apply to search and seizure?
▶ 1:06:28Mr. Fowlkes: Yes, according to the fourth amendment of the U.S. constitution, there shall be no unreasonable searches and seizures without a warrant. There are obviously exception to that including the carol ross cochran for removal exits, exigent circumstances, when time doesn't permit to be able to seek a warrant from a magistrate or judge. But yes.
▶ 1:06:50Sen. Kennedy: Could arkansas decide that it doesn't want to follow the federal rule, that it wants to require a warrant for all arrests and all searches and seizures with no exceptions?
▶ 1:07:07Mr. Fowlkes: They certainly could, senator. However, as a prosecutor for many years, I understand those exemptions to the warrant requirement are important for a public safety and law enforcement safety.
▶ 1:07:19Sen. Kennedy: How could arkansas do that?
▶ 1:07:21Mr. Fowlkes: Arkansas could pass a law but a state legislature to say a warrant is required in every arrest made throughout the state of arkansas. Obviously, that would be subject to challenges in both state and federal court.
▶ 1:07:34Sen. Kennedy: If arkansas did that, why doesn't the supremacy clause overrule arkansas?
▶ 1:07:42Mr. Fowlkes: Certainly would be an argument, if that was challenged in federal court.
▶ 1:07:46Sen. Kennedy: Who would win?
▶ 1:07:48Mr. Ganjei: I'm not sure without knowing more facts about how the statute was drafted, how to examine exactly the type of legislature -- legislative interpretation that goes along with that. Without more facts --
▶ 1:08:02Sen. Kennedy: Let me give you these facts. You recite it correctly the warrant requirement, exceptions both for arrest and search and seizure. Suppose the arkansas legislature said, we appreciate the advice but we are not going to follow it. We are going to require a warrant or both arrests and searches and seizures. And somebody challenges that under the supremacy clause. Who would win?
▶ 1:08:31Mr. Fowlkes: I'm not sure I've ever thought about that that in-depth, senator, but it would be a strong child into that state law.
▶ 1:08:40Sen. Kennedy: What if arkansas construed its state constitution to require a warrant for both arrest and seizure?
▶ 1:08:48Mr. Fowlkes: I think it would be the same analysis, whether it was a law passed by the state legislator or an amendment to the constitution.
▶ 1:08:55Sen. Kennedy: Why couldn't arkansas -- ever heard of the adequate and independent state ground doctrine? My wood the adequate and independent state ground doctrine applied there?
▶ 1:09:06Mr. Fowlkes: That certainly would be an argument that one of the parties could make in support of that arkansas state law. Again, it would go back to legislative analysis in determining all the factors that go into that, as to whether or not that we withstand scrutiny from the court.
▶ 1:09:23Sen. Kennedy: Thank you, counselors. Senator whitehouse. I'm sorry, what did you call me?
▶ 1:09:33Sen. Whitehouse: Chairman.
▶ 1:09:34Sen. Kennedy: Thank you. I appreciate that.
▶ 1:09:40Sen. Whitehouse: If confirmed, you would become members of the federal judiciary. You would become members of the federal judiciary at a time when there is a particularly difficult threat environment for judges. A person threatening a judge has committed a crime, correct? >> yes, senator. >> yes, senator.
▶ 1:10:10Sen. Whitehouse: >> yes, senator.
▶ 1:10:13Sen. Whitehouse: The criminal liability related to that threat could extend beyond the utterer of the threat, is also correct?
▶ 1:10:28Mr. Fowlkes: That would depend strongly on the facts and circumstances, the nature of the threat.
▶ 1:10:33Sen. Whitehouse: There are facts and circumstances in which criminal liability for threatening a judge could extend beyond the utterer of the threat to individuals who may have orchestrated or in other ways directed the threat be uttered against the judge. Do all three of you agree with that?
▶ 1:10:57Mr. Fowlkes: I think my answer would be a depend strongly on the facts and circumstances.
▶ 1:11:02Sen. Whitehouse: Very open route that could happen if the facts and circumstances that are there, correct?
▶ 1:11:08Mr. Ganjei: I would agree with my colleagues, senator.
▶ 1:11:12Mr. Peterson: I agree with my colleagues.
▶ 1:11:17Sen. Whitehouse: Let's say that you are now a judge and you are on the receiving end of that threat. Would you expect that the marshall service, or if the marshall service has seen in the investigative piece of this over to the fbi, the fbi would take a look at not only the utterer of the threat, but also evidence
▶ 1:11:49Sen. Whitehouse: That there may be other parties complicit or probable -- culpable behind the utterer of the threat? >> senator, there has been some recent case law on the analysis of threats of both against individuals and against federal officials.
▶ 1:12:12Sen. Whitehouse: I would hope that the investigating officers and the investigating ausa's would look closely at those factors, the facts and circumstances of the individual involved, circumstances surrounding that. My answer to that is I would hope that the U.S. marshals service, federal protection service, the ausa's assigned to that case will look closely at all those factors and make an appropriate determination.
▶ 1:12:35Sen. Whitehouse: You all agree it would be wrong to categorically refuse to investigate behind the utterer no matter what the evidence?
▶ 1:12:44Mr. Fowlkes: Revert back to my original answer. It just depends very strongly on the facts and circumstances of the threat, whether it is analyzed as a true threat and or whether other individuals involved in making that threat as well.
▶ 1:12:57Sen. Whitehouse: Which means that if there were such facts and circumstances, it would be wrong for federal investigators, as a categorical matter, to refuse to investigate that. There is a possible avenue of investigation. To foreclose that would not be right. Do I understand correctly?
▶ 1:13:20Mr. Fowlkes: I think so, senator. My original answer remains the same.
▶ 1:13:25Sen. Whitehouse: Depending on the facts and circumstances, it would be wrong to foreclose investigating that at all as a categorical matter. Do you agree as well?
▶ 1:13:35Mr. Ganjei: I agree with my colleague. It is a highly factual circumstance. I don't know if I can offer an opinion.
▶ 1:13:43Sen. Whitehouse: Every criminal investigation ends up being a highly factual circumstance. If there is an avenue of investigation and of criminal liability, that should be investigated where the facts and circumstances justify. It's a fairly straightforward proposition. You are not contesting that, are you?
▶ 1:14:07Mr. Ganjei: Senator, my understanding of the question, whether every avenue of investigation should be pursued, I think that is highly dependent on the specific case.
▶ 1:14:17Sen. Whitehouse: Are there some cases in which an avenue of investigation supported by the evidence should not be pursued?
▶ 1:14:23Mr. Ganjei: Senator, I think the supported by evidence part of it is the key.
▶ 1:14:28Sen. Whitehouse: That is why my question was asked the way it was. Why would you want an investigative agency to categorically refuse to investigate legitimate avenues of c1 if the evidence and facts d circumstances justify it?
▶ 1:14:51Mr. Ganjei: I'm sorry, I didn't understand your question, senator.
▶ 1:14:56Sen. Whitehouse: Never mind. >> thank you, senator. Senator moody.
▶ 1:15:05Senator Moody: Thank you, chairman kennedy.
▶ 1:15:10Senator Kennedy: I love that -- the sound of that, senator moody. It gives me goosebumps. [laughter]
▶ 1:15:23Senator Moody: This demands the entire family's attention. As someone who grew up in a family of public servants, I'm so thankful. I'm struck by her nominees.
▶ 1:15:42Senator Moody: At one point now or in the past, they were all prosecutors working to ensure that the laws passed by lawmakers on behalf of the people, the people's laws worth faithfully enforced and that is so important to our carefully balanced separation of powers, the way our government is meant to work, so thank you to your prior service.
▶ 1:16:04Senator Moody: I think it speaks volumes about who you are as people to ensuring not only the strength of our constitutional framework and also the safety of our communities. I'm comforted by the fact that we have nominees of your caliber put it up to this position.
▶ 1:16:23Senator Moody: I want to ask you about this phenomenon where prosecutors of jurisdictions are saying, I don't care what the people's law says, I don't think it should be a law so therefore I'm not going to prosecute it. What is your opinion on what that does to the constitutional framework and how the people's government is supposed to work?
▶ 1:16:45Mr. Ganjei: I won't speak about the specific instance you described or a matter of public controversy but I can say that as a government official, as an unelected mid-level executive branch official, it's not up to me to decide what laws should be prosecuted or not be prosecuted. I think policy decisions are best left to the branches accountable to the people.
▶ 1:17:11Sen. Moody: Just in general not specifically, Mr. fowlkes, how important is it that we have top prosecutors of jurisdictions and forcing the peoples' laws?
▶ 1:17:22Mr. Fowlkes: I think that is very important and we have taken an oath to enforce the laws as written and I'm proud of our record in western arkansas with the case and take -- intake. I also share what my colleague noted, I can't speak specifically.
▶ 1:17:40Sen. Moody: I'm not asking you to speak specifically, but the phenomenon of having top prosecutors and law enforcement officials say, I'm not going to do with the people want me to do. That fundamentally disrupts our system of government, would you agree?
▶ 1:17:59Mr. Fowlkes: I agree. Back to some of my jury trials, can you faithfully apply the laws to the circumstances of each individual case as jurors? I think if we ask jurors to do that it is purposefully -- it is acceptable to ask prosecutors to do that.
▶ 1:18:21Sen. Moody: I come from a long line of judges and I'm really concerned that the judicial branch has a pr crisis. A rightfully labeled pr crisis because we have many district court judges that are more interested in wearing a blue jersey than a black robe. Based on my fundamental belief we have to have impartial judges that will faithfully apply the laws given to them.
▶ 1:18:51Sen. Moody: I believe this fundamentally disrupts the carefully balanced powers set forth in verse -- constitution. Would you agree?
▶ 1:19:02Mr. Fowlkes: I do.
▶ 1:19:04Sen. Moody: Would you agree, Mr. ganjei?
▶ 1:19:08Mr. Ganjei: I would.
▶ 1:19:10Sen. Moody: Mr. peterson?
▶ 1:19:13Mr. Peterson: I would.
▶ 1:19:14Sen. Moody: When you have judges that conferences with no evidence at all saying this administration is going to violate court orders. Or making allegations that senators would destroy evidence.
▶ 1:19:32Sen. Moody: All of this undermines the fair and impartiality need that we have to have in our judges and I'm terrified that some of the behavior we have seen around the country is undermining the strength of our system. I want to ask you, Mr. fowlkes -- Mr. ganjei, part of this is when judges issue nationwide injunctions. What is your belief in terms of a ceiling of relief that is available to a district court judge?
▶ 1:20:01Mr. Ganjei: I know the supreme court has spoken on this recently that the relief should be one that gives the parties full relief, but that congress did not authorize otherwise nationwide injunctions for district courts.
▶ 1:20:18Sen. Moody: My time has expired. Thank you. >> thank you. Thank you, Mr. chairman. Thank you all for being here and thank you for your willingness to serve. Mr.
▶ 1:20:33Sen. Moody: Ganjei, you have been a prosecutor and you have repeatedly claimed that the tax on law enforcement are unacceptable, which I think we all can agree. You have also said that people who engage in attacks on law enforcement should be held accountable.
▶ 1:21:02Sen. Moody: You stated in a department of justice press release last month "those who attacked law enforcement officers are attacking the american system of justice." in another release you said "let it be known if you lay a hand on an officer, deputy, or federal agent, the state of tx will do whatever it can to put you in prison for as long as federal law will allow." president trump gave a blanket
▶ 1:21:34Sen. Moody: Pardon to individuals who participated in january 6th, 2021 attack on the capital -- capitol, many of them were involved in a salts on law enforcement's -- assaults on law enforcement. I know you have been asked briefly about this, but let me take a couple of examples.
▶ 1:22:01Sen. Moody: Julian gaher sprayed officer brian sicknick with pepper spray. He admitted to this violence and was sentenced to more than 6.5 years in prison for his crimes. Before he was pardoned by president trump.
▶ 1:22:25Sen. Moody: So my question to you is do you support president trump's pardon of Mr. kaher?
▶ 1:22:39Mr. Ganjei: I can't comment on the president's exercise of his constitutional powers anymore than I could comment on the house's use of the power of the purse. I'm comfortable saying I have poor political violence of all kinds.
▶ 1:23:02Sen. Blumenthal: Well, this individual atrociously assaulted a capitol police officer and you are unwilling to say whether you support a pardon that allowed him to go free without any record of a crime?
▶ 1:23:22Mr. Ganjei: Senator, as a judicial nominee it would be mpox -- improper for me to way into public comment like that and comment on president trump's power or president biden's commutations of people on death row.
▶ 1:23:48Sen. Blumenthal: I'm talking about assaulting law enforcement officers. Ryan nichols pushed the crowd against officers defending the doors at the capitol and after the attack he posted a video to facebook, where he said "I'm going to be violent now" and he said "if you want to know where ryan nichols stands, ryan nichols stands for violence." he was sentenced to more than five years in prison trump pardoned him.
▶ 1:24:18Sen. Blumenthal: What do you think is the reason that would justify that pardon?
▶ 1:24:20Mr. Ganjei: Senator, I wouldn't stand to speculate on the president's reason.
▶ 1:24:26Sen. Blumenthal: Well, do you support it?
▶ 1:24:29Mr. Ganjei: Senator, again, I can't comment on separate branches' exercise of enumerated constitutional powers.
▶ 1:24:39Sen. Blumenthal: Are there any limits to what you would not support in terms of the pardon used by the president?
▶ 1:24:46Mr. Ganjei: Senator, you stated any limits to what I would support, I'm stating I cannot comment on president trump's use of the pardon power or president biden's use of the power of commutation for people on death row.
▶ 1:25:05Sen. Blumenthal: I haven't asked you about president biden's use of the pardon power and for you to gratuitously talk about other uses of the pardon I think is simply meant to distract from this use of the pardon power with respect to these individuals who committed assault, brutal assaults on police officers. My time is expired. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:25:34Sen. Blumenthal: >> before I call on senator hawley, I have a letter here supporting Mr. ganjei's nomination from a person, ray hunt, executive director of the houston police officers union. Mr. hunt praised Mr.
▶ 1:25:54Sen. Blumenthal: Ganjei's "steadfast commitment to keeping our city safe." and his efforts to "work hand-in-hand with local law enforcement to combat violent crime, reduce the flow of illegal firearms and narcotics and hold dangerous offenders accountable." without objection, that will go on the record. Senator hawley.
▶ 1:26:20Sen. Hawley: Thank you very much, Mr. chairman. Mr. ganjei, I will give you more time if you wanted to respond, did you want to say something about president biden's commutation power?
▶ 1:26:31Mr. Ganjei: I was merely illustrating how the president has broad commutation and pardon power and president biden commuted the sentences on death row.
▶ 1:26:53Sen. Hawley: Do you want to give him a grade on that?
▶ 1:26:56Mr. Ganjei: I wouldn't give him a grade on that.
▶ 1:26:58Sen. Hawley: Do you want to grade any president on constitutional authority?
▶ 1:27:03Mr. Ganjei: I do not.
▶ 1:27:03Sen. Hawley: Would be within your purview should you be confirmed?
▶ 1:27:07Mr. Ganjei: Whether I should be confirmed or as a nominee, neither would it be proper for me to comment.
▶ 1:27:14Sen. Hawley: Let me ask each of you if I could, I want to talk a little bit first about nationwide injunctions. I think this is a vital issue. Tell me what you understand if you were to be confirmed, tell me what the scope of equitable powers to grant injunctive relief, to whom could you granted under one circumstances? This is an issue of vital importance that has been discussed on a bipartisan basis here.
▶ 1:27:45Sen. Hawley: Mr. fowlkes, am I pronouncing her name correctly?
▶ 1:27:52Mr. Fowlkes: Fowlkes. Just like a bunch of "folks." there are a series of factors that courts have considered as to whether or not a party -- an injunction can be granted.
▶ 1:28:22Mr. Fowlkes: The possibility of a public interest in that order.
▶ 1:28:23Sen. Hawley: All of that sounds correct. Is it your understanding, should you be confirmed could you as a district court judge bind parties who are not before you?
▶ 1:28:33Mr. Fowlkes: It is a very developing area of the law and my understanding is is that that power be limited by the case law from the supreme court and also by the federal rules of civil procedure.
▶ 1:28:45Sen. Hawley: Tell me what you think the relevant case law is. I assume you're talking about thecasas case.
▶ 1:28:52Mr. Fowlkes: The court determined that was a power that should be reserved to the congress for a nationwide authority over certain issues and I think that under this modified our previous understanding of federal row procedure 65 and I think it is a very developing area of the law. It would be very fact specific. Going forward it is an important case.
▶ 1:29:21Sen. Hawley: Are you telling me you think you can as a district court judge, that there are some instances where you could bind parties who are not before you?
▶ 1:29:30Mr. Fowlkes: I think we are still understanding the court's ruling in casa and developing procedures that go along with that. It would be highly unusual and certainly challenge a ball in court.
▶ 1:29:45Sen. Hawley: What is the basic rule you understand the supreme court to have lay down?
▶ 1:29:49Mr. Fowlkes: The basic rule that a nationwide injunction that enjoins people who are not before the court would be exceeding the court's power in that respect.
▶ 1:29:58Sen. Hawley: Good. Mr. ganjei, what would your power be to bind parties not present?
▶ 1:30:06Mr. Ganjei: Generally I would not be able to bind parties not in front of the court but the goal for any injunction would be to give complete relief to the parties before the court.
▶ 1:30:15Sen. Hawley: I think you just stated the rule of the casa case.
▶ 1:30:19Mr. Ganjei: Yes.
▶ 1:30:21Sen. Hawley: You know, senator kennedy, here I am asking questions and giving the answers. Thanks. It is really kind of defeating the point though. It is like your bar exam except I'm giving the answers.
▶ 1:30:35Sen. Hawley: I think the casa said the equitable powers of the district court to provide relief to the plaintiffs in the case. Let's talk about that in practice, Mr. peterson. What does that mean in practice in terms of the districts equitable powers?
▶ 1:31:01Mr. Peterson: It means a court has authority over the parties before it in the case. The supreme court in trump v. Casa pointing out nationwide injunctions don't flow from the judiciary act, the goal is to give complete relief to the parties before the court and if I were to be confirmed I would strive to achieve that.
▶ 1:31:25Sen. Hawley: Is it fair to say that because the injunctive powers equitable and courts have said for centuries that equity power has to be very closely monitored because it is discretionary in many ways, it is difficult to pin down. We've got to be very careful in the use of equitable powers.
▶ 1:31:56Sen. Hawley: You would want to be careful outside of a ruling that reaches out beyond plaintiffs in front of you, you want to be very careful?
▶ 1:32:06Mr. Peterson: Absolutely.
▶ 1:32:08Sen. Hawley: I have more questions about the sentencing guidelines. I will give those to you in the written record and congratulations again on your nominations.
▶ 1:32:18Chair Grassley: By the way, I have legislation in on national injunctions with several cosponsors. I was with the chairman of the house judiciary committee and he also has legislation in on that so regardless of what the supreme court said, we can narrow down even more.
▶ 1:32:46Sen. Hawley: I agree with you Mr. chairman, I think it is important we do it.
▶ 1:32:49Chair Grassley: Senator schiff is on his way. Senator kennedy, did you have any other questions you wanted to ask for anything?
▶ 1:32:59Senator Kennedy: No, I'm happy. [indiscernible] [laughter]
▶ 1:33:06Chair Grassley: I'm going to ask you folks out of courtesy to senator schiff, I shall just hold in abeyance the continuation, I don't have any more questions.
▶ 1:33:12Sen. Hawley: I'm happy to ask another question.
▶ 1:33:15Chair Grassley: Please.
▶ 1:33:16Sen. Hawley: I'm sure the nominees are ecstatic about that. I want to stay on the topic of nationwide injunctions for just a second. If a district court to recharacterize the injunction and say it is not an injunction per se, it is a temporary restraining order and therefore the casa case does not really applied, so it is a whole different set of analysis, is it your understanding that you could do that? Is the temporary restraining order a get out of jail free card?
▶ 1:33:49Sen. Hawley: What is your understanding of how you can use tro's and how the casa relates to tro's?
▶ 1:33:56Mr. Fowlkes: I believe it is the same analysis and the same factors.
▶ 1:34:10Mr. Ganjei: I think it would be the same. They are both equitable.
▶ 1:34:14Mr. Peterson: It is the same analysis, senator.
▶ 1:34:18Chair Grassley: Senator schiff.
▶ 1:34:21Senator Schiff: Thank you, Mr. chairman. If you give me one more moment.
▶ 1:34:29Chair Grassley: We won't take it off your five minutes.
▶ 1:34:40Sen. Schiff: Thank you, Mr. chairman. Mr. ganjei, you worked for professor and former assistant deputy attorney general john you. And I wanted to ask you, he recently wrote an op-ed in the washington post concerning the military strikes on shipping and I raise an issue as to whether that was lawful.
▶ 1:35:14Sen. Schiff: Let me ask you your thoughts as a legal and constitutional matter. In the absence of congressional authorization to use force, in the absence of any declaration of war, our military attacks on ships suspected of drug trafficking lawful or constitutional?
▶ 1:35:35Mr. Ganjei: Senator, I think that is a highly fact specific situation and if there were such strikes and there were going to be challenged for it, there was a likelihood it could come before me if I'm fortunate enough to be confirmed so I don't think I can offer an opinion on it.
▶ 1:35:54Sen. Schiff: Can you offer an opinion on whether the war powers would be constitutional?
▶ 1:36:02Mr. Ganjei: That could be something that comes before me as well.
▶ 1:36:06Sen. Schiff: I imagine any things -- many things could come before you. That does not preclude you from commenting on the wars act. --war powers act.
▶ 1:36:21Mr. Ganjei: My answer is the same.
▶ 1:36:23Sen. Schiff: Let me ask you all, share with me if you would your views on nationwide injunctions. We can go down the line.
▶ 1:36:34Mr. Fowlkes: I think it is a very developing area of the law after trump v. Casa and that decision. But typically injunctions and temporary restraining orders are constrained by federal rule civil procedure 65 and the courts have along with that rule basically considered four important factors as to whether or not an injunction or temporary restraining order should be issued which have already stated. One of them is the likelihood of a party being successful on that injunction in trial eventually.
▶ 1:37:07Mr. Fowlkes: The balance of equities between issuing the injunction and not. The possibility of irreparable harm. And then of course the public interest in issuing that injunction with it being a developing area of the law, it would be a very cautious analysis but it would include those factors and the factors enumerated by the court in trump v. Casa.
▶ 1:37:27Sen. Schiff: So you wouldn't categorically rule out the potential applicability of a nationwide injunction?
▶ 1:37:31Mr. Fowlkes: I think we have to examine closely casa and the key would be the balance of equities and whether or not that supreme court decision constraints the application of those four factors with the nationwide injunction and it would appear on its face that it would. With it being a very developing area of the law, it is going to be a fact specific and case specific analysis that goes into those factors.
▶ 1:37:57Mr. Ganjei: Senator, I agree with much of my colleague's statement. I would say post-casa, you would look to see what is needed to give the parties before you fall and equitable relief. But generally the supreme court has cautioned against courts having the ability to bind parties not before them.
▶ 1:38:24Mr. Peterson: And I agree with both of my colleagues, senator.
▶ 1:38:36Sen. Schiff: If we could go down the line also, do you believe congress has the power to legislate an enforceable code of ethics on the supreme court?
▶ 1:38:50Mr. Fowlkes: I think I would probably need more facts and circumstances to be able to answer that question fully, but certainly of congress were to pass the law, it would be subject to all the same scrutiny requirements of any other piece of legislation.
▶ 1:39:05Sen. Schiff: Can you do a little better than that?
▶ 1:39:08Mr. Fowlkes: I think congress certainly has the authority under the law to issue laws and to pass statutes and certainly that would be one that congress has the authority to do. Whether or not it would withstand constitutional scrutiny, I would have to have more facts and circumstances to make a complete analysis of the subject.
▶ 1:39:32Mr. Ganjei: Senator, I also would like to have more facts before rendering an opinion on that, but I would obviously be very attuned to the separation of powers concerns that something like that would raise.
▶ 1:39:49Mr. Peterson: Senator, again, I agree with my colleagues, I'm going to add that the potential separation of powers concern, but Mr. ganjei did that.
▶ 1:40:01Sen. Schiff: Thank you you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:40:05Chair Grassley: [inaudible] >> yes, thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:40:13Chair Grassley: [inaudible] -- be the last one. He had to go to another committee meeting, that is why he was not here. Just hold please.
▶ 1:40:44Chair Grassley: Are you ready to go if I call on you now? We are waiting for senator durbin, but you can go ahead. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. And as always, congratulations on the nominations.
▶ 1:41:06Chair Grassley: We are working as hard as we can and I know you have heard it from others, to make certain that we get through the nominations and confirmation process and to fill positions with people that believe in the constitution and will conduct themselves accordingly Mr. ganjei. Mr. ganjei, mi saying that correct?
▶ 1:41:34Mr. Ganjei: Yes, senator, thank you.
▶ 1:41:37Sen. Blackburn: Ok, just wanted to be sure. I noted you served as an acting and interim U.S. attorney in texas and looking at your materials I was impressed by your aggressiveness and noted you had filed 225 cases in a single week, a lot of those were narcotics offenses violent crimes, immigration matters in your career I noticed you had
▶ 1:42:15Sen. Blackburn: Taken on complex cases dealing with human trafficking and crimes against children. Talk about this experience as a prosecutor and how you would translate that experience?
▶ 1:42:27Mr. Ganjei: Senator, I can first speak to my experience as a prosecutor. So many of these different offenses are, having a secure border is essential to preventing the trafficking of children or human trafficking.
▶ 1:42:55Mr. Ganjei: It is something that as the numbers come down you see less and less of it and that is a very good thing. As a judge, I understand how sensitive those cases are and how they should be approached with great caution. We are fortunate in the southern district to have phenomenal prosecutors. They handle them with great care and compassion.
▶ 1:43:20Mr. Ganjei: I think that if I were selected as a judge, I would bring that experience with me and understanding that there is a tremendous human cost, there are certain crimes that may be don't have an immediate, apparent victim such as narcotics trafficking. But with sex crimes and crimes against children, there is a very tangible victim. Justice for victims is very important.
▶ 1:43:46Sen. Blackburn: Mr. fowlkes, I want to come to you with the same thing. At this committee, my report act requires big tech platforms to report when they have actions against the safety of children and then we are trying to establish a national human trafficking database. Senator klobuchar and I completely bipartisan.
▶ 1:44:18Sen. Blackburn: There is a lot of work we have done in protecting children in the digital space. We have the kids online safety act. I know that you have prioritized the prosecution of some of these child-abuse cases. Talk about what you have done and how that would influence your work going forward.
▶ 1:44:44Mr. Fowlkes: Under my leadership in the western district of arkansas we have prosecuted child-abuse cases and asked what tatian race -- cases over three times the national average according to the sentencing commission. We are very proud of our work and the work is so important because these are the most vulnerable members of our society. We take an oath to uphold the law.
▶ 1:45:17Mr. Fowlkes: There is nothing we can do that is more important than protect these children. It would be important for judge to consider all of the appropriate sentencing factors but those would be among the most important cases any judge would review because these are the most vulnerable members of our society.
▶ 1:45:44Sen. Blackburn: I was talking with your governor this morning and we were talking about the work she has led. Most children today, if they encounter a drug dealer, a sex trafficker, a predator, a pedophile, a groomer, it happens first and that connection is first made in the digital space.
▶ 1:46:16Sen. Blackburn: Thank you, Mr. chairman. >> thank you, I'm sorry I had to step out, but I will certainly be brief. Mr. ganjei, as U.S. attorney for the southern district of texas, you have repeatedly criticized defendants who assaulted law enforcement officers.
▶ 1:46:40Sen. Blackburn: For example you stated on multiple cases that you employee a "zero-tolerance policy" against these offenders and argue that individuals who attack law enforcement are "attacking the american system of justice." can you stand by your comments with individuals who violently assault law enforcement?
▶ 1:47:00Mr. Ganjei: Yes, senator, I do.
▶ 1:47:03Sen. Durbin: Do you believe that individuals who attacked capitol police on january 6 attacked the american system of justice?
▶ 1:47:15Mr. Ganjei: I think that question asks for me to wade into a matter of public controversy and a political issue and therefore I cannot.
▶ 1:47:23Sen. Durbin: Too hot to handle?
▶ 1:47:25Mr. Ganjei: No, senator, just as a judicial nominee it will be prudent and I think the canons of judicial conduct would prohibit me from weighing in on political matters such as that and matters of the controversy such as that.
▶ 1:47:39Sen. Durbin: Mr. fowlkes, the first step active 2018, I was proud to lead this and follow a real leader chairman grassley and it was signed into law by president trump during his first administration. The first step fact represented a bipartisan recognition that we can and must do better when it comes to our criminal justice system to make our community safer for more americans.
▶ 1:48:08Sen. Durbin: We have made great strides in bolstering public safety through the first step act. What are your thoughts for the first step act as a federal prosecutor and what steps will you take as a judge to encourage rehabilitation whenever possible?
▶ 1:48:26Mr. Fowlkes: I think it is an important piece of legislation as he stated. The first step takes into account certain factors and some are located, the history and characteristics of the defendant , the past conducts.
▶ 1:48:49Mr. Fowlkes: I think it also takes into account the notion of rehabilitation and in western arkansas we have some called the focus for which our office has worked closely with our judges in western arkansas to attempt to rehabilitate those individuals convicted of nonviolent drug offenses and other nonviolent offenses and to prepare them to reenter society and to be valuable members of society so I think the first step act is an important part of that, signaling the importance of rehabilitation of some of the
▶ 1:49:19Mr. Fowlkes: Metals in our justice system.
▶ 1:49:20Sen. Durbin: On a related issue, the question of court orders, there seems to be some doubt, some questions have been raised as to whether or not the trump administration follows the orders of the court in a prompt and complete fashion. What would you consider to be the status of a court order when you issue a final order?
▶ 1:49:49Mr. Fowlkes: Any order issued by a federal district court carries with it great weight and an analysis of the statute and factors before the court and I think it should be given great weight and deference. With regard to speaking on current public controversy some simply constrained by the judicial canons, including political speech and political conduct.
▶ 1:50:18Mr. Fowlkes: The rulings of the court are inherently important to our justice system.
▶ 1:50:21Sen. Durbin: Mr. ganjei, a ruling by the court on executive branch members, is it required to be followed?
▶ 1:50:30Mr. Ganjei: Senator, if I'm fortunate enough to be confirmed as a judge, any order I enter I would expect the parties regardless of who they are to follow.
▶ 1:50:41Sen. Durbin: Mr. peterson?
▶ 1:50:43Mr. Peterson: Yes, senator, if I'm fortunate enough to be confirmed, I would expect that any order I enter would be followed.
▶ 1:50:52Sen. Durbin: Thank you all very much. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:50:56Chair Grassley: [inaudible] -- written questions for the record may be submitted until november 26 at 5:00 p.m. I would ask you to return them as quickly as you can.
▶ 1:51:19Chair Grassley: [inaudible] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap.org]