▶ 0:19:32.
▶ 0:19:38Chair Grassley: Are people here? Good morning. Welcome, everyone. Today's hearing will involve sheria akins clarke, district of south carolina, kathleen lane, district of montana, evan rikhye , district of virgin islands, and kara marie westercamp, to
▶ 0:20:08Chair Grassley: The court of international trade. Today's nominees boast a diverse set of backgrounds. Each has extensive litigation experience. But their career paths reflect varying practices. They are uniquely tailored to the courts for which they have been nominated. Before we turn to our visitors to introduce miss lane and miss clark, I will introduce two of our nominees.
▶ 0:20:40Chair Grassley: Their nominations are to the court that this committee doesn't consider too frequently, like the district of virgin islands and the court of international tree -- trade. Mr. rikhye got his law degree from american university working with the federal election commission before spending the bulk of his career with the justice department. In 2004, Mr. rikhye: in 2004, Mr.
▶ 0:21:09Chair Grassley: Rikhye began as an attorney advisor with the office of legal policy. He helped prepare federal judicial nominees for confirmation, including chief justice roberts and justice alito. In 2006, he transitioned into a litigation role and spent two years as a trial attorney with the criminal section of the justice department bus civil rights division.
▶ 0:21:38Chair Grassley: Thereafter, he spent a decade and a half as a federal prosecutor in a pair of U.S. attorneys offices, including the district of the virgin islands. He investigated and prosecuted a wide array of criminal offenses, diligently protecting victims of fraud, drug trafficking, and violent crimes.
▶ 0:22:03Chair Grassley: He also briefly worked on detail as an attorney advisor to two U.S. embassies. In 2024, Mr. rikhye: in 2024, Mr. rikhye since then has served as a senior counsel with walmart, leading the company's internal investigations. Mr.
▶ 0:22:26Chair Grassley: Rikhye is an accomplished attorney with significant experience protecting the people of the virgin islands and I look forward to hearing from him today. I am fortunate to have a native I/o in with me, -- ioa I/o in with me, -- iowan with me, Ms.
▶ 0:22:53Chair Grassley: Westercamp: me, Ms. westercamp, who clerked for judge john darby and in 2011 went into private practice at jones day. She litigated insurance recovery , security regulation, and financial disputes. Since 2014, she's transitioned to public service as a trial attorney for the national courts section of the justice department civil division.
▶ 0:23:25Chair Grassley: In that role, she defended federal agencies from lawsuits and appeals arriving out of the united states court of international trade. Her expertise in matters before the court is unparalleled. She litigated trade disputes until late last year, when she transitioned into the white house counsel office. Needless to say, Ms.
▶ 0:23:51Chair Grassley: Westercamp it highly qualified to serve as a judge on the court of international trade and I look forward to hearing from her today. I would ask everyone to keep the questions limited to five minutes in order to keep the hearing on schedule. Senator durbin?
▶ 0:24:12Sen. Durbin: Thank you, Mr. chairman. Before I make a statement about the morning business, I would like to call the attention of the judiciary committee to the ruling from yesterday in new mexico, where the attorney general there filed a civil lawsuit under new mexico law against meta, facebook, and instagram for endangering children with content on social media.
▶ 0:24:38Sen. Durbin: There isn't a parent or grandparent alive who isn't fearful of what the hell these kids are looking at all day long and what is happening to them as a result. We have had lengthy hearings in this committee with the victims and families of victims of these practices. Promises by the industry to clean up their act and protect children and failure after failure.
▶ 0:25:00Sen. Durbin: This decision, which involved a civil verdict of almost 400 million dollars against meta, facebook, and sick, it is indication that section 200 30 is not impregnable. The section has protected these social media vendors for a decade or more. It should be brought down.
▶ 0:25:23Sen. Durbin: I bring this to the attention of the committee because this is one of the few issues where we universally agree on a bipartisan basis that we should act. We have voted for it over and over again and failed to bring it to the floor. This ought to be a call to action for this committee to respond on the senate floor and actually legislate for a change instead of what we do day after day. Legislate for the benefit of these children and grandchildren.
▶ 0:25:50Sen. Durbin: I commend raul torres, the attorney general mexico, for his leadership on this issue. He points the way and I think we ought to follow through. Now to address the business of the day before the committee, I want to congratulate the nominees and their families. Today's hearing serves an important purpose.
▶ 0:26:10Sen. Durbin: As members of the judiciary committee, it's our responsibility to determine if nominees before us have the experience, independence, and temperament, temperament for a lifetime appointment to the bench. We have evaluated each of these nominees with the first basic question, will they follow the rule of law? It's all the more crucial now with a president who is constantly trying to break the law, define court orders. In his second term, the president has accelerated his first term pattern.
▶ 0:26:43Sen. Durbin: Putting in place patently legal policies, during the courts to strike it down, and when the courts uphold the rule of law, respond by personally attacking the judges. The trump tariff policy is a perfect illustration of this. Just two weeks after he returned to office last year he invoked the international emergency economic powers, known as I you both, to impose tariffs.
▶ 0:27:09Sen. Durbin: The law gives the president authority to impose sanctions or freeze assets in response to emergencies. I.e. Pup never mentions the word tariffs and had never been used before to impose tariffs. The president announced reciprocal tariffs on almost every country in the world, claiming without evidence that trade deficits were an unusual and extraordinary threat to our national security.
▶ 0:27:36Sen. Durbin: Immediately, american small businesses challenge these tariff taxes is exceeding the scope of the presidential powers . Lower courts disagreed with the president and agreed with the plaintiffs, the business community, finding that only congress had the power to impose tariffs, not the president. A few weeks ago a 6-3 decision in the supreme court affirmed the lower court position, holding that I does not authorize the president to impose these illegal and costly tariff taxes.
▶ 0:28:08Sen. Durbin: On cue, the president went on the attack, ranting on social media that the supreme court "unnecessarily ransacked the united states" by ruling against them -- him, calling the three conservative justices "disloyal, unpatriotic, fools and lapdogs for rhinos and radical left democrats.
▶ 0:28:33Sen. Durbin: The supreme court struck down the tariffs and major questions remain with respect to how american businesses will receive refunds for tens of billions of dollars that they lost to president trump's illegal tariff taxes. The court of international trade or cit, a specialized court that hears international trade cases, will hear many of the suits filed by plaintiffs seeking to recoup their losses.
▶ 0:29:01Sen. Durbin: President trump is resulting to -- resorting to his typical practice for him, after losing before the supreme court, he wants to stack the courts, including the cit, with maga loyalists. Today the committee will consider the nomination of kara marie westercamp for a lifetime appointment to the score. Based on her record, it appears she will be faithful to the president. What about her faithfulness to the rule of law?
▶ 0:29:32Sen. Durbin: Her social media account reads like trump fanfiction, questioning the outcome of the 2020 election, whitewashing the january 6 attack on the capital, attacking chief justice roberts are not being sufficiently conservative.
▶ 0:29:45Sen. Durbin: For example, election day of 2020 she tweeted "if you cheat, you will win." january 6, 2021, she claimed that democrats are perfecting our cheating and has attacked senators on both sides of the aisle if they dare to cross the president.
▶ 0:30:03Sen. Durbin: For example, one member of this committee she spoke of, senator graham, she said "it is true to no one but his own self-preservation." repeatedly calling senator mitch mcconnell "cocaine mitch." reach weeding posts accusing him of "betraying trump." she has accused senator collins, republican member of the senate, of prioritizing "her own personal political power over
▶ 0:30:34Sen. Durbin: Loyalty to trump." this shameless display of extreme rhetoric does not reflect the independence or judicial temperament required for a lifetime appointment to the federal bench. I look forward to hearing from her personally when we ask the questions.
▶ 0:30:51Chair Grassley: Senator tim scott, to introduce the nominee from his state.
▶ 0:30:58Senator Scott: Thank you, chairman. I am proud to introduce and strongly support the nomination of sheria akins clarke to serve as united states district judge for the district of south carolina. Her background is not difficult for judicial candidates. She was homeschooled. As I think of it, that's a great way to be valedictorian. And she attended liberty university, majoring in psychology, graduating with honors.
▶ 0:31:26Senator Scott: She worked her way through law school at the university of north carolina and clerked for judge before finding her way to washington. She has built a distinguished legal career rooted in service in the courtroom and in her community. She has held several roles with increasing responsibility from her time on the ethics committee to eventually leading one of the most high-profile and consequential committees in congress as a staff director for the house oversight and government reform committee.
▶ 0:31:57Senator Scott: Her experience also includes serving as an assistant united states attorney in the district of south carolina, where she worked as a federal prosecutor focused on upholding the rule of law. Today she continues her legal career as a partner at nelson mullins in greenville, south carolina.
▶ 0:32:17Senator Scott: Her commitment to service extends into the community where she serves on the jazmine road board of directors, supporting women in recovery from trafficking, addiction, and expectation, and serves as chair of the miriam foundation, supporting organizations like the phyllis wheatley community center and the governor's school for science and mathematics foundation.
▶ 0:32:39Senator Scott: These rules are clear evidence of her deep but consistent commitment to strengthening communities across south carolina and her faith is central to who she is and is reflected in her approach to justice, or respect for others, and commitment to fairness. She understands that the law requires not just intellect, but sound judgment, restraint, and a deep awareness of how decisions impact people's lives as she rings those qualities to the bench.
▶ 0:33:10Senator Scott: Beyond her professional accomplishments, she is a devoted wife and mother, balancing family life with an exceptional career in public service. I met sheria clarke nearly 15 years ago through a mutual friend, trey gowdy, a congress member in the house at the time. She is one of the most outstanding people of character I have ever met.
▶ 0:33:38Senator Scott: She brings a rare combination of humility and conviction to her work, with a clear understanding of the responsibility that -- responsibility and trust required from a several -- federal judge. In the decades since we met I've never heard her utter a single negative word about anyone at all. Not even about my bad singing voice that one time a bunch of us called to try to sing happy birthday to her.
▶ 0:34:09Senator Scott: She has a quick mind and picks up complex concepts with remarkable speed and ease. She is modest and never seeks attention or accolades. To the contrary, she deflects them in a genuine way. I cannot say that she is slow to anger, because in more than a decade I have never seen her angry.
▶ 0:34:31Senator Scott: Trust me, in this town and with the friends that I have, she's had plenty of opportunities to show it. What I can say is that she was a frequent dinner guests when she was in washington, joining an often bipartisan table of friends as she earned the respect and affection of everyone there. The ranking member of the committee that she worked on had as much respect for her as the chairman who employed her.
▶ 0:35:04Senator Scott: I am very proud to support her nomination without hesitation and am confident that she will be an outstanding addition to the judiciary and most importantly, I am proud to call her my friend. If more people were like sheria clarke, the world would be a better place. No problem, you're the chairman. We do what you say. Thank you very much.
▶ 0:35:27Chair Grassley: You're free to go on.
▶ 0:35:32Senator Kelly: I might go ahead and depart.
▶ 0:35:34Chair Grassley: Senator daines?
▶ 0:35:38Senator Daines: Thank you to the ranking member. It's my honor to introduce kathleen lane, supporting her nomination to serve as judge for the district court of montana. Her distinguished record of public service and experience in the federal and state judiciary makes are well qualified to serve on the federal bench.
▶ 0:36:03Senator Daines: I appreciated ranking member durbin's comments about temperament and I will tell you, kathleen lane has the right temperament to serve as a U.S. district court -- U.S. district court judge. She grew up in bozeman, my hometown, attending kindergarten through grade, as I did, in bozeman, although I went a little before her. She graduated from my alma mater, bozeman high school.
▶ 0:36:33Senator Daines: She spent her summer skiing, hiking, camping in her a deep love of the treasurer states in the values that make montana the last best place. Although we both went to the same high school, katie is a lot smarter than me, because she graduated magna cum laude from the antonin scalia law school at george mason. She clerked at the trial and appellate levels of the federal judiciary for two federal judges.
▶ 0:37:04Senator Daines: She then returned to montana to serve as the deputy solicitor general under our current montana attorney general, austin knudsen, from 2021 to 2023 and during that time in our state capital of helena, she worked zealously to defend montana laws and challenge federal overreach.
▶ 0:37:27Senator Daines: She litigated cases in both state and federal courts on issues important to the people of montana, including defending the second amendment, multiple land-use and grazing rights cases, defending the montana coal industry. As the people of montana know very well, federal judges play a critical role in our daily lives. For many years, we have dealt with an activist judiciary that repeatedly rules against the interests of montana.
▶ 0:37:56Senator Daines: Which is why it is essential that we pick principled jurists who are committed to upholding the constitution and making decisions based on the rule of law, not personal politics or viewpoints. With this in mouth -- this in mind, senator sheehy and I are confident that katie is the right choice to serve montana as our next federal judge.
▶ 0:38:21Senator Daines: Her values, and by the way, I have known her family since she was a little girl, her values are rooted in montana and grounded in the constitution. I am confident that she will be fair-minded, principled, bringing honor, decency, and integrity to the bench. I cannot recommend katie highly enough and I urge the committee to approve her nomination and for the senate to confirm her without delay.
▶ 0:38:52Senator Daines: Mr. chairman, thank you.
▶ 0:38:52Chair Grassley: Thank you. We will ask our nominees to come . Senator graham is going to speak about Ms. clarke, but he's not here yet, and when he comes I will interrupt the hearing to hear from him. Will the nominees please come to the table?
▶ 0:39:26Chair Grassley: Before you get seated, I would like to swear. Raise your right hand. Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give before this committee will be the truth , the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? >> I do.
▶ 0:39:48Chair Grassley: All have answered affirmatively. We will start with, I think we will start with Ms. clarke. Besides your opening statement, if you have guests and friends you want introduce, for all of you, that's very appropriate.
▶ 0:40:11Ms. Clarke: Thank you, chairman grassley. Good morning. Chairman, ranking member, members of the committee, thank you for convening this hearing and considering my nomination to be a district judge for the district of south carolina. I am truly honored for this opportunity and I appreciate you considering my nomination. I would also like to thank the president, president trump, for nominating me to this position. It's an honor of my lifetime.
▶ 0:40:42Ms. Clarke: I would like to thank senator scott, I believe he already left , but I want to thank him for such a kind welcome. He is one of my dearest friends and I appreciate all of the support that he has given me over the last 15 years. I do have some people I would like introduce today. Today with me are my parents, wayne and deborah, who will be celebrating their 50th wedding anniversary this fall, and I am so proud of them.
▶ 0:41:12Ms. Clarke: [applause] also with me, my wonderful husband, javon clark, he's been my rock for almost 17 years and I don't deserve him. We have three beautiful children. I know that my middle son will not like me calling him beautiful, but they are beautiful to me. My oldest is 14. My second is 11. My baby girl is eight. Also with me is my mother-in-law .
▶ 0:41:42Ms. Clarke: She keeps the clark household running. I appreciate everything she has done. There are so many friends here today, I won't take the time to introduce them, but I did want to highlight the hamiltons, who came up from south carolina, their son, asa, my friend from law school, and more in, I want to call her her name still, who flew all the way from texas.
▶ 0:42:09Ms. Clarke: A number of people came today and took time out of their busy schedules at the house ethics committee and from the benghazi committee. I just thank them for their time and I look forward to answering your questions.
▶ 0:42:23Chair Grassley: Thank you miss lane?
▶ 0:42:26Ms. Lane: Thank you to the members of the committee for considering my nomination. I want to thank president trump for nominating me and senator daines and senator sheehy for their support. Senator daines has particular been a tremendous supporter of my career. I will take a moment to introduce my family in the room. My wonderful husband took a redeye from a conference in california last night to come straight to this hearing. I appreciate him be here.
▶ 0:42:59Ms. Lane: My parents and one of my brothers are here from montana. There's not really enough time to think my parents for everything they have given me, but suffice it to say I am here today because of the example they set and the sacrifices they made. I also have my husband's wonderful family here from missouri, including my two sisters in law who are graduating law school themselves in a few short weeks.
▶ 0:43:26Ms. Lane: I have a great many friends and colleagues in the room as well with many watching online, including the two judges for my clerked. I cannot fully express my gratitude for their mentorship throughout my career and for the example of what it means to be a federal judge. It is a privilege to sit before this committee and be considered for this role.
▶ 0:43:47Ms. Lane: If I have the honor of being confirmed, I will spend the rest of my life faithfully upholding my solemn duty under articles three and six, living up to the standards set by my judicial mentors and those with whom I will share the bench.
▶ 0:44:05Chair Grassley: Mr. rikhye: than you. ?
▶ 0:44:09Mr. Rikhye: Thank you so much for your generous inflection today. Ranking member durbin, thank you as well. Thank you to all members of the committee for your careful consideration. I'm humbled and grateful for the opportunity. I want to take a moment to thank the president for nominating me to serve. The president has done me the singular honor of my professional career by nominating me to serve in this capacity.
▶ 0:44:39Mr. Rikhye: I'm truly humbled by the trust and cut -- confidence he has shown in me. I want to take a moment to introduce my family to the members of the committee. First and foremost, my wife of 28 years, annalisa, who has steadfastly supported and taken care of our family as the career I have has taken us around the globe and back again.
▶ 0:45:06Mr. Rikhye: Grateful to my oldest daughter, who graduated last year and is pursuing a wall street career in new york. My two younger children are both in school and this is spring break week for them. They are getting a real-life civics lesson and I am truly grateful to have been here. With that, chairman grassley, I look forward to answering any questions that you are the committee having an thank you for the opportunity.
▶ 0:45:37Chair Grassley: Thank you. Now, Ms. westercamp?
▶ 0:45:42Ms. Westercamp: Chairman, ranking member, thank you for considering my nomination. I want to begin today by thinking president trump for the great honor of this nomination to the court of international trade, and chairman grassley thank you again for that kind introduction for your support. With me today from iowa, the hawkeye state, is a family.
▶ 0:46:08Ms. Westercamp: My mother, barbara, saying that wester camp passed away seven years ago but he is with me in spirit. I could not have asked for better role models for the role of education, hard work, in the public service they instilled in me and my siblings.
▶ 0:46:32Ms. Westercamp: I'm joined by my brother, jonathan, into my sister carol, and they are happy to see the cherry blossoms are nearly and pete bloom. My sister-in-law, jessica, and my nieces, olivia, are wishing you the best from cedar rapids. I am grateful to my colleagues and friends.
▶ 0:46:59Ms. Westercamp: I would like to give special thanks to judge john journey, for whom I clerked. It was a foundational experience where I had the opportunity to see judicial integrity and action and I strive to model myself after him if I am so fortunate to be confirmed. Though he passed away two years ago, I would be remiss if I didn't mention professor bucky bus at the college of law for his support and encouragement throughout my career.
▶ 0:47:27Ms. Westercamp: I also thank my many colleagues over the past 12 years at the national court section of the department of justice for their support. About a decade ago, the first trade case I was assigned to was the honey case that would set me on a path towards specializing in international trade and be sitting before you today.
▶ 0:47:52Ms. Westercamp: Thank you also to my colleagues at the white house counsel office and my many friends and extended family who are here today or watching from afar. I am so honored to be here and look forward to the committee's questions.
▶ 0:48:12Chair Grassley: We will have five-minute rounds and I'm asking the members for the second time to stay within those time limits. I hope I get a good dataset a good standard for that. Wester camp, born and educated in iowa, I assume that your first job was with judge harvey in the southern district. Tell me how the court of international trade is so important to the average person in iowa.
▶ 0:48:36Ms. Westercamp: I think the court of international trade is important -- [o]
▶ 0:48:44Chair Grassley: Please start over again.
▶ 0:48:47Ms. Westercamp: It's important to the great state of iowa because iowa is an international state, soybeans and corn. Manufacturing, I grew up in cedar rapids. My dad could tell which cereal general mills was making on any particular day.
▶ 0:49:05Ms. Westercamp: And in the context of the court itself, the court hears disputes arising from international trade laws and considers antidumping and countervailing duties assessed by the department of commerce and certain determinations by cdp, revering certain proclamations by the president. Importantly, international trade , it is an ecosystem that is incredibly connected.
▶ 0:49:38Ms. Westercamp: Again, for an agricultural and manufacturing state like iowa, it's very important.
▶ 0:49:44Chair Grassley: Now you have had more than 130 appearances before the international or court of international trade. How did preparing for cases before that court differ from the more traditional federal courts?
▶ 0:50:08Ms. Westercamp: The records are voluminous and making sure that decisions done by congress were cdp, as otherwise in accordance with law, senator, chairman, I have had multiple motions argued before the court. It's a very collegial court.
▶ 0:50:32Ms. Westercamp: From day to day, I could have, it could be opposing counsel within the next week it might be a defendant intervening in the case and I enjoy that about the court as well, where the bar is so congenial.
▶ 0:50:45Chair Grassley: Ms. clarke:
▶ 0:50:49Chair Grassley: Ms. clarke, in your decade on the hill, you developed a reputation for working well with people on both sides of the aisle. Representative gaudi stated that representative cummings respected your work is much as the republicans did. How did you learn, what did you learn from working with people that held different viewpoints that you are going to bring to the bench?
▶ 0:51:18Ms. Clarke: Chairman, firstly I failed to thank Mr. gaudi for all of his support, so I wanted to make sure I said that today. Throughout my career on the hilt, I've tried to treat everyone with humility and respect. I've tried to be fair and impartial in my dealings with everyone and tried to continue that throughout my career.
▶ 0:51:43Ms. Clarke: I hope that my experience on the hill, building relationships, and being kind to those will carry with me if I am fortunate enough to be confirmed.
▶ 0:51:52Chair Grassley: Miss lane, you spent years working as the solicitor general in montana for that person. During your career, you also litigated many cases that arise from rural jurisdictions involving land use, grazing rights, and coal mining leases. How will these experiences prepare you for arriving and serving as a federal judge in montana?
▶ 0:52:24Ms. Lane: The cases I had the opportunity and privilege to work on in meant -- in montana often involved complicated regulatory schemes and in those cases the facts were often very complicated, dealing with large administrative records and complicated and complex regulatory schemes.
▶ 0:52:46Ms. Lane: Oftentimes, those cases moved on very fast timelines, such as a representative I had to get up to speed quickly on the legal and factual issues. If I had the privilege of being confirmed to the district of montana, I would take the same diligence with me, working hard to get up to speed on the cases before me understanding the facts, the law, and deciding the cases before me.
▶ 0:53:15Chair Grassley: Senator graham to introduce.
▶ 0:53:20Senator Graham: I apologize for being late. The budget committee is working on shoring up the budget sheria clarke, very important. Sheria clarke, you are going to make it. Graduated from liberty university. You've already introduced your wonderful family already.
▶ 0:53:45Senator Graham: A law clerk on the court of appeals in north carolina who served for a decade on cap hill, and on the ethics committee you must have learned a lot about bipartisanship. Then on the select committee of benghazi before returning to ethics, where you met trey.
▶ 0:54:05Senator Graham: From 2017 to 2019 she served as staff director for the house committee on oversight and government reform and has served as assistant U.S. attorney in the office of south carolina where she handled civil and criminal cases. She is currently a partner at nelson mullins, one of the bigger and more prestigious firms in the state.
▶ 0:54:30Senator Graham: She has been described by our colleagues as someone who is highly intelligent, even keeled, and humble. You are going to make it, in spite of being humble. I believe that out of all the people we could've picked to serve at the district court, federal district judge in south carolina, we could not have done better than you.
▶ 0:54:57Senator Graham: Trey, thank you very much for pointing her distinguished career out. To my colleagues on the committee, we tried to make sure our judges are going to stand the test of time and reason. You are absolutely living a stellar life, you deserve this nomination, and of the people of south carolina will benefit from your ability to be a fair-minded judge if you get on this court.
▶ 0:55:25Senator Graham: I'm hoping that you will and to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, thank you for paying attention to this nominee. I hope and pray we can get a good bipartisan vote for her, just to reaffirm that the committee can function that way. Thank you.
▶ 0:55:42Chair Grassley: Senator durbin?
▶ 0:55:44Sen. Durbin: Thank you, Mr. chairman. Ms. westercamp, throughout your prolific inflammatory social media career, you launched attacks on multiple members of the senate, repeatedly referring to senator mitch mcconnell as "cocaine mitch." retreating a post that accused him of "embodying everything that is wrong with politics." you once told senator graham that he is "true to no one but your own
▶ 0:56:18Sen. Durbin: Self-preservation." you accused senator collins of prioritizing her own personal political power over presidential priorities. Would you like to apologize to those senators today for which you posted?
▶ 0:56:31Ms. Westercamp: Yes, senator. If I may, and a comments in my made as a personal private citizen, but in hindsight using twitter is not the right platform, especially retreating someone I don't know regarding political opinions, controversial topics, or even characterizations of people.
▶ 0:56:55Ms. Westercamp: I do sincerely apologize for those posts and if confirmed, senator, I would faithfully uphold the judicial canons, which include avoiding any appearance of impropriety, including social media and have seriously considered ranking member durbin, completely deactivating twitter.
▶ 0:57:20Sen. Durbin: Let me ask you of your tweets beyond personal references to the senate, focusing on what you had to say about republicans, you used social media to spread conspiracy theories regarding the insurrection on january 6, including that you said law enforcement was complicit with the violence and appeared to agree with a tweet that said that the attack was orchestrated by members of the senate and members of the capitol police.
▶ 0:57:50Sen. Durbin: You outlined a claim that those storming the house chamber were "nt foot in the," the violence of the day, including assaults on law enforcement by retreating that we are all supposed to be sending thoughts and prayers to traumatize members of congress whose workday was interrupted for a couple of hours. Are you willing to denounce here and now the violence perpetrated on january 6 in this capitol building?
▶ 0:58:24Ms. Westercamp: I condemn all violence on the six and for what you quoted, that's endemic of how it is not proper to use retweets from someone or people I don't know regarding such a controversial topic.
▶ 0:58:40Sen. Durbin: Will you apologize to the law enforcement officers for spreading the conspiracy theory that they were somehow complicit in the violence of january 6?
▶ 0:58:50Ms. Westercamp: Again, I think that gets to have retreating posts from people I don't know on controversial topics, I regret doing it. Again, I condemn all the violence that occurred on that day.
▶ 0:59:07Sen. Durbin: What we are trying to get to is whether you have the temperament for a lifetime appointment. As we vote and send off judges to do their duty, we don't know if they are going to keep their word before us. We look at their background, we look at their values, and try to draw conclusions as to whether they are stable, independent, and if they should have the authority and power for a lifetime on the federal bench.
▶ 0:59:36Sen. Durbin: What would you like to say today about what you put in your social media pet posts in the past about events and members of the senate as to whether or not we should say that is an accurate reflection of your values?
▶ 0:59:53Ms. Westercamp: I'm a native island and if you speak to my colleague and friends behind me, they would tell you that I live a life of integrity and I regret those retweets about what occurred on january 6 and I do condemn all of the violence that happened on that day. If I am confirmed.
▶ 1:00:14Sen. Durbin: If you are confirmed to the court of international trade and later decide to rule against the executive branch in future, would executive branch officials be required to comply with your decision?
▶ 1:00:29Ms. Westercamp: Yes.
▶ 1:00:31Sen. Durbin: Without exception?
▶ 1:00:34Ms. Westercamp: Senator, yes. There are appeal mechanisms, but any party I would expect to comply with any court order.
▶ 1:00:50Chair Grassley: Senator kennedy, commentary on his questioning. We are here to assess your qualifications. You have extensive leave -- legal advocacy by all accounts. I think that Ms. westercamp has been a diligent and capable attorney throughout her career. Politically charged statements by nominees are not unheard of in this committee.
▶ 1:01:24Chair Grassley: I think that both sides of the aisle know that this has happened, whether we have a republican or democratic president or nominee. My democratic colleagues on those occasions did not object when president biden's nominees like anita cooped up made inflammatory partisan statements criticizing members of this committee, or members of openly partisan organizations,
▶ 1:01:55Chair Grassley: Supporting dale hollow, nominee, even though he described himself as a "wild eyed liberal." senator kennedy, I'm going to go up to the budget committee for questions. Can you stay here for about 15 minutes?
▶ 1:02:16Senator Kennedy: Yes, sir. I can.
▶ 1:02:18Chair Grassley: Go with your questions.
▶ 1:02:23Senator Kennedy: Thank you. Does this mean I get extra time? [laughter] all right. I can feel the power coursing through my veins. Ms. westercamp, can we agree that social media quite often is just a cesspool of snarked?
▶ 1:02:53Ms. Westercamp: Unequivocally, yes.
▶ 1:03:04Sen. Kennedy: When you made these comments about senator mcconnell call -- mcconnell, senator graham, senator collins, what job are you in at the time?
▶ 1:03:18Ms. Westercamp: I made the comments in my personal capacity as a private citizen and was at the department of justice.
▶ 1:03:25Sen. Kennedy: Your white house counsel office now?
▶ 1:03:31Ms. Westercamp: Since may of last year, yes.
▶ 1:03:34Chair Grassley: You didn't make them while working for Ms.
▶ 1:03:38Westercamp: President trump?
▶ 1:03:39Ms. Westercamp: No, I was at the department of justice, though it is technically a federal agency.
▶ 1:03:49Sen. Kennedy: I try not to read social media too much. One of my colleagues knows to bring to me any really cool cuts that somebody said about me on social media. Probably the coolest when they brought to me, somebody said one time "kennedy, you look exactly like my second wife." I thought that was a very cool cut.
▶ 1:04:21Sen. Kennedy: You are an expert in international trade law?
▶ 1:04:24Ms. Westercamp: Yes.
▶ 1:04:27Sen. Kennedy: Tell me about the supreme court opinion in learning resources against trump.
▶ 1:04:37Ms. Westercamp: Commonly referred to as the upas supreme court case, it came out I think now we are coming up on a month ago. In that opinion the supreme court held that the president did not have the authority to use ie but, using the words regulate and impose tariffs in the supreme court declared that the tariffs imposed under Ms.
▶ 1:05:04Westercamp: -- under ie but were lawful. -- I.e. Pot -- iepa were unlawful.
▶ 1:05:15Sen. Kennedy: What underpins the decision?
▶ 1:05:19Ms. Westercamp: He had used it during peacetime and in terms of the doctorate itself, he had relied on it for the authority to impose tariffs, where the clear text said the president did not have that authority.
▶ 1:05:38Sen. Kennedy: It was the major questions doctrine, was it not?
▶ 1:05:42Ms. Westercamp: A plurality of the justices said that part of another reason by the president didn't have the authority to impose those tariffs was the major questions doctrine, that this body had essentially not, for something a political and economic significance, had not delegated the president the authority to the president.
▶ 1:06:07Sen. Kennedy: Major questions doctrine, right?
▶ 1:06:10Ms. Westercamp: Yes, senator.
▶ 1:06:12Sen. Kennedy: Minute or so left here. Mr. rikhye, is that how you say your name, sir? Tell me about the war powers clauses.
▶ 1:06:29Mr. Rikhye: They require --
▶ 1:06:30Sen. Kennedy: Which articles of the constitution are they?
▶ 1:06:33Mr. Rikhye: It was an act of --
▶ 1:06:36Sen. Kennedy: I'm sorry, bad. I didn't phrase my question right. Not the war powers, the war powers clauses. Let's start with which articles of the constitution are involved.
▶ 1:06:52Mr. Rikhye: Article one gives congress the authority to declare war.
▶ 1:06:57Chair Grassley: What else?
▶ 1:06:59Mr. Rikhye: Congress has the authority or responsibility to fund whatever military actions.
▶ 1:07:08Sen. Kennedy: The president has a role to play, doesn't he? Under article two. -- Mr. rikhye: that's under article two.
▶ 1:07:18Sen. Kennedy: How do you reconcile that only congress to declare war, doesn't say make war, says declare war, with the president as commander-in-chief? What did our founders intended?
▶ 1:07:32Mr. Rikhye: I think it goes along with the whole concept underpinning the constitutional system that we have of divided government, power split between the different branches. I think that there was an inherent tension built into that , as there are in many different areas of our federal government.
▶ 1:07:53Sen. Kennedy: Ladies, I'm sorry I didn't get to you. Senator blumenthal? I believe you are up.
▶ 1:08:04Senator Blumenthal: Thank you, senator kennedy. Welcome, everyone. Thank you for your service. Ms. westercamp, who won the 2020 election?
▶ 1:08:14Ms. Westercamp: Senator, under our constitution, the electoral college votes for the president and then that is certified by congress. In 2020, president biden was certified by the electoral --
▶ 1:08:33Sen. Blumenthal: That's on my question, who won the election?
▶ 1:08:37Ms. Westercamp: Under our constitution -- and mine Sen.
▶ 1:08:40Blumenthal: I know who was certified. And I know what you think of certification, because you tweeted on january 6 in a post saying in reference to these 2020 election results, "a certified lie is still alive." I'm asking you who won the 2020 election. Let me make it more specific. Who won the popular vote?
▶ 1:09:05Ms. Westercamp: Under our constitution, what matters is who the electoral college votes.
▶ 1:09:19Sen. Blumenthal: I'm not asking you what the constitution says. I'm asking you what it says practically. You were instructed to give this answer, right?
▶ 1:09:32Ms. Westercamp: I am speaking to at the constitution, under our constitution again, article 2 --
▶ 1:09:37Sen. Blumenthal: Let me ask you this, who won the 20 election?
▶ 1:09:42Ms. Westercamp: In the 2024 election, the electoral college voted for president trump and congress certified Sen.
▶ 1:09:55Blumenthal: --
▶ 1:09:55Sen. Blumenthal: Did donald trump lose the 2020 election?
▶ 1:09:56Ms. Westercamp: That goes back again to under the constitution --
▶ 1:10:00Sen. Blumenthal: Let's try another question, miss wester camp. Was the U.S. capitol attacked on january 6? 2021?
▶ 1:10:10Ms. Westercamp: Senator, again, I condemn all the violence that occurred on january 6.
▶ 1:10:19Sen. Blumenthal: Ok, we are not going to get an answer from you. Let me try Ms. clarke. Who won the 2020 election?
▶ 1:10:29Ms. Clarke: Under our constitution, the mechanism for electing a president --
▶ 1:10:35Sen. Blumenthal: I'm amazed by the insult to this committee of witness after witness seeking to be a federal judge subverting our constitution and showing how you have no independence, which is essential to a federal judge. Who won the 2020 election, miss lane?
▶ 1:10:59Ms. Lane: Apologies. Again, senator, the constitution outlines the process that is a judicial nominee I'm here to talk about what the constitution requires, and electoral vote and certification by congress.
▶ 1:11:16Sen. Blumenthal: Who won the 2020 election, Mr. rikhye?
▶ 1:11:20Mr. Rikhye: As my colleague stated, the process that we have under the constitution is a vote by the electoral college followed by certification.
▶ 1:11:29Sen. Blumenthal: Was the capital attacked on january 6?
▶ 1:11:34Mr. Rikhye: There was violence that occurred.
▶ 1:11:37Sen. Blumenthal: Was the capital attacked?
▶ 1:11:40Mr. Rikhye: Violence occurred here on that day.
▶ 1:11:42Sen. Blumenthal: You have seen videos of what happened?
▶ 1:11:45Mr. Rikhye: I have.
▶ 1:11:47Sen. Blumenthal: Was the capital attacked?
▶ 1:11:53Ms. Lane: The characterization of january 6 is subject to ongoing debate and as a nominee would be inappropriate for me to characterize it.
▶ 1:12:05Chair Grassley: Ms. clarke:
▶ 1:12:09Chair Grassley: Ms. clarke, who is the winner of the 20 election?
▶ 1:12:10Ms. Clarke: Under the process set up by the constitution, the electoral college --
▶ 1:12:17Senator Kennedy: Can you pull that a closer? Ms. clarke: the electoral college alexa president.
▶ 1:12:23Sen. Blumenthal: You know the answers here, which are obviously canned, pre-rehearsed, orwellian in their denial of reality, and they are a subversion of this process. They are an insult to this committee and fundamentally show a complete lack of independence in backbone. And impartiality.
▶ 1:12:51Sen. Blumenthal: Which are the fundamental requirements of a united states district court judge or a judge on any panel, Ms. westercamp. I'm a little bit disappointed that you are not more original. That you cannot think of a few different words. I'm just amazed. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:13:28Senator: Just to finish senator blumenthal's point, I hope you realize how ridiculous the four of you look, spreading these canned answers in a forum where you are a supposed to tell the truth and b demonstrate the judicial capacity to make independent, factual decisions in hard cases.
▶ 1:13:47Senator: If you cannot even sit here and say that joe won the election or that the capital was attacked -- joe biden won the election were that the capital was attacked, what is left? What is left if a hard case comes your way as a judge and, let's say, the trump administration is bearing down on that?
▶ 1:14:09Senator: Why would we ever believe that you would give the litigants a fair hearing and a fair decision if the executive branch was leaning in on you, when we cannot get a reasonable answer out of any of you with the executive branch leaning in on you to give these ridiculous answers today? I'm really sorry to have to go through this and that you have to go through this.
▶ 1:14:39Senator: It would be nice if youhandlers, it would be nice if youhandlerss clarke, I am supported by lindsey graham. He is a friend of president trump. He is the second senior person on the republican side in the judiciary committee. He is likely to be the next judiciary committee chair. I think I will be ok. I don't need to make myself ridiculous at your direction. It would be great if you could have said that.
▶ 1:15:11Senator: It would be great if your answers were simple and honest here today. It is really disappointing. Let me ask a different question, a legal question. A judge gets a threat, a threat to the judge's life or to the judge's family.
▶ 1:15:31Senator: Can you imagine a scenario in which liability may attach to individuals beyond the utterer of that threat? Miss clarke?
▶ 1:15:54Ms. Clarke: Senator, as a prosecutor, there are instances where there is some responsibility assigned to someone who is not the utterer of a threat to an individual so to answer your question, yes I can imagine.
▶ 1:16:15Ms. Lane: Yes, senator, and I would follow also be incorporated.
▶ 1:16:20Mr. Rikhye: Yes, senator, I agree with that.
▶ 1:16:24Sen. Whitehouse: Ms. westercamp:
▶ 1:16:30Sen. Whitehouse: Ms. westercamp, you are going international trade and will not see many of this but do you agree with it?
▶ 1:16:34Ms. Westercamp: Yes, senator.
▶ 1:16:37Sen. Whitehouse: The documents that would provide the legal basis for investigation in those scenarios would include doctrines like -- name one, miss clarke.
▶ 1:16:45Ms. Clarke: Senator, doctrines that are -- if someone is essentially carrying out --
▶ 1:16:55Sen. Whitehouse: Solicitation, would that be one? Solicitation of a threat?
▶ 1:17:00Ms. Clarke: Yes.
▶ 1:17:01Sen. Whitehouse: Or conspiracy out of which a threat emerged, would that be another one?
▶ 1:17:06Ms. Clarke: Yes.
▶ 1:17:07Sen. Whitehouse: How about the product of an enterprise under the racketeering statute? Would that be a way a liability could extend beyond the utterer?
▶ 1:17:16Ms. Clarke: That is correct.
▶ 1:17:17Sen. Whitehouse: Can you think of another one? What are some of the legal theories that would support that kind of investigation and prosecution?
▶ 1:17:25Ms. Lane: Senator, of the doctrines you mentioned, I would agree with and would look always to the federal law and federal statute guiding that.
▶ 1:17:33Mr. Rikhye: Senator, I would agree with that. I think you covered the major ones, conspiracy, rico. There may be other avenues of potential legal liability, but I think you covered the three big ones in that scenario.
▶ 1:17:49Ms. Westercamp: Senator, I am not if there are any more with my practice that does not touch on criminal law.
▶ 1:17:55Sen. Whitehouse: So here is why I asked you these questions. We are asking these questions because right now federal judges are under the worst shadow of physical threat in my lifetime and perhaps in the history of this country. And in responding to those threats, we have the united states marshals service, which reports to the department of justice.
▶ 1:18:18Sen. Whitehouse: I have now over a dozen times asked the marshall service, will you investigate behind the utterer of a threat if the evidence justifies it? That is a super easy question. The answer is, yeah, of course we will. They won't answer that. They won't answer that.
▶ 1:18:41Sen. Whitehouse: I point this out because judges across the country need to pay attention to the fact that the marshall service will not confirm that it will investigate behind the utterer of threat if the evidence supports that. Why would that be the case? That would be the case because when you get behind the utterer of a lot of these threats, you run into right wing conspiracies .
▶ 1:19:12Sen. Whitehouse: And this maga department of justice would rather not go there so they leave justices, judges exposed with investigations in which they are not doing investigative 101 work that you have all identified as possible interference. And we need to fix that. We need to fix that.
▶ 1:19:53Sen. Hirono: Ok, I start all of my questioning by asking fundamental questioning any of the nominees on the committees on which I sit. So we will ask this panel and start with miss clarke and go down the line. Since you became a legal adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?
▶ 1:20:17Ms. Clarke: Senator, I have not.
▶ 1:20:20Ms. Lane: No, senator.
▶ 1:20:22Mr. Rikhye: No, senator.
▶ 1:20:24Ms. Westercamp: No, senator.
▶ 1:20:26Sen. Hirono: Have you ever faced discipline or entered into a settlement related to this kind of conduct?
▶ 1:20:32Ms. Clarke: No, senator.
▶ 1:20:34Ms. Lane: No, senator.
▶ 1:20:36Mr. Rikhye: No, senator.
▶ 1:20:38Ms. Westercamp: No, senator.
▶ 1:20:40Sen. Hirono: I have a question for Mr. rikhye. On social media, you liked an article in which mike davis said, and I quote mike davis, I have no problem with president from pardoning almost all of those january 6 defendants because they have suffered enough. Now, you posted that you like that so I wanted to ask you, do you agree with those pardons? Do you agree with the sentiment that they have suffered enough?
▶ 1:21:11Mr. Rikhye: Senator, I don't recall liking that particular article. I do know the article you are referring to, however, and what I would say on that is the constitution gives the president plenary authority to issue pardons.
▶ 1:21:25Sen. Hirono: Oh, no, I am not asking about what powers the president has. Are you telling me that you don't recall liking this post by mike davis?
▶ 1:21:35Mr. Rikhye: That is correct, senator.
▶ 1:21:38Sen. Hirono: So now as you sit here, I am telling you that this is the information I have, that this is factual that you liked that post. Do you agree with the pardons?
▶ 1:21:48Mr. Rikhye: Senator, when it comes to the pardons, the point I was making was that given the president has disciplinary.
▶ 1:21:55Sen. Hirono: I know that. You don't need to sit and lecture me about the powers of the president. I just want to know if you agree with those pardons.
▶ 1:22:02Mr. Rikhye: As a nominee to serve on the court, I believe it would be contrary to the canon of judicial ethics for me to comment on the president's pardon power. So respectfully --
▶ 1:22:13Sen. Hirono: As a judge, you will not be having any pardon powers. If confirmed, will you hold those accountable under the lot regardless of the political affiliation?
▶ 1:22:24Mr. Rikhye: Yes, senator. If I am fortunate enough to be confirmed, and confirmed, any criminal defendant that comes before me --
▶ 1:22:33Sen. Hirono: Isn't it clear that the president pardon 1500 of the january 6 defendants based on political affiliation? He pardoned 1500 people, many of whom beat up capitol police. This is amazing to me. Miss westercamp, you did not hold back.
▶ 1:23:01Sen. Hirono: You were asked by my colleague about some of the posts that you put out regarding various members of the senate. You did not hold back. You would consider those posts opinions, not fact, I hope.
▶ 1:23:17Ms. Westercamp: Senator, I believe some of what ranking member durbin referred to were retweets. I think we tweeting from other people whom I don't know about people or controversial topics is improper.
▶ 1:23:29Sen. Hirono: Anyway, my question is so you posted things of people you did not know, including me, by the way. So I am just asking if you understand the difference between these posts, which were not facts but opinions. Where they your opinions? Everyone is entitled to an opinion, so are you.
▶ 1:23:53Ms. Westercamp: I do understand the difference between opinion and a fact.
▶ 1:23:57Sen. Hirono: So those are opinions.
▶ 1:23:58Ms. Westercamp: Senator, again, using social media as senator kennedy has said --
▶ 1:24:06Sen. Hirono: Yes or no? You cannot only whether the posts where you put out posts to members of the senate that whether those were facts or opinions? You can't tell me that?
▶ 1:24:20Ms. Westercamp: Senator, I should not have retweeted. Again, re-tweeting from other people, should not have done that, and if confirmed, would avoid --
▶ 1:24:31Sen. Hirono: I am asking a yes or no answer. To me, those are opinions. Of course, judges are supposed to be the finders of fact. They are supposed to be the people who should distinguish between fact and fiction. I do have a question regarding when you were advising the president on trade matters and tariffs, I take it.
▶ 1:25:02Ms. Westercamp: Chairman grassley, amount of time?
▶ 1:25:05Sen. Hirono: I am sorry, did not hear you.
▶ 1:25:08Chair Grassley: She asked the question before the time is up to whatever time it takes you to answer, you got it.
▶ 1:25:13Sen. Hirono: I am sorry. I was on a roll. I will submit for the record a question I have about her role in providing advice on trade policy, which the supreme court has said that president trump's tariffs are illegal.
▶ 1:25:30Chair Grassley: Senator britt.
▶ 1:25:33Sen. Britt: Thank you, Mr. chairman, and congratulations to each of you on your respective nominations, and welcome to your family. I know this is a proud day for all of you. Examining a number issued to the U.S. court of economic trade which obviously plays and in an important role. I would be remiss if I did not mention the fact that this hearing is being held against a backdrop of what I believed to be a reckless shutdown of the department of homeland security.
▶ 1:26:03Sen. Britt: The agencies there include things like customs and border protection that are tasked with enforcing our trade and customs law and facilitating lawful trade. We must find a pathway forward to fully fund cbp, which like the court of international trade, plays a central role in maintaining the fairness and integrity of the international trade ecosystem. With that being said, Ms. westercamp, I will turn to you with my first question.
▶ 1:26:32Sen. Britt: The court of international trade is of course a court with limited subject matter jurisdiction. It requires judges with a specialized knowledge of trade related issues. Mrs. westercamp, I know that in your case you have appeared before the court more than 130 times.
▶ 1:26:52Sen. Britt: Can you discuss your experience practicing in front of the court and how that experience will inform your work on the court as a judge and why the court's expertise is so vital to our nation?
▶ 1:27:05Ms. Westercamp: Yes, senator. Again, it is a very highly specialized area of law. And with mentioning cbp, I was actually honored by attorney general merrick garland for my work on the enforce and protect act, which depends cbp determinations regarding transshipment when an order for perhaps a company to avoid duties in one country, they basically transship to
▶ 1:27:36Ms. Westercamp: Another country to avoid those duties. And I think my experience before the court is important because clearly I am familiar arguing before the court. I know the various statutes and regulations. I would also say what I have enjoyed again is just the collegiality of the trademark. But I found it very helpful where some of the judges should questions in advance for the parties to answer.
▶ 1:28:01Ms. Westercamp: Sometimes written questions or at oral argument, and I think that helps all of the parties gain a deeper understanding of the issue, of the particular issues or facts that the judge maybe believes is not supported by substantial evidence.
▶ 1:28:12Sen. Britt: Thank you, miss westercamp. I appreciate that. Mr. rikhye, turning to you, you have been nominated to a court that is unique in a number of respects, one of which is geographic. As you know and are well aware, the virgin islands along with puerto rico have been designated as a highly intense -- high intensity drug trafficking area. And the location of the virgin islands makes drug trafficking and issue of particular concern.
▶ 1:28:42Sen. Britt: That same is true when it comes to issues like illegal immigration. Can you speak to some of those unique aspect of the district and how your previous work there as assistant U.S. attorney has better prepared you to assume the bench there?
▶ 1:28:57Mr. Rikhye: Thank you, senator. In the virgin islands, the problem of drug trafficking and controlled substances takes two different forms.
▶ 1:29:06Sen. Britt: Do you mind?
▶ 1:29:08Mr. Rikhye: Yeah. The problem of drug trafficking takes two distinct forms. One area relates to sort of trafficking within the islands, people selling to users on the island. The other aspect of it is the introduction on the high seas of narcotics trafficking.
▶ 1:29:29Mr. Rikhye: We have the experience of the bridge and I -- in the virgin islands of dealing with very large seizures that occurred either on the high seas or within the territorial waters of the virgin islands, and these are very different types of cases that have to be handled differently because of course when the introductions are done at sea, those are prosecuted under the mdlea whereas the prosecutions that happen on land within the territory are handled through the more traditional tools of investigating and prosecuting drug offenses, so I
▶ 1:29:59Mr. Rikhye: Have had experience dealing with both. The drug boats that get interdicted on the high seas as well as drug trafficking organizations within the islands who are sometimes dealing with customers on the islands but also as a transshipment point where large quantities of drugs get essentially broken down into smaller retail quantities and transshipped further north. So I have handled both types of cases.
▶ 1:30:27Mr. Rikhye: On the immigration front, we are close to the british virgin islands so quite often illegal immigrants come through the british virgin islands into st. John's and st. Thomas. One unusual thing is that even though it is very vulnerable to illegal immigration, we are dealing with a relatively low volume because there is not a land border. So typically it is a few people at a time, unlike what we see on our southern border with hundreds or thousands of people. So those are some of the differences.
▶ 1:30:56Mr. Rikhye: Again, I have dealt with all of these cases as a prosecutor and feel as though I am well-equipped to handle them if I am fortunate enough to be confirmed.
▶ 1:31:02Sen. Britt: I appreciate that and think your experience will lend itself well on the bench. I have more follow-up questions for all of you and him at times I will submit those for you but thank you for your willingness to serve.
▶ 1:31:12Sen. Schiff: Thank you, Mr. chairman. Miss westercamp, are you familiar with the term performance improvement plan, sometimes referred to as a pip?
▶ 1:31:25Ms. Westercamp: Yes.
▶ 1:31:26Sen. Schiff: Would you agree that employees subject to any pip are being notified that some aspect of their performance is not acceptable?
▶ 1:31:35Ms. Westercamp: Yes.
▶ 1:31:36Sen. Schiff: Have you ever been subject to a performance improvement plan and your time at the office?
▶ 1:31:43Ms. Westercamp: No, senator, I have had excellent ratings.
▶ 1:31:46Sen. Schiff: So there have been no issues that your superiors or supervisors have had that involve a pip?
▶ 1:31:55Ms. Westercamp: No, senator.
▶ 1:31:56Sen. Schiff: Thank you. I wanted to ask you about your experience trying cases. Have you ever tried a case to a verdict of a jury?
▶ 1:32:07Ms. Lane: Senator, I have worked on a bench trial and as a federal law clerk, I have handled seven trials.
▶ 1:32:13Sen. Schiff: I was a federal law clerk as well. I would not say I handled the trials. I think the judge handled the trials. But let me ask you about your experience with the bench trial. Review the lead counsel in that case?
▶ 1:32:27Ms. Lane: No, senator, I was part of a small team of attorneys.
▶ 1:32:33Sen. Schiff: And were you the senior associate counsel on the case?
▶ 1:32:37Ms. Lane: Yes, senator. I was an associate on the case. There were three -- excuse me, four attorneys on the case. I was responsible for helping prepare witnesses, helping second chair depositions. I also took a deposition myself. I cross-examined a witness at trial it was response one for all the pretrial and post trial briefings and findings.
▶ 1:33:02Sen. Schiff: Of those attorneys, how many of them were more senior to you on that team?
▶ 1:33:08Ms. Lane: Senator, I believe two. There were several people who came in to assist. But again, I was the primary drafter for all the briefings.
▶ 1:33:19Sen. Schiff: I heard that. I just want to understand, so your trial experience consists of being the second or third senior lawyer on a bench trial?
▶ 1:33:31Ms. Lane: Senator, yes. It was a weeklong trial involving complicated constitutional issues, and my role again was I helped draft and prepare all the briefing.
▶ 1:33:42Sen. Schiff: You have never done jury selection, for jury selection, .
▶ 1:33:48Ms. Lane: When I was a locker, five of the trials were jury trials that I cooked for -- cler ked for.
▶ 1:33:58Sen. Schiff: I was a law clerk and it was a great experience but I did not pick the jury. Using a challenge for a cause for a juror, that is not the role of a law clerk. You observe it but do not do it yourself. Apart from the bench trial, have you cross-examined witnesses and any kind of other jury trial or any jury trial?
▶ 1:34:23Ms. Lane: Senator, in that case, I cross-examined a this and deposed an expert.
▶ 1:34:30Sen. Schiff: Never before a jury. Have you filed or argued a motion?
▶ 1:34:35Ms. Lane: Yes, senator. In that matter, I handled several motions as well as in other matters, particularly preliminary injunction stage, some of the litigation I have been involved in as had asked extensive evidentiary site have filed and handled several motions, many motions, senator.
▶ 1:34:55Sen. Schiff: Many emotions in that one bench trial?
▶ 1:34:58Ms. Lane: Yes, senator. In that one bench trial, I have handled several motions but also in other litigation. Again, more at the preliminary injunction stage, seeking to establish a clear record going into a preliminary injunction hearing where there may be life witnesses, evidentiary issues kind of at that initial stage.
▶ 1:35:19Sen. Schiff: I am not trying to denigrate your experience as a law clerk. I think it is a great experience, and I highly encourage those graduating from law school, but having tried cases as assistant U.S. attorney is not the same. To observe them is not to do them yourself. I am sure you agree. Thank you, I appreciate it. I yield back.
▶ 1:35:44Chair Grassley: Thank you. Before senator blackburn, I would like to enter in a letter supporting miss lane's nomination from attorneys general that endorsed her nomination and state "through our offices's work on complex high-stakes litigation, we have had the opportunity to observe firsthand the caliber of lawyers best suited for the federal
▶ 1:36:15Chair Grassley: Branch. Miss lane stands out among them for her experience, judgment, and temperament make her superbly well suited to serve as U.S. federal district judge. Without objection, that will be entered in the record. Ms. blackburn.
▶ 1:36:32Sen. Blackburn: Thank you, Mr. chairman. Miss lane, judge marlon sends his regards. He reached out yesterday. He is really proud of you and the work that you did. I have no doubt he is watching this morning. So he does send his regards.
▶ 1:36:54Sen. Blackburn: I want to talk with you for just a minute about some of the cases you have had the opportunity to work on that include national security and constitutional law. And according to 10 partners at the law firm, work never fazed you.
▶ 1:37:21Sen. Blackburn: And that is a statement that has been made about you that you work able to work under pressure, that you were able to stay levelheaded, and of course, I have heard the same thing from the judge and your work there. So talk for a minute about that skill set that you have developed in the private sector and how you would take that to the bench.
▶ 1:37:44Ms. Lane: In my practice, I have had the privilege of litigating at every single level of state and federal court, including the united states supreme court. I filed over 100 briefs and motions. I have argued in federal and state trial courts. I have gone to trial, argued appeals, handled numerous other appeals.
▶ 1:38:04Ms. Lane: And in many of those cases, they involved complicated administrative law issues, constitutional law issues, and they were often moving on a very fast timeline. So as an attorney representing my clients's interests, I had to get up to speed very quickly on both the facts and the law and grasp really complicated issues quickly.
▶ 1:38:27Ms. Lane: If I have the privilege of being confirmed to the district of montana, I would take the same diligence with me and not only work really hard to get it right, but also to manage my docket efficiently and to understand all of the different legal and factual issues that come before me.
▶ 1:38:42Sen. Blackburn: Thank you. Miss clarke, good to see you on this side of the hill.
▶ 1:38:47Ms. Clarke: Thank you, senator.
▶ 1:38:50Sen. Blackburn: I want you to talk in the about -- you have done a lot of work in the human trafficking ring as a volunteer. This is something that we are seeing many more of these cases, many of them connected on social media and young people that are being human trafficked, sex trafficked, and these predators, pedophiles, groomers ending up in court. We have been a lot of work with other agencies on these protections.
▶ 1:39:20Sen. Blackburn: So you have experience and also a broad-based experience in policy. And I think this is something that should help shape your opinion as a judge. So talk with me how you would use that experience as you move to the bench.
▶ 1:39:45Ms. Clarke: Senator blackburn, that experience that I have had working with jasmine road and also my experience as a prosecutor, I got to see both sides of what is happening when it comes to human trafficking.
▶ 1:40:04Ms. Clarke: As you mentioned, there is a lot of grooming that takes place through social media, through games that have access to the internet, and so I think having that experience will allow me if I am so fortunate as to be confirmed to be able to jump into cases that involve those issues.
▶ 1:40:23Sen. Blackburn: I think after the new mexico decision yesterday, that verdict against meta, we are going to see more of these that will come forward in the protection of our children. Mr. rikhye, you come from an area that I think the virgin islands is a different district, if you will.
▶ 1:40:47Sen. Blackburn: And your work as an attorney there, how do you carry that to the bench and some of the challenges, a different set of challenges really, that come before that district?
▶ 1:40:57Mr. Rikhye: Yes, senator, the virgin islands is unique in terms of its geography as well as its culture. It is also a very small place. The entire territory has about 85,000 people there. One of the things I remember from my experience is that every single federal case, even if we as prosecutors did not think it was a very significant case, and had a measurable significant positive impact on the community. So I know firsthand how work that was done in the U.S.
▶ 1:41:27Mr. Rikhye: Attorney's office there and continues to be done has a positive impact on the community, on people's lives. I found out to be very rewarding and look forward to the opportunity to serving in a different capacity in the virgin islands.
▶ 1:41:38Sen. Blackburn: Sounds good. Miss westercamp, they have kind of had their arrows pointed at you today. And sometimes I think that is done in a very unfair mindset. They are not happy right now. But is there anything you would like to clarify that you have been asked today and were not able to give a full explanation?
▶ 1:42:02Ms. Westercamp: If I may, chairman.
▶ 1:42:05Chair Grassley: Go ahead.
▶ 1:42:06Ms. Westercamp: I appreciate that question, senator. The arrows of unfortunate have rained down on me this morning and would like to reiterate to the entire committee, chairman grassley, ringing member durbin that I am a woman of integrity and fidelity to the law and for the past 12 years at the apartment of justice have devoted myself already to a life of public service.
▶ 1:42:35Ms. Westercamp: And if I were confirmed to be a judge on the court of international trade, I would faithfully adhere to the judicial canons, but with impartiality and all that entails for any party that would appear before me. Thank you.
▶ 1:42:55Sen. Coons: Thank you, Mr. chairman. Am I the last senator to question?
▶ 1:43:06Chair Grassley: No.
▶ 1:43:08Sen. Coons: Would you like me to defer to you? Yes, I can defer to you. It is a genuine offer. Thank you, sir. Congratulations to each of you, to your families. I appreciate your willingness to step forward and serve. First, just a general question I have been working on with one of my colleagues.
▶ 1:43:34Sen. Coons: The amount of country that creates controversy jurisdiction has been set since 1976. The amount that is at issue in most cases, the volume of cases, has gone up dramatically. In each of you briefly tell me something about why you think we should or should not increase the amount in controversy required to create diversity jurisdiction and why that would be an appropriate thing for this congress to do or not? Briefly, miss clarke.
▶ 1:44:01Ms. Clarke: As you pointed out, the amount is $75,000. At this stage, that is a very low bar, especially when it comes to civil litigation to allow a potential plaintiff or even a defendant to remove a case from state court into federal court. I have not thought thoroughly about what that number should be, but I do recognize that is a low number.
▶ 1:44:26Sen. Coons: Thank you. Miss lane. Forgive me.
▶ 1:44:30Ms. Lane: Senator, I think that would go to having an ongoing debate of what is appropriate and as a nominee I would not want to get too far out in front of my skis on that one, but I would say as a federal judge sitting in diversity jurisdiction, I would follow the $75,000 threshold until congress changes it.
▶ 1:44:49Sen. Coons: Sir?
▶ 1:44:51Mr. Rikhye: Thank you, senator. My practice has been almost exclusively in criminal law, but I am certainly aware of this low threshold that exists. I think, again, in terms of congress increasing that threshold, I am hesitant to kind of comment on potential legislation that this body might take up and support it or be against it. But I definitely understand the concern.
▶ 1:45:16Mr. Rikhye: This is not so much of an issue that we have seen in the district of the virgin islands, but I do understand it is a nationwide problem.
▶ 1:45:22Sen. Coons: Does the election of cases from territorial court to federal district court to federal district court have the same dynamics and act on volume -- an impact on volume as it might in other districts?
▶ 1:45:32Mr. Rikhye: I don't have metrics for other districts but I think this is less of a problem in the district of the virgin islands but certainly it is an issue that is there and is something that has been debated in the bar. Again, I just think it would be -- I would be hesitant to comment on potential legislation.
▶ 1:45:51Ms. Westercamp: Senator, the court of international trade is a court of limited jurisdiction so it does not really apply.
▶ 1:45:57Sen. Coons: So maybe I will move onto questioning you about something directly. Miss westercamp, if you would briefly tell me, what has your role been in advising president trump on the tariffs issued under ieepa, the international emergency economic powers act?
▶ 1:46:15Ms. Westercamp: Senator, so consistent with past precedent for nominees appeared before this committee who worked in the executive branch and cognizant of the various privileges that the executive branch enjoys, I can't talk about specific matters. But not the advice given or to whom the advice was given.
▶ 1:46:31Sen. Coons: Did you discuss with president trump how cit should or might rule on the legality?
▶ 1:46:38Ms. Westercamp: Senator, that gets again into areas that I cannot discuss. But I can tell you that I did work on various executive orders citing ieepa. And since the learning resources decision, I have not had further work related to that. And I am also not working on any of the ongoing litigation that is currently back before the cit.
▶ 1:47:06Sen. Coons: Given that the supreme court ruled 6-3 against the administration's position, and you administration's position, and do you agree and what should be done to refund the money now that the supreme court has validated that?
▶ 1:47:21Ms. Westercamp: Again, that is a matter of active litigation before the cit and a matter of public debate with different economists as to how to tackle that question. So as a judicial nominee --
▶ 1:47:32Sen. Coons: You wrote in your questionnaire you would recuse any case touching on work you have performed while in the counsel's office. With that relate to everything ieepa or tariffs?
▶ 1:47:42Ms. Westercamp: Pursuant to the statute governing recusal, I would take any recusal matter very seriously and discuss the matter with my colleagues and determine whether recusal is appropriate. I think with the various subject matter that I have worked on at white house counsel's office, I would very seriously consider whether recusal would be appropriate.
▶ 1:48:04Sen. Coons: Your answer in the questionnaire was not as carefully cabin door constructed . It was you would recuse in any case on a separate you worked on in the counsel's office.
▶ 1:48:16Ms. Westercamp: No, senator, that is accurate.
▶ 1:48:19Sen. Coons: Last if I might to miss lane, I am deeply concerned by the lack of legal experience you bring to a lifetime position . Senator schiff probed a number of questions. My understanding is graduated in 2017, about nine years. How many years have actually practiced law putting aside your two clerkships?
▶ 1:48:40Ms. Lane: I have been fortunate to practiced law since graduate in law school and after my clerkships. I have worked on over 50 cases, filed over 100 nations in federal and state courts at every level, and I currently manage a litigation docket of over 100 cases. I am very grateful for the wealth of experience I have had.
▶ 1:49:00Sen. Coons: So you mentioned in your questionnaire that you drafted at once for direct and cross examinations and cross-examined a witness. You only mentioned one cross-examination. You have certainly conducted more than one cross-examination in federal court. Is that correct?
▶ 1:49:17Ms. Lane: I conducted that one cross-examination but have been very involved in the preparation of witnesses.
▶ 1:49:24Sen. Coons: One cross-examination in federal court. Is that correct?
▶ 1:49:26Ms. Lane: I have, senator, and I have worked extensively with preparing experts, helping prepare.
▶ 1:49:32Sen. Coons: You took the deposition of an expert witness. You have certainly taken more than one deposition in your legal career. Is that correct?
▶ 1:49:40Ms. Lane: I have taken a deposition of an expert but have also been deeply engaged in --
▶ 1:49:45Sen. Coons: So one deposition?
▶ 1:49:47Ms. Lane: Yes, senator.
▶ 1:49:50Sen. Coons: How many direct examinations have you conducted?
▶ 1:49:53Ms. Lane: Senator, I have like I said drafted outlines for direct examinations and helps prepare witnesses and second chair depositions.
▶ 1:50:04Sen. Coons: The chairman is doing his best to draw my attention and get me to end. I will simply comment and closing that you have been held in contempt for flagrant disregard of a court order, the legal team of what you are part to be specific. I think the company should of your lack of experience and that weighs heavily against your nomination. Thank you for your indulgence, Mr. chair.
▶ 1:50:25Chair Grassley: I would like to enter into the record before senator welch speaks supporting miss lane's nomination from 33 current and former state solicitors general and other members of their senior staff.
▶ 1:50:44Chair Grassley: They happened to praise miss lane for her "rare combination of intellectual rigor, practical insight, careful attention to details, quality details, qualitie essential for for a judge." she also developed persuasive legal argument and engaged effectively with courts and opposing consuls.
▶ 1:51:16Chair Grassley: Without objection, that will be entered into the record. Senator welch.
▶ 1:51:19Sen. Welch: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. chairman. I want to follow up, miss westercamp, on this conflict of interest question and recusal. You worked of course in the white house. You worked on the trade policies and the tariffs. Is that correct?
▶ 1:51:37Ms. Westercamp: Senator, I worked on as I disclosed in my senate judicial questionnaire various executive orders and proclamations.
▶ 1:51:44Sen. Welch: You had nothing to do with the tariffs?
▶ 1:51:46Ms. Westercamp: Senator, some of the executive orders as I said were executive orders related to trade and tariffs.
▶ 1:51:54Sen. Welch: Right. That was obviously under that was obviously unan enormous pillar under the trump policy. The court that you will be serving on, should you be confirmed, found those were unconstitutional. Correct?
▶ 1:52:13Ms. Westercamp: The cit with the three-judge panel, yes, found it was unconstitutional.
▶ 1:52:20Sen. Welch: Right, and the U.S. supreme court confirmed that decision and said the cit cited that correctly.
▶ 1:52:27Ms. Westercamp: That is correct, senator.
▶ 1:52:29Sen. Welch: Explained to me how there is any question about whether you should recuse yourself. You worked in the white house where the major policy of the white house was the promotion of tariffs, and now you would be sitting on a court where they found those tariffs unconstitutional.
▶ 1:52:46Sen. Welch: And should there be further litigation about these tariffs, you cannot tell us today whether you would recuse yourself in view of the fact that you were an advocate for the tariffs in one case and now would be on a court that found those tariffs to be unconstitutional?
▶ 1:53:01Ms. Westercamp: Again, senator, I would take recusal very seriously. In terms of recusing for any matters or executive orders I have worked on, I believe the president had actually revoked as executive orders via another executive order after the supreme court decision.
▶ 1:53:19Sen. Welch: It is possible for me to understand this. You worked for a client on a policy that was determined to be unconstitutional. You have a right to do that. Obviously, the president made his decision. You were his advocate, and now you are on a court where the supreme court has said those were unconstitutional and there will be questions about refunding those tariffs. In fact, there are questions about that right now.
▶ 1:53:46Sen. Welch: You cannot just make a clear expression to us about whether you would or would not recuse yourself when you were on both sides of the issue?
▶ 1:53:56Ms. Westercamp: Senator, I think it would not be appropriate to grade my own work so to speak, so yes, I would for specific matters I worked on in the white house would recuse myself and add the refund litigation is actively before I think judge eaton in the court of international trade. So it would be inappropriate for me to comment on how that is proceeding.
▶ 1:54:19Sen. Welch: I want to ask you about a couple of tweets. George papadopoulos, who tweeted out there are two parties now, traitors and patriots. As you know, he is a former advisor to president trump. My understanding is you retweeted that out. Did you do that?
▶ 1:54:40Ms. Westercamp: Senator, I don't have twitter in front of me right now. I take you at your work, but I had tweeted that and as I stated previously, I think we tweeting from people I don't know, including the gentleman you just mentioned, is an inappropriate way to express oneself on any controversial political matter.
▶ 1:55:00Sen. Welch: Read tweeting is an indication that you want to amplify what you read in the tweet. Right? That is why people retweet. Correct?
▶ 1:55:09Ms. Westercamp: Senator, I believe so.
▶ 1:55:13Sen. Welch: Who are the traitors and who are the patriots?
▶ 1:55:17Ms. Westercamp: Senator, again, I think that this is a judicial nominee would be inappropriate for me to comment on the topic of the controversial subject matter. I have apologized.
▶ 1:55:28Sen. Welch: I am asking you -- you retweeted something. You made an active decision to amplify a tweet. You thought other people should see it. That tweet included patriots and traitors. So I am asking you, when you retweeted that, who in your mind are the patriots and who in your mind were the traitors?
▶ 1:55:50Ms. Westercamp: Senator, I don't have any contact for that and apologize for tweeting.
▶ 1:55:54Sen. Welch: You did this. You did it. You hit send. So who are the patriots and who are the traitors?
▶ 1:56:02Ms. Westercamp: Senator, I don't have an answer for you.
▶ 1:56:06Sen. Welch: Unbelievable. On november 14, you retweeted a post by an account. The tweet read in part, "big distinction between us and the party of hate." who is the party of hate?
▶ 1:56:23Ms. Westercamp: Senator, again, first of all, I am out of time, but also as I said I don't agree with everything that has been retweeted in the past.
▶ 1:56:32Sen. Welch: Do you agree with anything you did in the past? You have to figure that out.
▶ 1:56:42Ms. Westercamp: Senator, as to your specific question, I don't have an answer for you.
▶ 1:56:48Sen. Welch: My time is up. Thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:56:56Chair Grassley: Miss lane, when she was asked this last question, so I will give you an opportunity to respond to senator coons's comments if you want to take advantage of it.
▶ 1:57:09Ms. Lane: Thank you you, chairman grassley. At no point in any of my representation and any litigation I have been involved in have I ever been held in contempt, sanction, or formally rebuked by a judge. In a letter that was submitted to this committee, it referenced litigation I was involved in. And that was in a state trial court. I was an attorney tasked with defending the state of montana.
▶ 1:57:35Ms. Lane: And the trial judge went out of his way to say that the attorneys in the case had done nothing wrong and had complied with all of our legal and ethical obligations. And I appreciate the opportunity to clear the record.
▶ 1:57:45Chair Grassley: Ok. Now the meeting is over. I thank the nominees for their testimony today and would expect you to answer written questions. For written questions, a record may be submitted -- the questions may be submitted until april 1, 5:00 p.m. Meeting adjourned. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap.org]