Hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee - Nomination of Mark Filip to be Deputy Attorney General
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
SEN. ORRIN HATCH (R-UT): Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I can make a suggestion, this is such an important position, and it needs to be filled. He is a sitting federal judge, and personally, I believe this side would waive -- would waive and agree to unanimous consent to get him on the job and get him confirmed before we actually go out here this year. That might be something you might want --
SEN. LEAHY: Well, I think we're getting into a discussion that we should probably be having among members privately, and --
SEN. HATCH: Well, I just -- I'd love to cooperate on this.
SEN. LEAHY: What we have done, Senator Specter and I have done something that takes care of the problem. I think what the senator from Utah is about to suggest something that would require both leaders and everything else, and I'm not in a position that I can speak for them, nor is the senator from Utah. So I think we should go ahead with the questions.
SEN. HATCH: Fine. And if I could just add to that one comment that that is a solution that probably could be done. I can't imagine a sitting federal judge wanting to take a recess appointment. I think that he would -- and we all know how qualified and competent he is. So let's think about it, anyway. Mr. Chairman, I know that you have great intentions here, and it is just a suggestion. I hope that we can get him on the job, is what I'm saying, full time.
Well, I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing. And I want to welcome you and Judge Filip, your wonderful wife, these fine young men that you have as sons, and your friends and the principal all here, and -- grateful. I enjoyed meeting in our office a couple of weeks ago, and expect great things from you at the Department. I think all of us do.
You know, you've accomplished some amazing things in your legal career. And I understand you were nominated to the bench -- when you were, the Chicago Council of Lawyers endorsed your appointment and praised your legal ability, temperament, and professionalism.
Now, the Senate, of course, unanimously confirmed you to the U.S. District Court, the federal District Court, almost four years ago, and you've served in a distinguished fashion there. And then last year, the Chicago Council of Lawyers surveyed practitioners about judges, and you again received rave reviews. They say you're impartial, open- minded, smart and hard working, professional and easygoing. And your integrity is absolutely unquestioned. So I would think we might be able to hopefully get you on the job.
Now, let me quote from a recent posting on a popular legal blog by a criminal defense attorney who practices before you. Quote, "He is outstanding and is one of the best judges we have in the Northern District. What I know is what I see in court. He is bright, thoughtful, and well prepared on the cases. He is respectful of the parties and attorneys and conducts himself in complete professionalism." Now, that's from a criminal defense attorney about a judge and former prosecutor. That's high praise, indeed.
Now, it seems like you more than fulfilled people's high expectations on the bench, and I expect you to do the same at the Department of Justice. And as I told General -- Attorney General Mukasey when he was before this committee, I think your experience as a federal judge is an important addition to the leadership team at the Department. And we all respect the federal bench, and we certainly respect you.
More and more issues confronting the Justice Department, especially on the -- in the war on terrorism, end up challenged in court. And having not just smart lawyers, but experienced judges over there making these decisions adds something very unique and valuable. And I think you can add a lot.
Now, on the controversy over destruction of video tapes allegedly recording a CIA interrogation of terrorists, Attorney General Mukasey has said Congress should wait for him to investigate before launching its own probe. In other words, let the prosecutors do their work before the politicians join the fray.
Today The Washington Post editorialized that the attorney general is right. Yesterday the Chicago Tribune said the same thing, that politicians should not throw a wrench in the works. And I find it a little ironic that some who most loudly demand that the attorney general be independent from the president appear to want him to be dependent upon Congress. And I think we've got to be careful there.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I ask consent to include these two editorials in the record, if I can.
SEN. LEAHY: No objection.
SEN. HATCH: Judge Filip, what is your view of that issue? Should the Congress hold off and let the Justice Department probe proceed first and, if so, explain why.
MR. FILIP: Senator, I would hope that both bodies could pursue their investigations. At this early stage, it may make some sense to give some breathing room to the Department so that they can try to see what the landscape looks like and see if it looks as though a criminal investigation is going to go forward. But I would hope that both aims can be pursued and that folks can work cooperatively in that regard.
SEN. HATCH: Well, thank you. During his confirmation, Attorney General Mukasey promised personally to reexamine the Justice Department's strategy for enforcing the anti-obscenity laws. Now, I think the Department has been wrong to prosecute only the most extreme, fringe material and leave the more common, equally obscene, equally illegal material alone.
That new approach, to me, does not impact the obscenity industry, and does not curb the poison of obscenity in our communities. So will you personally examine this policy and consider changing it, if you will?
MR. FILIP: Yes, sir.
SEN. HATCH: Well, those are two things that I feel pretty darn deeply about. And there are a lot of other things, too, but I noticed that -- well, let me just ask one other question, if I can.
Some would question whether you have the management experience to lead the Department, with more than 100,000 employees, hundreds and hundreds of lawyers in operations spread across the country. Now, the hearing we had yesterday included nominees to Justice Department components as varied as the Tax Division, the Violence Against Women Office, and the Community Relations Service.
The deputy attorney general is like the chief operating officer. On the one hand, I do not know how anyone nominated for this position could have comparable prior experience unless they led a massive multinational corporation, and that isn't generally where we go to get people in your position.
But let me ask you, how do you size up the management challenges ahead, and what prepares you to tackle such a monstrous task?
MR. FILIP: Sir, I hope I'm humble enough to realize that there's 110,000 very talented people there, and I would seek to draw upon their talents. I have managed, in a legal setting. I've managed law enforcement people and teams of attorneys, both as a prosecutor and in the private sector, but not 110,000 people. I doubt many folks have ever done that.
But I do think, and work very hard to try to be fair and to try to be a good listener. I would seek to draw upon the talents of the people who are there. I would seek to try --as I understand it, a big part of the job is resolving disputes within the Department, (top/tough ?) disputes that can't be resolved anywhere else, and I would hope that my experience as a judge and my record as a judge would give people comfort that I'll give people a fair hearing and hear them out, and then be decisive, and try to do things in the best interest of the Department.
SEN. HATCH: Well, Judge, I mentioned a minute ago that I think your judicial experience is particularly important. Some have questioned whether you are sufficiently independent to help lead the Justice Department. Now, different people mean different things about the words like "independence." Some will not think you are independent unless you actually oppose the very president who would appoint you, on certain issues.
Some say you will simply account to the president because you volunteered on his 2000 campaign and contributed to his reelection campaign. To me, that's crazy. No one cited these connections or questioned your independence when the Senate unanimously confirmed you to the federal bench.
Now, we easily confirmed to the judiciary and Justice Department scores of President Clinton's nominees who were tied much more closely to him. No one questioned their independence or their commitment to the rule of law. But let me ask you how, especially your service as a judge, has given you the kind of independence, the kind of commitment to the rule of law that you will need in order to help lead this Justice Department?
MR. FILIP: Senator, commitment to the rule of law is fundamental, as a prosecutor, as a member of the Justice Department, as a district court judge. And I would hope my record reflects that. I try to figure out what the law is and apply it to the facts at hand fairly, without regard to where that leads you.
SEN. HATCH: Well, thank you. I appreciate it.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for this time, and --
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT