Hearings to examine certain pending nominations.

Good morning. I'd like to welcome everyone to today's hearing. I am gonna start by reading Chairman Grassley's o- opening statement on his behalf. Today we'll have two panels. The first panel features Daniel Trainor, who is nominated to the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Our second panel has four district court nominees. Angela Colmanaro for the Southern District of Texas. Michael Martin for the Eastern District of Michigan. Kasdan Miller for the Northern District of Texas. And Antonio, is it, how do we say this correctly?

Pozo.

Pozo. Okay, excellent. Pozo for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. In a moment, I will turn to our visitors to introduce these nominees, but first I'd like to say a few words. Today we are considering a pair of district court nominees from Pennsylvania and Michigan, Mister Pozos and Mister Martin. These are the first judicial nominees this Congress who've received blue slips from Democratic senators.

Mm-hmm.

I want to commend President Trump, Senators Fetterman, Peters and Slotkin for their collaboration on these nominations. The blue slip has been a practice for more than a century. It's, in part, how the Senate exercises its advice and consent role regarding judicial nominations. The practice has been defended by senators of both parties over the years. Ranking member Durbin and myself can both speak firsthand about the political pressure we've received from our respective colleagues' wishes and retaining this long-standing practice. Properly understood, blue slips safeguard one of the Senate's distinct constitutional powers. When approached in good faith, it fosters cooperation with the White House to ensure that district judges are well-suited and respected in the states in which they will serve. Republicans and Democrats have successfully worked together for decades in this regard. Under the first Trump administration, and the Biden administrations, senators from opposing parties returned more than a hundred and eighty blue slips for district court nominees. More than a hundred and eighty. Those blue slips weren't impediments, but instead useful tools to reach bipartisan agreements. I know this. Ranking member Durbin knows this. And all of my Senate colleagues know this as well. It's why they frequently thank me for respecting their wishes and defending the Senate's century-old practice. But in this divisive political climate, short-sighted partisans have sought to undermine the blue-slip practice and sow further division in our country. Take, for example, the progressive dark money group known as Demand Justice. That group recently announced its plans to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in targeted advertising campaigns against Senate Democrats who dared to return blue slips for any of President Trump's nominees. Demand Justice and others threatened, quote, "Democrats who shrink from this fight will face consequences," end quote. So let's look at the two nominees who Demand Justice so vehemently opposes today. Mister Pozos practiced law for nearly two decades. He served as a federal prosecutor during the Obama administration. And his time in private practice has been heralded by many, including the Philadelphia Business Journal, which gave him the Minority Business Leader Award. Like Mister Pozos, Mister Martin is not a political activist. He is a faithful career public servant who prosecuted serious matters involving espionage, terrorism, and export control. In the Eastern District of Michigan, he served in the United States Attorney's Office under the Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations. But demand justice is threatening Senate Democrats because of these nominees. Shame on them and anyone who doesn't oppose these tight tactics. They seek partisan advantage at all cost, and they don't care if the casualties are good public servants or the judiciary as an institution. Groups like Demand Justice don't care about the Penn people of Pennsylvania or Michigan, or any other state for that matter. So I wanna take a moment to praise Senators Fetterman, Peters and Slotkin for their work here. It took real courage to rise above these despicable pressures to do what's right for the people of Pennsylvania and Michigan, and to reach a bipartisan result that ensures safety, security, and freedom in their respective states. I also want to encourage my Senate colleagues to follow these senators' leadership. The blue-slip practice is under assault. and it falls to each and every one of us to do our part to uphold it. Senators tell me they want to retain this practice, but the very often their conduct is destructive to the institution they claim to want to protect. The blue slip for district judges and US attorneys has survived for a century, but this practice will become more untenable unless senators

Thanks, Jerry Britt. And let me say at the outset, uh, when I chaired this committee during the previous administration, I respected the blue slip rule uh and it gave authority to members of the senate uh both political parties to choose uh certain judicial candidates and nominees for their own state uh the same organization that you've referred to was critical of my decision i believe they were wrong then wrong again now uh if we can get bipartisan cooperation for the appointment of lifetime judges we should do it uh we need to try to transcend the political divisions prevail in this country and it should be a start in this committee. Late last week the Republican majority forced through nearly seventy billion dollars to fund President Trump's massive deportation campaign, without any reforms to prevent abuses by immigration agents. Senate Republicans failed as well to put in place any guardrails to prevent the President from reviving his mega one point eight million slush fund for January sixth, cop beaters. Instead, they are asking us to trust Attorney, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanch, President's former personal lawyer, when he says the fund is no longer viable. But just days ago, President Trump uh made his own pronouncement. He renewed his call to create the slush fund. How long do you think it will take, Attorney General Blanch, if he is uh appointed to that position, to do President Trump's bidding? That brings me to today's hearing. The nominees before us are considered for lifetime appointments. Judges are the last line of defense for our f- constitution, especially as this administration has weaponized the Justice Department against the American people. Just look at what happened in the last year. Attorney General Pam Bondi was fired after federal judges stepped in and blocked her efforts to advance baseless prosecution against the president's enemies list. Since Todd Blanch became Acting Attorney General, he has used the power of the Justice Department to bring flimsy cases against Trump's perceived enemies. In less than a year, the department has brought two vindictive, baseless indictments against former Director James Comey. One will go down in history, the famous seashell prosecution. These prosecutions were personally ordered by the president, who despises Comey for overseeing the investigation of Russia's interference in the twenty sixteen election. The Justice Department also brought a paper thin indictment against the Southern Poverty Law Center, a civil rights organization that has a long history of exposing violent, white supremacist extremists who are allied with those in the White House. Not only is this administration weaponizing federal law enforcement against the American people, it also refuses to respect the rule of law by following court orders when the ju- ju- judicial system holds it accountable. Just last week, Homeland Security Secretary Mullen refused to commit to following court orders, falsely claiming, we quote, " we see courts over and over again use their bench for political opinion, not just the rule of law." I would remind Secretary Mullen that a court ruling against the executive branch is not a political act. It is part of checks and balances that our founders designed in the Constitution. As I've noted before, scores of judges appointed by presidents of both parties have found this administration has broken the law. And violating a court order is not an acceptable reaction when the administration doesn't like a court ruling. Yet that is exactly what is happening. Earlier this year, a Republican-appointed judge found that ICE had violated over one hundred court orders in one month in Minnesota alone. quote, more court orders than some federal agencies have violated in their entire existence. The more liberties this administration erodes, the more important it is for Americans to restore trust in the judicial system. That is why we need a judiciary that's not only fair and impartial, but one that rules without fear or favor. We need judges who will truly be neutral arbiters. And that is why the Senate's constitutional duty of advise and consent is so critical. Blue slips are an important part of that process, providing home state senators with a voice in selecting district court nominees. As chair of this committee for four years, I protected blue slips during the Biden administration. I'm thankful that Chairman Grassley shares my views on preserving them. This hearing marks the first time during the second Trump administration that we will hear from nominees for whom Democratic home state senators have returned blue slips. I thank Senator Fetterman and the Michigan senators for working in good faith with the White House. I look forward to hearing from all the nominees today. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Raking Member. We're now gonna turn to the introduction of our nominees. Uh, we'll have introductions by Senators Kramer, Hoven and McCormick, and then members of this committee. Because of a scheduling conflict, Senator Cruz has asked me to enter into the record, uh, his introduction for Miss Colmanaro and for Miss Mitchell into the record. And with out objection, I will enter those into the record now. Also because of a scheduling conflict, Senator Kramer has asked to lead us off. So, Senator Kramer, thank you for taking time to join us today. Please go ahead.

Well, I'm sorry that the conflict um has messed up the schedule, cuz I'd be love to sit and listen to everybody else's quite honestly. Um but thank you very much um Madam Chair and and Ranking Member Durbin and, and colleagues. It it uh it is that time of the year when we're doing the National Defense Authorization mark-ups so I will get back to armed services as as quickly as I can, so thank you for accommodating that. Um it is a joy for me to be able to be here to introduce my friend, uh my partner in many noble endeavors, as far as everybody knows. Um uh uh Dan Trainor, uh Judge Dan Trainor from North Dakota who has been nominated to the eighth circuit court. Um, with not just the return of a blue uh slip, but strong encouragement and and enthusiastic support from Senator Holman and me. Judge Traynor has demonstrated uh his integrity, his character, and his intellect in in magnificent ways on the bench in North Dakota, and certainly was the the obvious logical choice for for this advancement. Um, and I'm grateful that he's willing to take it, and with him today is his wife, Patricia, who clearly um agreed and uh we're we're grateful for that uh although uh i sure hope she can hang around bismarck longer um when i remember when when we first uh presented dan forward for the uh for the the district courtship court um several people were sort of stunned at how popular he was with the aba being you know mean spirited right wing republican and uh and and yet we were delighted to know that this is a man that that has certainly conviction but um but also integrity and recognized and doing the hard work of being well qualified and supported by the aba then as he is now as a as a member of the bench he is actually um still a member of the house of delegates for the american bar association demonstrating again further his level of conviction and and uh and service and i've known dan a very long time obviously we're good friends uh for a long time. Knew him while he was, before he went to law school. His mother almost never forgave me for delaying that decision to go to law school by a year by having him work for me but she got over it when he became a judge. And I was grateful for the redemption. Um because again Dan is a person with a a servant's heart, a a a heart for justice, an intellect to apply it properly in our in our construct and um it's just my honor to be able to be here today. to introduce introduce him to you all. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Senator Kramer. Senator Hoven, go ahead.

I'm pleased to join my colleague, Senator Kramer, here in introducing uh Judge Dan Treanor. I do have to check though, is the uh presiding member sufficiently of age so that we meet all the requirements here and and pass the rules properly?

I appreciate that more than you possibly know.

All right. I know the ranking member is. chairman well uh chairman brett ranking member durban members of the committee thank you for the opportunity to appear today to introduce uh dan trainor as well along with my colleague uh senator kramer but also he has with him patricia or better known as lieutenant colonel air force retired patricia i always call her lieutenant colonel you know the proper decorum She's awesome as well. And their children, Mary, Mark and Joe. And they are, it's just a great family. And I knew uh Dan's folks really well too and that and they, you know, were fantastic. So this is this is just Dan's a great guy, but he's surrounded by great people. Uh, it's a privilege uh to introduce him today and and I will tell you right up front, he's a man of great integrity, intellect and and deep faith in our Constitution. He understands the Constitution very well. And he understands that his job is to um enforce the law, not try to interpret it. He's earned a reputation as a thoughtful and a fair jurist, whose commitment to justice is respected by all of the people that know him. He's lifelong North Dakotan, through and through. We love that. Common sense all the way. Born in Devil's Lake. Uh attended University of North Dakota both for his Bachelor of Arts and his Juris Doctorate. Uh, and he's been involved in so many things in the state, and his family too. Uh, if you ask uh, if you say the name Trainor, it's known statewide and it's known statewide for good deeds in many different ways and many different areas. Uh, he's demonstrated an unwavering commitment throughout his career to public service, and as I said, faithful application of the law. Uh, since his confirmation as judge for the United States District Court uh in North Dakota, He really has distinguished himself, not only for making decisions on the facts and the law, but doing it decisively, clearly, expeditiously, and very, very well. Uh, his judicial record reflects a deep respect, as I said, for the Constitution. And that's so important as he heads to the eighth circuit. Again, he will enforce the law, not interpret the law, and that is exactly what our founding fathers intended. Um his professional accomplishments are too numerous to to name here. I can say I'm already beyond my time. I haven't even gotten through my notes. Uh, but I better wrap up and just tell you that we could not have a better nominee for the eighth circuit court than Dan Treanor. Thank you so much, Madam Chair.

Thank you very much, Senator Hoven. And now we'll move to Senator McCormick.

Hey, thank you uh Madam Chair and uh Ranking Member. Really a pleasure, and m- and members of the Judiciary Committee, it's really a pleasure uh to be here to introduce Antonio Pozos, nominee to the United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, to welcome him and his and Claire, his wife and their their lovely family. Uh, Tony's a successful attorney, a strong Pennsylvanian. a decorated public servant, and he's eminently qualified for this role. President Trump has made a strong and wise selection in nominating Tony. In fulfillment of our duty to advise and consent, Mm-hmm. my colleague and I, uh Senator Fetterman, established a commission of legal and civic leaders in Pennsylvania to Mm-hmm. rev- review and propose potential candidates for this critical position. The commission interviewed a number of excellent candidates, and even among this group of extraordinary people, Tony excelled and stood out. Colleagues, you know as well as I that we stand at a particularly consequential moment. Our nation must further the president's progress in stopping the scourge We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the future. We must fight for the picture. We must fight for the future. We must battle. We must fight for the future. We must wrestle. We must wrestle. And I really have the utmost confidence that if confirmed, Tony will more than meet this moment. He's a former federal prosecutor. He has a formidable track record of rooting out fraud, prosecuting those who abuse taxpayer dollars, and protecting Americans from predatory healthcare systems. He's built a strong practice as a partner at a prominent law firm. He commands the respect of his colleagues across uh this uh field of law, but also particularly in Pennsylvania, his academic credentials. degrees from Harvard and Michigan are unimpeachable. Uh, and thank you, Tony, for stepping up and stepping back into the arena of public service at this uniquely consequential moment. I trust you will serve the people of Pennsylvania honorably, and I urge my colleagues to support this exceptional nomination. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Senator McCormick. Uh, we will now turn to Senator Cornum.

Thank you, Madam Chairman. Uh, and uh, It's my honor to uh introduce two outstanding Texas, Angela Cominero and Kasdan Mitchell, who are a product of the federal judicial evaluation committee that Senator Cruz and I have set up on a bipartisan basis to evaluate the credentials of uh nominees or potential nominees to the federal bench and uh and both of them came through that process with flying colors and so uh both have earned uh, the recommendation of both Senator Cruz and I to the White House. And I'm pleased the President has seen fit to uh, to nominate these two fine individuals. Uh. Some of the finest attorneys and judges in the nation hail from the great state of Texas. And I'm glad to be able to sing the praises of these two. Um, Angela? Received her bachelor's degree from the University of Texas at Austin, with a JD from Notre Dame. After law school, she served as a law clerk for a federal judge, Judge Fish, on the US District Court of the Northern District of Texas, and then entered private practice, focusing on trial practice and complex commercial litigation. In two thousand nine, she entered public service with the Texas Office of Attorney General as an Assistant Attorney General in the General Litigation Division. After nine years of service, she joined the office of the Texas Governor as Deputy General Counsel, where she coordinated with agency executives on internal investigations, employment matters, and state law compliance. She directed litigation strategies for the uh for the governor and advised the governor on clemency applications in capital cases and she currently serves as Governor Abbott's Deputy Chief of Staff. I know Governor Abbott has high standards when it comes to legal matters, having served with him myself. Um, and I think uh his commendation of uh a Miss Common Error for this job uh speaks loudly. Today uh she's joined by Kasdan Mitchell, who's another one of the Lone Star State stars, who received her BA and law degree from Yale University. She began her legal career as an Assistant Solicitor General in Alabama.

Yes.

Handling civil and criminal cases at both the trial and appellate levels. She clerked for uh, my friend and a great judge, Judge Bill Pryor, on the uh, US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and Justice Clarence Thomas, on the US Supreme Court, in addition to working in the private sector, most recently at Kirkland and Ellis, where she was elevated to partner in two thousand eighteen. With uh such exceptional credentials, it's no surprise that Texas Trump, Te- President Trump has selected both of these great lawyers and and Texans to serve as US District Judges. And I'm honored to say a few words uh on their behalf. So congratulations, Angela and Kasdan and to your families who I know are proud beyond measure of your accomplishment here today. And I look forward to supporting both of your confirmations here on the committee and on the Senate floor. I do wanna just take a second, just to reflect a little bit on uh, on our current political climate insofar as it affects the judiciary and the rule of law that uh, uh, we, we talk about all the time, and just reflect on the fact that as Justice Scalia famously said, the, the one thing that preserves our great country is not necessarily the rule of law, it's the independence of the judiciary. And uh, of course, uh, once you're confirmed, uh, we can't cut your pay, and you can't be fired, except for extraordinary reasons. Uh, that would be through impeachment, which uh, we know we don't have to worry about, but we know that in this political climate, judges are frequently objects of criticism in the public domain. And that's fine. You know, we uh, we all enjoy the freedom of speech in this country. But the problem is, judges can't really defend themselves against criticism. It takes other people to speak on their behalf. And sadly, the organized bar association has abdicated their responsibility to speak on behalf of judges who are doing nothing more and nothing less than their job. And not putting their finger in the in the wind to see which way the political wind blows, but what the correct outcome is, according to the facts and the law in the case. So shame on the shame on the organized bar from for not speaking up, um, when judges are unfairly uh criticized. And I know people, some people have gone so far as to say, well, judges should be impeached for decisions that they don't like. Well, there is a remedy for a judicial decision that you don't like. It's called an appeal. It's an appeal. It's not impeachment. So, uh, we can all argue about judicial decisions, and uh, having been in that role myself at one time in my life, uh, it it always happens, there's always controversy, but somebody's gotta decide it. And as Chief Ju- as uh Justice Jackson on the US Supreme Court said, that uh, in the case of the Supreme Court, the decisions of that court are final, not because they're always right, but they are right, because they're final. And there has to be some place where Americans can go and get a decision made by an independent member of the judiciary, irrespective of politics or popular opinion, and have a decision made according to the law and the facts. And that's gonna be your responsibility, as you know. And so I just wanted to, uh, say a few words to impress upon you and everybody else here, uh, the importance of the independence of the judiciary. Um, so thank you and um, Madam Chair, I will yield the floor.

Madam Chair.

Senator Kennedy.

Madam Chair, um. I know I'm out of the regular order here, but I wanted to raise a point of personal privilege. Uh, I sat here and listened to Senator Cornyn. And there are not words in English for me to express how much I am going to miss him on this committee.

Mm.

I have learned so much from John Cornyn. And he's the same person today as he was when I got here ten years ago. Whip smart, even tempered, even-handed, exercises power materially, not emotionally, unafraid, but uh but but but but never ugly,

Such a

never vindictive. Um, god we're gonna miss you, John. And and it is such a privilege to have to have served on this committee with you. And I mean that. I don't know why, if I make it to heaven, just sitting in a political comment is just a how I feel in my heart. If I make it to heaven, I'm gonna ask God why bad things happen to good people. You're a good man. We're gonna miss you.

Ma- Madam uh Chairman, if I could briefly and then when they respond, I would just tell the nominees that the fact that there are not many people here on this side of the dais is actually a great sign. The thing that, the thing you should fear if you're going to be a nominee or a witness in a in a Senate hearing is when every one of these seats are full.

True.

But beware, when Senator Kennedy is here, anything can happen.

That's Mm. that's so right.

Thank you both for your comments. On Chairman Grassley's behalf, I now introduce Mister Martin. Mister Martin earned his BA from Miami of Ohio University, his master's degree from Georgetown University, and his law degree from Boston College Law School. After law school, Mister Martin clerked for Judge Edward Harrington on the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts. He spent the bulk of his career in public service under both Republican and Democratic administrations. In two thousand and five, Mister Martin joined the Justice Department's counter espionage section. He then joined the US Attorney's Office in the Eastern District of Michigan, where he has remained for nearly two decades. As a federal prosecutor, Mister Martin handled a wide array of criminal offenses, including terrorism, espionage, export control, drug drug trafficking, firearm offenses and violent crimes. He has tried eleven cases to final verdict and handled important appeals. Mister Martin was also selected for many leadership positions, including Chief of National Secur of the National Security Unit, the Executive Assistant U of the U of US Attorney and the Chief, the Criminal Chief. The US Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan sent a letter to the committee, praising Mister Martin. It stated quote, " Mike is a public servant of the highest order. He has been an assistant US Attorney in this office for eighteen years. He has excelled at every role. As a trial attorney, Mike secured some of our most important convictions in national security and violent crime." End quote. Without objection, I will enter this into the record. Senator Portman, who previously served the state of Ohio, also asked me to convey that he knows Mister Martin personally and fully supports his nomination. I look forward to hearing from Mister Martin today. And before we move on to swearing in Judge Treanor for our first panel, I wanted to take a brief moment of personal privilege to say how personally thrilled i am to see casden miller-mitchell before the committee today while she's been nominated from texas um alabama is proud to claim her casden watching you through the years has been remarkable i mean you're truly one of a kind i mean from her time at yale to her time in the solicitor general's office um to the clerkships that you spoke of with judge prior and um with Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Um she has always exceeded every mark in front of her. Um I have the privilege of living where Kasdan grew up and she is still a legend, uh walking the halls where my kids go to school. And she is someone that Alabama always looks to um for your integrity, your class, your grit, your intellect, um and your your passion for serving those around you. We were both alumni of Girl State. She was girls' state governor in two thousand and two, and then girls' nation president, so she's been no joke since the beginning. Um, and you are someone that every year, when all of those young girls from across our great state come together and think about what's possible, you show them to think even bigger, even brighter, and that their future and potential is endless. So knowing you and your sister Tori has been a privilege. My only regret of today's hearing is that you will not be serving in the great state of Alabama, but Texas and our country is immensely grateful and, um and and you should be really proud to have her serve, um on the federal judiciary. I certainly look forward to it. So congratulations on your well-deserved nomination. There are many of us who knew this day was coming for quite some time. All right, our first panel, uh please come forward and stand before the witness table. i will get to administer the oath of office judge trainer if you will raise your right hand please and answer this question 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 excellent thank you very much you may be seated it is our normal process if you desire to introduce the people that are with you including your family and then you may give your opening

thank you very much um uh chairman brit and ranking member Durbin for scheduling this hearing to consider my nomination to the eighth circuit court of appeals i'd like to thank president trump for the honor of this nomination and for nominating me to the district court i also wanna thank senator john hoven and senator kevin kramer for their many years of friendship and their support and encouragement in this process. I'm thankful to be joined by my wife, Tricia, who gave up an active duty career in the United States Air Force to stay in North Dakota and marry me. She retired as a lieutenant colonel after more than twenty years of active and reserve service in the Air Force. Today she teaches at the University of Mary in North Dakota. Tricia and I have been blessed with three great children our daughter mary our sons mac and joe and i'm grateful my family is able to be here today to support me my parents jack and jane trainer are not alive to see this day but i'm grateful for all the support they gave me throughout my life i'm also grateful my brother tom sister-in-law julie and grandaught and their granddaughter olivia came from north dakota My brother Paul, who's a professor at the law school in North Dakota, is also here. My brother Mike and sister-in-law Mary Beth planned to be here, but Mary Beth was bucked off her horse and broke eight ribs. We continue to pray for her recovery. My father-in-law Tony Lang and mother-in-law Cathy Lang are here from their home in Bowie, Maryland. I'm grateful that many of the Lang gang, Bria, Juliana, Jamie, Susie, Eva, Jacob, Liam, JP, Liz, Patty, and Nolan are here today. My wife, Tricia, grew up in Maryland, and as a result, we have a large contingent of family here to support me and to support us. I'm also joined by my three law clerks, Conor Keneally, Sarah Belliston, and Robert Schmidt. They are hopeful that the Senate will act quickly on this nomination, as it might provide an unexpected boost to their resumes. Finally, I'd like to thank and honor three significant people in my life and career as a lawyer and as a judge. First, Judge Ralph Erickson, who has served at the lowest and highest levels in both the state and federal judiciary. He's a good man, a good friend, and a living legal legend in our great state. Second, my former boss, Chief Justice Gerald Vandewall, for whom I clerked, a true icon in North Dakota. who led our state courts for decades with great skill and humility. Since my clerkship, he has been my mentor and friend. And I'm grateful that he is alive to see one of his law clerks nominated to the eighth circuit. Finally, I'd like to thank and honor my brother, Tom. He helped raise me when I was in high school. I practiced law with him for more than twenty years. He is the finest man I know. He struggles today with Parkinson's and I pray for him every day. I'm so grateful he's here to support me. Thank you again, Chairman Britt, Ranking Member Turbin, for scheduling this hearing. I look forward to answering your questions this morning.

Judge Treanor, thank you for that thoughtful introduction of the people with you. We are certainly um so glad that all of you are here and congratulations on this big day and the role that you've played and helping create a foundation for him to be in front of us. I will now turn to Raking member Durbin for um for the question portion.

Thank you very much, Chair Britt, and thank you Judge Treanor for being uh with us and thank you to your family and friends for showing their support. Judge, you were a contributing author and signatory of a letter to Columbia University, criticizing the university's response to protests on campus, following Hamas's October seventh attack on Israel. In that letter you vowed not to hire anyone who joins the Columbia University community, beginning with the entering class of twenty twenty four. Yet in denying a recusal motion in Thunderhawk versus County of Morton, which was brought by the Columbia Law School Initiative for a Just Society, you said quote, "I reaffirm my lack of bias toward any student or Columbia faculty or initiatives of its law school." With all due respect, Judge, this statement seems contradictory, stating at one point that you would not hire any from, one from Columbia, and second, that you have no bias against those from Columbia. Can you explain?

Senator, the uh letter was targeted and directed to the president of Columbia University. And the reason why is because there were Jewish students who had enrolled in the educational system at Columbia and were hav- having to shelter in place. The administration, some of the professors, were engaging in the conduct of trespassing, violent conduct, and making these students feel that they could not obtain an education. I'm a former member of the North Dakota Board of Higher Education. it is important that when students are able to be educated that they have the opportunity to pursue that education that type of conduct was not being appropriately appropriately handled and it was as described in the letter um a cauldron of of bias that was being um promoted on that campus and so that's why i signed on to the letter

You've explained why you signed the letter. Can you explain why you reversed your position?

Senator, I don't believe that I reversed my position. What I stated, in the recusal order, um, with regard to an application from some, um, I believe they were graduates of Columbia. But I don't hold a bias against graduates of Columbia. I don't hold a bias against, uh, people who attend the institution. The, the purpose of the letter was to to what the little one can do as a federal judge.

So you're saying you wouldn't hire them because they're from Columbia and misconduct and then saying you have no bias against Columbia, I don't follow that.

Senator, these um lawyers had graduated from Columbia long ago, they were in private, they were in practice, and as a result um the the boycotter uh that of the letter that I signed onto did not apply to them.

I'm not a graduate of Columbia but I'm still troubled. trying to understand your logic. You volunteered to hear habeas petitions from immigrants who were rounded up as part of Operation Metro Surge, the notorious ICE action in Minneapolis that led to the deaths of two innocent individuals. Around the country, Trump administration has detained tens of thousands of immigrants, eighty-five percent of them without any criminal records. Overwhelmingly, district court judges appointed by both Republicans and Democrats have held that mandatory detention is illegal and unconstitution. According to Politico's analysis, judges have ruled against the Trump administration's policy of of mandatory detention more than ten thousand times. And even a majority of Trump-appointed judges have ruled against the administration's position. You are an extreme outlier on this issue, which you've even acknowledged in several of your opinions. In your opinions, you embrace the Trump position that it can detain any immigrant without a bond hearing, no matter how long they've been in the United States, and even if they have no criminal history. Why did you volunteer to preside over these cases in Minnesota? And in light of your embrace of the Trump administration's position, even when judges have ruled against the administration policy more than ten thousand times why should we feel or have confidence you could be a neutral arbiter, when it comes to presiding over challenges to the trump administration action.

senator i volunteered to help in minnesota because i was previously licensed in minnesota i was previously assigned to handle a case and actually conducted a trial in the district of minnesota and when north dakota was down to one federal district judge judges from throughout the country including many from minnesota were very helpful um in handling matters that were pending in the district of north dakota um And so that's why I signed up.

But, uh, um, the the bottom line on the issue of habeas corpus, the issue of detention, why is it you're such an outlier when it comes to Trump policy?

Senator, I reviewed the law. I felt that the administration was acting within their lim limits. And I made my decision. I based it on the law. And I also based it upon what I expected the eighth circuit court of appeals would do and indeed the position that I took and the and the ruling that I made was upheld by the eighth circuit

Thank you. I'd like to enter into the record six letters supporting Judge Trainor's nomination from community leaders in Minnesota. These letters were written by legal academics and the state uh leaders of the state. bar associations and the former chairman of the Spirit Lake tribe. They all praised Judge Traynor's character and judicial temperament. One later letter stated quote, " I have a great deal of confidence that he'll, that he'd be a trustworthy and highly ethical circuit judge and exhibits superb temp superb temperament and wisdom in performing the important duties of his judicial office," end quote. The other letters shared similar sentiments. Without objection, I'd like to enter these letters into the record. So ordered. Um, now I'll call on Senator Cornyn.

Judge Treanor, as you were introducing your family, I I think uh it's more like a clan. Uh, congratulations on your nomination and Welcome all of your uh biggest fans here to the hearing here today. I guess my first question is uh you know a federal district judge sitting in a courtroom deciding an individual case is probably the most powerful person in the country insofar as the uh that particular subject matter is concerned. So why would you wanna give all that up? To be on an appellate court and not be able to how why would you relinquish all that power

senator um you remind me of a speech that i gave to a member of the state district court bar who became a member of our state supreme court i said you're giving up all of this authority you don't have to uh find anybody else to agree with you and now you've diminished your your ability to make decisions um uh because you've gotta find at least two or three um, other, justices to agree with you. It is a, it is a change of pace as, I think Justice Alito described district court judges and I told, of the judicial nominees for the district court, it is a great job. Um, and I've enjoyed being a federal district judge. Um, it's, the greatest honor of my life, Senator, to, to hold that position. Justice Alito I think described us as monarchs in our own courtroom, and that, uh, may be, uh, correct. Uh, I will miss it, but I was a Law Clerk on, um, on an appeals court at the North Dakota Supreme Court. I know and respect and admire many members on our circuit court, um, including, uh, the person that hopefully will be my predecessor if I'm confirmed, Judge Ralph Erickson. And so I look forward to working with them collaboratively.

So you may have heard this description of an appellate judge before, that it's uh, someone uh hides in the hills, while the battle rages below, and then swoops down to kill the wounded. Well, maybe that sounds like something Senator Kennedy would say, but but the uh, you know the point is uh, that appellate judges are not just uh, uh, don't serve the same function as trial judges, right? And uh, you don't retry the case and re-find the facts all over again. Uh, once it's appealed, there are certain standards of review uh, that would apply and uh defer uh, in some instances to the fact finding of course made in the trial court below. Um, so what lessons will you take with you from your experience on the trial bench, and in terms of the decision making process that that judge goes through, and the somewhat deferential, not obviously on matters of law, and not on matters where the evidence is clearly to the contrary, but how will you approach uh dealing with an individual case um where the standards of review don't um allow you to retry the case.

Senator, you're right. Uh, appeals court judges are limited and they should be. Um, the trial court um, is really the place where the action is. And one of the perspectives and, that I hope to bring to the Court of Appeals, is the perspective of a trial court judge. Judge Erickson, um, from North Dakota, is a federal district, a former federal district judge. And he's talked about the fact that as a district judge he approaches issues somewhat differently than some of the other members of the appeals court. who may be academics or may have, uh, positions in government. The fact that somebody, like me, has been nominated. I'm, am hoping that I help to bring a perspective as a twenty year trial lawyer, who actually represented people and brought cases to trial, in front of a jury or a judge. And also now six years as a federal district judge.

Well, I heard all the nice things that uh, senator kramer and senator hovind said about you do you have anything you can share with us that's not public that we can use in our various negotiations with them here in the senate

i don't i don't know that i wanna get into that i might lose their vote

well the uh you know i think uh there are couple of gifts in life one is the statute of limitations and the other is a a a fading memories so uh no they're great colleagues and uh We listen very carefully to the high praise of your qualifications and certainly look forward to supporting your nomination. Thank you.

Senator Boehmer is all.

Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Uh Judge Treanor, thank you for your service. Thanks for being here today.

You will go to people where, thank you.

Uh Who won the twenty twenty election, Judge Treanor?

Senator, this issue has become a question of political controversy i'm a sitting federal district judge i'm a nominee to the eighth circuit court of appeals and justice jackson who previously was confirmed by the senate um for a position on the

well if i may interrupt you judge cause my time is limited it's political controversy only because the president refuses to accept the results of the twenty twenty election i'm asking you as a matter of fact who won the twenty twenty election

well senator as uh as justice jackson stated in her responses to questions in the record um it is not appropriate to engage in discussion regarding that as a judge as a sitting judge

so you're going to use the same script that other nominees have used before this panel to avoid the question

senator i think this precedence established by justice jackson and other nominees is something that i need to follow as a crucial

as a as a matter of fact who got more votes in twenty twenty which of the presidential candidates

senator as i stated

well

before um this is an issue that justice jackson and other nominees have been asked they've not provided a response because

you you you understand why i'm asking you to state as a simple matter of fact who got more votes the reason is that the president seeks to perpetuate a lie you are in effect protecting the lie if you fail to take an independent position as a matter of simple fact everybody in this room knows the answer you're unwilling to state it instead adopting a script that's been dictated to you by the white house you prepared this answer with the white house did you not

senator i prepared the answer based upon the response provided by justice jackson

you you consulted with the white house before you invoked

in questions to the record

justice jackson that's the script as you well know that nominees sitting where you are right now have used again and again and again let me ask you was the capital attack on january sixth

senator the actions on january sixth were deeply troubling to watch um but i'm not going to characterize it beyond

you've watched the videos