Grassley: 6th Circuit Nominee Joan Larsen is Mainstream Jurist with Bipartisan Respect in Legal Community
Prepared Senate
Floor Statement by Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa
Chairman,
Senate Judiciary Committee
On the
Nomination of Justice Joan Larsen to Serve on the 6th U.S. Court of
Appeals
November 1,
2017
Today,
the Senate will vote on the nomination of Michigan Supreme Court Justice Joan
Larsen to serve on the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Though
she currently lives in Michigan, Justice Larsen hails from the great state of
Iowa. In fact, she and I share the same alma mater, the University of Northern
Iowa. I’m proud to see a fellow Iowan, and such an eminently qualified nominee,
be nominated to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
For
those who may not be familiar with her career and accomplishments, I’d like to
take a few minutes to share them with you. I think you’ll find, as I have, that
Justice Larsen is particularly well suited to serve as a federal appellate
judge.
Justice
Larsen has an outstanding academic record, having received numerous awards
during her undergraduate and law school careers. Justice Larsen was a
presidential scholar at the University of Northern Iowa and graduated with
highest honors. She graduated first in her class at Northwestern University Law
School, where she won the John Paul Stevens Award for Academic Excellence and
served as editor of the Northwestern Law Review.
She
began her legal career as a clerk for Judge Sentelle on the D.C. Circuit Court
of Appeals, and then clerked for Justice Scalia on the Supreme Court. Following
her clerkships, Justice Larsen joined the D.C. office of Sidley Austin, one of
the largest law firms in the United States.
Justice
Larsen spent two years as Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Office of
Legal Counsel, where she provided legal advice to the President and Executive
Agencies on difficult issues of constitutional and statutory interpretation.
Justice
Larsen has taught constitutional law and criminal law at the University of
Michigan Law School since 1998, where she has earned the respect of faculty
members and students alike. She won the L. Hart Wright Award for Excellence in
Teaching early in her career.
In
addition to her teaching responsibilities, Justice Larsen ran Michigan’s
clerkship program, helping hundreds of students and alumni pursue clerkships at
the federal and state level. As an adjunct professor, she continues to run the
law school’s moot court program.
Her
colleagues at the University of Michigan praised Justice Larsen, writing, “Even
among the talented and ambitious lawyers at an elite law school, Joan stands
out for her ability to make the penetrating insight that untangles some knotty
problem of statutory interpretation or judiciary doctrine. Especially
distinctive, moreover, is the rigor and even-handedness she brings to her
analysis.”
I’ll
share one more excerpt from that letter because I think it addresses what some
of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle may be concerned with, her
approach to the law.
Her
colleagues wrote, “For those of us who have found ourselves on the opposite
side of a debate with Joan about a case, a statute, or some broader issue of
constitutional history, she has demonstrated time and again that she is both a
gracious and an intellectually honest partner in the collaborative project of
figuring things out. What matters for Joan is not winning, but working out the
right answer. Even when you disagree with her, it is impossible not to respect
her and to take pleasure in the process of refining the issues actually in
dispute.”
In
other words, Justice Larsen is and will be a jurist who seeks to find the right
answer, never simply one she prefers as a matter of policy.
We
can already see from her time on the Michigan Supreme Court, that Justice
Larsen is a principled jurist with an impressive legal acumen. She’s served
with distinction on that court since she was appointed in 2015. She was elected
to the position in her own right in 2016, by a resounding majority, winning
every county in Michigan.
Colleagues
on the court have praised her sharp legal analysis, her clear and crisp
writing, and her work ethic.
Outside
of the courtroom, Justice Larsen is actively involved in volunteer efforts to
serve disadvantaged children, and she works with Michigan’s Veterans, Drug,
Sobriety, and Mental Health Court programs.
Now,
some of my colleagues have said they won’t support her nomination because
Justice Larsen was included on President Trump’s short list for the Supreme
Court. If you look at her background, it’s no surprise that she was included on
that list. She’s an accomplished legal academic, a mainstream jurist, and
well-respected on a bipartisan basis throughout the legal community.
Because
my colleagues have been concerned about everyone on that list, at her hearing,
I asked Justice Larsen when she learned that her name was on that list. She
replied, “the date it was announced….it was a complete surprise to me.”
I
also asked her about judicial independence and whether she could rule against
the president that nominated her. She replied, “I would have no trouble ruling
against the President who appointed me or any successor President as well.
Judicial independence means one thing, one very simple thing, and that is,
putting the law above everything else, the statutes passed by this body and the
Constitution of the United States. So I would have absolutely no trouble, and,
indeed, that would be my duty.”
And
here’s the most outrageous reason I’ve heard for voting against Justice Larsen.
Some in the minority have suggested that she is somehow responsible for outside
groups running ads supporting her nomination in Michigan. The claim that she is
responsible for the action of an outside group is ridiculous. And the
allegation that these ads are in some way a guarantee of how she will rule in
future cases is absurd.
I
find it interesting that my colleagues who are complaining about conservative
groups don’t seem to have much concern for the groups on the left that are
spending money in opposition to nominees.
One
such group, Alliance for Justice, routinely issues reports and press releases
on judicial nominees. Often times, these “reports” put forward incendiary and
false criticisms of these nominees—and my colleagues even make the same
incendiary attacks against the nominees as these outside groups do. I don’t hear
my colleagues on the other side up in arms about their spending millions of
dollars to oppose nominees.
And
of course all last year, groups on the left coordinated attacks on me. I was
followed all over Iowa by these groups and their members. They ran ads against
me and put up billboards opposing my election. I don’t remember hearing any of
my colleagues on the other side of the aisle complain about all the money these
groups spent.
As
I’ve said before, I expect outside groups on the left, and on the right, want
to have their voices heard in the nomination process. There’s nothing wrong
with that. But I take issue with complaints from the other side that don’t
acknowledge that all sides have interest groups that are spending and engaging
the judicial nomination process.
It
was completely appropriate for Justice Larsen not to wade into the political
debate regarding political ads. Her answers to those questions were exactly
what I’d expect an independent nominee to say.
Justice
Larsen’s nomination is supported by a broad and diverse coalition of lawyers,
judges, and academic colleagues. It’s easy to see why. She is an accomplished
and well-respected academic. She is a brilliant and independent jurist. Her
careful and well-reasoned legal analysis puts her squarely within the
mainstream of legal thought. I urge my colleagues to support her nomination.
-30-
