Grassley Statement at Executive Business Meeting to consider U.S. Attorney Nominees

Today, we are holding over two judicial nominees and two executive nominees. I’d like to take a moment to explain why I am going to vote against U.S. Attorney Nominee Rachael Rollins. I have no problem voting yes for the other U.S. Attorney nominees, many of whom hold policy beliefs that I do not agree with. In fact, we approved 7 last week, and we will approve all 8 that are up today. But I have significant problems with Ms. Rollins, who is an outspoken progressive prosecutor who seeks to “change” the criminal justice system.

 

As the Suffolk County District Attorney, Ms. Rollins announced that her Office would not charge 15 types of offenses—including threats, larceny and trespass. When I asked her about this, she told me that “there were no criminal offenses that [her] office declined to charge categorically” and that her office “has prosecuted over 25% of these crimes when the facts and circumstances justified doing so.” That means that 75% of the time in Suffolk County, if you threaten someone, steal, violate someone’s property, or commit other crimes, you won’t be charged.

 

If we vote ‘yes’ on Rollins, we can expect that President Biden will nominate like-minded individuals to other U.S. Attorney positions across the country. I cannot support that.

Prosecutors publishing a list of crimes they don’t plan to prosecute encourages people to break those laws. I can’t support a nominee who does that, particularly when crime is skyrocketing across the country. Now is not the time to nominate a lenient prosecutor who does not want to do her job. Therefore, I’m voting no.