Prepared
Statement by Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa
Chairman,
Senate Judiciary Committee
Hearing on
Special Counsels and the Separation of Powers
September 26,
2017
Today
the Committee will hear testimony related to two bills recently introduced by
members of our committee: S. 1735, the Special Counsel Independence Protection
Act—introduced by Senators Graham, Whitehouse, and Blumenthal, as well as by
Senator Booker—and S. 1741, the Special Counsel Integrity Act—introduced by
Senators Tillis and Coons. These bills have some things in common. Each bill
attempts to codify current Department of Justice regulations about the removal
of special counsels. Each bill provides for judicial review of the removal
decision. And each bill has some bipartisan support.
It
is also clear that each bill is motivated by similar concerns about the current
special counsel, Robert Mueller, and his investigation into the Russian
government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. One of the
bills even specifies that it applies retroactively to May 17, 2017, the date
that Robert Mueller was appointed special counsel. And both bills were
introduced when media speculation was rampant that President Trump was
contemplating firing Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
The
President has said that he does not intend to fire the special counsel, and I
think that he made the right decision. I hope that this investigation proceeds
to its conclusion rapidly and stays focused on what Deputy Attorney General Rod
Rosenstein charged it to investigate. The American people can be sure that this
Committee, which has jurisdiction over the Department of Justice and the FBI,
will take its oversight role over the investigation seriously.
While
there is no doubt that current events are significant to the issues we discuss
today, it is my hope that during today’s hearing, the Committee will engage in
a broader discussion in the grand tradition of the Senate as the world’s
greatest deliberative body. Both of the bills we will discuss today raise
potential separation of powers concerns that I believe deserve the attention of
the Committee and merit a full and respectful discussion. The issues we will
discuss today are bigger than the President or any of us. They concern the
fundamental design of our republic.
When
they drafted the Constitution, the Founders of our nation were rightfully
concerned that those in power would be tempted to abuse it to favor their own
interests. To prevent this, the Founders divided power among three branches of
government, setting up a system of government in which, to paraphrase James
Madison in Federalist 51, “ambition [is] made to counteract ambition.” It is
through this system of checks and balances between ambitious branches of
government that our fundamental liberties are protected.
There
are those who argue that the rise of the modern administrative state with its
federal agencies that are vested with both executive and legislative powers—and
even judicial powers sometimes—have weakened the separation of powers
provisions of our Constitution, or at least changed how we should understand
them. I believe that our government works best when each branch of government
has a clearly defined role, and I think that even in our modern times with our
greatly expanded federal government, that is not too much to hope for. But it
is something that we as members of Congress must carefully consider as we draft
legislation.
Some
who agree that these bills are good policy argue that by codifying the
Department of Justice special counsel regulations and providing judicial review
over removal decisions, they provide useful certainty about how disputes over
the removal of the special counsel would proceed and afford the office of
special counsel needed independence. But there are others who argue that these
efforts run afoul of the Constitution by interfering with the President’s
ability to control the executive branch and to make sure that the laws are
faithfully executed.
I
hope that both those who view these bills as constitutional and those who
express their doubts that they are constitutional can agree on one thing: there
is a robust role for Congress in overseeing the Executive Branch, including all
investigations conducted by Department of Justice-appointed special counsels.
The American people also play an oversight role and can apply political
pressure to any President who removes a special counsel for reasons they do not
consider adequate. And, finally, the Constitution gives to Congress the
ultimate check on the executive branch—the power of impeachment.
Every
American has a right to expect their government to be ethical, effective, and
accountable. If there is one thing I have learned in my career as a farmer and
as a Senator, it is that where the sun pokes through, there can be no darkness.
I have spent my career as a strong advocate for openness and transparency in
government. But I also believe that the separation of powers is essential to
preserve the liberties we enjoy as Americans and to an effective constitutional
democracy. I look forward to today’s hearing where these important issues will
be discussed.
-30-