My job here on the judiciary , you know, ato these hearings, is to raise my mr. Cohen, he seems like a really smart guy and a really great guy. He earns i can say about him, he earned, sort of, what he gets. To ask the tough questions. You see, they have 107 lobbyists on capitol hill. They are swarming capitol hill, their lobbyists. But i have wondered thousand people write me their objections. The first thing i would do is stop this deal. But it is not up to me. It is up to the sec and the doj. Senator franken weighs in on the proposed comcasttime warner cable merger. Monday on the communicators. On tuesday, attorney general eric holder testified before the house Judiciary Committee. He discussed the Justice Department to use of forecutorial processions marijuana and the nsa surveillance program. This is three hours and 45 minutes. Good morning. The Judiciary Committee will come to order and without objection, the chair is authorized to declare recess of the committee at any time. We welcome everyone to this oversight hearing of the u. S. Department of justice and i will begin by recognizing myself for an Opening Statement. Welcome, attorney general holder, to your seventh appearance before your confirmation since your confirmation in 2009. We are happy to have you with us today. Over the last year, we have witnessed an extraordinary level of executive overreach by the Obama Administration. Time after time, this resident has pushed the limits beyond their constitutional boundaries. He has repeatedly declared that rather than face faithfully executing the laws, he will refuse to take no for an answer. And that where congress will not act, i will. The house Judiciary Committee has worked diligently to oppose these broad assertions of executive power and remind the American People that our constitution gives congress the power to make the law and charges the president with its faithful execution. Our work continues today because the department of justice has undertaken its own form of outreach in several instances. This is despite the fact the legal opinions from the Justice Department under president carter, reagan, george h. W. Bush, clinton, and george w. Bush, all agree that while the president does not have the ability to execute laws that he determines are unconstitutional, the president may not refuse to enforce an act of congress for policy reasons. Unfortunately, the department of justice, under attorney general holder, has done just that. 19, 2000le, on october nine, attorney general holder announced that the Justice Department would stop enforcing the federal marijuana ban against persons to comply with state medical marijuana laws. The Justice Department decision not to enforce the controlled substances act in states whose laws violate federal law is not a valid exercise of prosecutors real discretion, but a formal, departmentwide policy of selective nonenforcement of an act of congress. On august 12 of this year, the attorney general directed all federal prosecutors to declined to charge the drug quantity necessary to trigger a mandatory minimum sentence. If a defendant meets certain criteria. The attorney generals directive, along with contradicting an act of congress, puts his own frontline drug prosecutors in the unenviable position of either defining their laws or violating their oath of can door to the court. Candor to the court. This Justice Department has continued to play fast and loose with taxpayer dollars. Every year, a Justice DepartmentInspector General compiled a list of the top management and performance challenges facing the department and every year since 1999, including this year, the issue of rent management has been included. Rather than learn from its mistakes over that 15 years and use more thanvely 200 grants, they have made a number of concerning changes to these programs. This type of change smacks of cronyism and opus and opens up to malfeasance. It is a direct conflict with Congress Intent when a creative when it created competitive grants. Secondly, i am concerned that this administration has begun a profound change in how forensic studiedstudy is without congressional approval or oversight. The Justice Department has permitted the National Institute of standards and technology to establish brandnew scientific area committees which will replace the longstanding working groups inferencing science that have operated for years under the department of justice and are the backbone of forensic science. We have learned that these new committees are rewriting forensic standards without input from experts contrary to congressional intent. Last summer, the department of justice announced that it would break from its tradition of having all of the safety officers benefit program frames ojp general the counsels office before an approval or denial was made. Instead, they have delegated this task to a counsel who reports to a little pointy. Counsel determination regarding the legality of a claim can also be overridden by the head of ojp and the department of justice has reduced the evidence needed to establish a claim. These changes will allow payments to be paid that are not supported by the law and they highlight the departments continued recklessness regarding taxpayer dollars as well as the continued disregard for the limitations congress places on how grant money should be spent. All of this demonstrates a pattern on the part of the Obama Administration to ignore or rewind rewrite the legislation that prayed that places limits for clinical purposes. The Justice Department has a responsibility to provide legal advice, including constitutional analyses, to the executive branch. I find it ironic that the department has chosen, on multiple occasions, to act in contravention of the constitution. I would be interested in hearing the, if any, legal Guidance Department has provided to the administration on these executive overreach is. I looky general holder, forward to hearing your answers to all of these important topics today as well as other significant issues to the Justice Department and the country. It is now my pleasure to recognize the Ranking Member of the full committee, the gentleman from michigan, mr. Conyers, for his Opening Statement. Thank you, chairman goodlatte. Welcome, attorney general holder. Jurisdiction of the department of justice, there are many topics worthy of discussion today. I hope that you will get a chance to accommodate chairman goodlatte in all of the numerous criticisms, flaws, and other things that he raised in his Opening Statement because we do want an honest appraisal of this. And im sure that you are up to giving us one. The first topic is enforcing Voting Rights for all americans. Voting discrimination of all time of all kind is alive and well in this country. It ought to be our committees overwhelming priority to take up thee resolution 3899, Voting Rights amendment act, without delay. Your work in sentencing reform is remarkable. In a country where nearly half of all federal inmates are serving time for drug offenses, the harshest crimes should be reserved for violent offenders. As you stated before the Sentencing Commission last month, our focus reliance on onorporation incarceration is not just financially unsustainable, it comes with human and moral costs that are impossible to captivate to calculate. We should note that the departments efforts to engage state and local agencies, juvenile Justice Systems and theunity leaders to end school to prison pipeline and ensure that every young person has the opportunity to reach his full potential, regardless of. He color of his or her skin we should celebrate the departments commitment to Marriage Equality as more and more of this country makes called one what you of the defining civil rights challenges of our time. General, your leadership on these and other issues has been invaluable. Throughout your tenure, you have been asked to do all of this and more with fewer resources. If you can give us any guidance as to the effect of the proposal,ryan budget we would like to engage with you on that topic as well. I would like to focus the balance of my time on the one overriding issue, our collective effort to roll back government surveillance of the United States citizens. Debate has recent focused on how to end the National Security agencys bulk collection of telephone records under section 215 of the usa patriot act. Ending that program and correcting the deeplytroubling legal argument at its foundation are of paramount importance. The president s proposal and the proposal advanced by some on the House Intelligence Committee deals only with section 215. In other words, they focus on one program used to access one database collected under one legal authority. To me, the problem is far more complicated than that. In his january 17 speech, president obama committed to much more. First, the president instructed you, mr. Attorney general, to institute reforms that place additional restrictions on the governments ability to retain, search, and use in criminal cases. The content of communications ofercepted under section 702 the foreign Intelligence Surveillance act. On march 28, in a letter sent to senator wyden, the director of national intelligence, james clapper, confirmed that the government mines this data for information about United States certain persons. Implicates in content, not metadata. Under any other circumstance, the government would require individualized suspicion and probable cause to seize these communications. Were neverendments intended to authorize that door surveillance of the United States persons and the department of justice should work with this committee to correct any impression to the contrary. Asks the attorney general to amend how we use National Security letters. So that gag orders will not be indefinite and will terminate within a fixed time. Asiew this modest amendment necessaryimum change to the regime in light of what the public now knows about government surveillance. Yet this committee has received no indication that this reform is underway at the department of justice. And i hope that we will hear news of this development in your testimony or soon. President he is anized that there inevitable bias within the Intelligence Community to collect more information about the world, not less. That bias is consistent with their mission to maintain National Security. But National Security is not the only value we hold dear. We must also be vigilant against government overreach and protect our Constitutional Rights to privacy and free association. In the congress, this committee has always been the proper form for a discussion about civil rights. In the National Security context. In the executive branch, that rule falls to the department of and specifically specifically, mr. Attorney general, to you. This country would be well served by your continued leadership on this issue. In years past, the department of justice and the house Judiciary Committee have worked together to draft, pass, and intimate the foreign Intelligence Surveillance act, the usa patriot act, and the pfizer amendments act. We should renew that Partnership Without delay. Act move the usa freedom through this committee with all necessary speed. I thank you and i look forward to your testimony, attorney general, and i yield back. The chair thanks the gentleman. Without objection, all other Opening Statements will be made a part of the record. Our only witness for joining us today. If you would please rise and we will begin by swearing you in. Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god . Yes. Lex let the record reflect that the attorney general responded in the affirmative. Thank you. 2009, general holder was sworn in as the 82nd attorney general of the United States. General holder has enjoyed a long career in both public and private sectors. First joining the department of justice or the attorney general on her program in 1976, he became one of the departments first attorneys to serve in the newlyform Public Integrity section. He went on to surge as a to serve as a judge in the superior court of the district of columbia. 1997, he was named by president clinton to be the general. Torney prior to that, he was a litigation partner at covington and berlin llc in washington dc. He is a graduate of Columbia University and columbia law school. General holder, we appreciate your presence and look forward to your testimony. Thank you. Conyers and the rest of the committee, i am here to speak on behalf of my hardworking colleagues about our continued commitment to the cause of justice and emissions that we share, securing our nation and protecting the American People. This is and always will be our top priority. Over the past year, the department has done important work in this regard, strengthening our ability to safeguard americans National Security, disrupt potential terrorist plots, and those who attempt to harm our nation can be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law. Last month, the department achieved a major milestone when we secured the conviction of the soninlaw of Osama Bin Laden and a Senior Member of al qaeda on terrorism charges. These cans such as safely occur in the city i am proud to call my hometown. Ability ofubted the our threecore system to administer justice swiftly in this case as it has hundreds of other cases involving terrorism defendants. And it would be a good thing for this country to finally put to thatthis political debate has otherwise questioned the experience that we have had. Last week, the senate Intelligence Committee voted to declassify portions of its report into past interrogation practices. I agree that as much of the report as possible should be made public. Of course, allowing for reductions necessary to protect National Security. I was pleased that the committee voted to send portions of the report forward for declassification. Having prohibited these practices upon taking office, the president believes that bringing this program into the light will help the American People understand what happened in the past and can help guide us as we move forward. So that no administration contemplates such a program in the future. Beyond our National Security work, the department will continue to build on the progress we have made on a range of threats and challenges. The resources of the department have been made available to help conduct a thorough investigation into last weeks horrific mass shooting at fort hood. Going forward, my colleagues and i will do Everything Possible to achieve justice for our brave men and women in uniform and prevent these far too common tragedies from happening again. More than ever before, the Department Law enforcement work must connect with new and emerging technology, including currencies such as bitcoin. Poseal currencies can challenges for Law Enforcement given the appeal that they have among those seeking to conceal illegal activity. This potential must be closely considered. We are working with our financial regulatory partners to account for this emerging technology. Those who favor Virtual Currencies solely for their ability to help mask Drug Trafficking or other illicit conduct should think twice. The department is committed to innovating alongside this new technology in order to ensure investigations are not impeded by a criminals ability to move funds anonymously. As Virtual Currency systems developed, it will be imperative to Law Enforcement interests that those comply with Money Laundering statutes and know your consumer and trolls. Controls. We have a department, commitment to integrity. Nowhere is this stronger than in our work to strengthen americas criminal Justice System through the smart Crime Initiative i announced last august. We are taking initiative on a number of evidencebased reforms. Including mandatory minimum sentences for certain nonviolent, lowlevel drug fin