01.27.05

Cantwell to Oppose U.S. Attorney General Nominee Alberto Gonzales

Questions torture memo role and Enron connections

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) today announced that she will vote against the nomination of Judge Alberto Gonzales to be the next U.S. Attorney General when it comes to the Senate floor next week.

"The Attorney General of the United States , as the chief law enforcement officer in the land, holds a special independent place in the government. While the President selects the nominee, the Constitution requires the Senate to provide ‘advice and consent.' After carefully listening to Judge Gonzales during his Senate hearings and reading his responses to questions, I have decided to oppose his confirmation.

"Given that Judge Gonzales's office generated legal opinions that counseled the White House it did not have to be bound by domestic and international laws on torture, and he failed to commit to recuse himself on Enron matters prior to confirmation, I cannot support him for the top law enforcement officer in the land. "We want our Attorney General to uphold the law no matter who the criminal is or who asks for his advice.

"It is essential that the person the Senate confirms for this position is independent. I am unconvinced that he has the independence to be the nation's leading law enforcement officer. As White House Counsel, his office generated a legal opinion on whether the President is bound by domestic and international law on torture, which the government recently repudiated as legally faulty. Such a repudiation calls Judge Gonzales's judgment into question, judgment that is important for our country's top attorney. It also suggests he is not independent of the President, which is essential for his new Cabinet role. Further, Judge Gonzales's changed position on the torture memos in the weeks before his confirmation hearings appears to demonstrate political convenience, not a truly self-reflective change in his thinking on these matters. Had Judge Gonzales recognized the serious problems with the judgments he made on these issues and given convincing assurances that he understands that his new role will require a different approach and a new allegiance to the law, I might have been convinced to defer to the President on this nomination.

"Additionally, Judge Gonzales had substantial ties to Enron while he was an attorney in private practice and then a candidate for the Texas Supreme Court, including receiving many thousands of dollars from Enron and its PAC both in campaign contributions and legal fees. These ties could effect the ongoing criminal investigations of Enron officials. Given the significance of this case and the past recusal of the outgoing Attorney General, Judge Gonzales should have made clear his intention to recuse himself from that investigation.

"Outgoing Attorney General Ashcroft recused himself because of similar political ties to Enron. While I have not been satisfied with the Administration's Enron investigation to date, at least I knew that the Attorney General Ashcroft acknowledged that his former friendship with Enron could pose problems in the investigation sufficient enough to justify his recusal. I want the same assurances from Gonzales, or at least an explanation of why these former professional and political ties to Enron do not constitute grounds for recusal. Yet in his written answers, Judge Gonzales would not state whether he would recuse himself, and he would not be specific about how his former ties to Enron might impact the Department of Justice's investigation of that company. What Enron did to my constituents in Washington and countless others across the nation was disgraceful, and one of the most important things the next Attorney General will do is conduct that investigation and bring Enron criminals to justice. Having read Gonzales's answers to the Enron questions, I am not even reassured that he would believe the investigation to be a priority."

Yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee reported Gonzales's nomination on a 10-8 vote. Consideration of the nomination will now proceed to the full U.S. Senate.

# # #