Written Questions for Attorney General Jeff Sessions
Submitted by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
October 25, 2017
1. U.S. intelligence intercepts reported in July appear to reveal that you discussed “issues of
the campaign” with the Russian ambassador during interactions with the ambassador in
April and July of 2016, including discussing candidate Trump’s positions on Russiarelated issues.1 During the oversight hearing on October 18, 2017, when I asked whether
you had ever met with Russian officials to discuss policies or positions of the Trump
campaign, you replied “that’s possible,” and that such conversations “could have been in
that meeting in my office“ when you made “some comment about what Trump’s
positions are.”
(a) The meeting “in [your] office” reportedly took place in September 2016. Is
it similarly possible that you discussed policies or positions of the Trump
campaign during interactions with the ambassador in April and July 2016?
(b) Did you discuss Russian sanctions, including the Magnitsky Act, during any
of these three or other interactions with Russian-connected officials in 2016?
2. Former Acting Attorney General and former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates
testified before this Committee in May that if a foreign adversary is aware that a senior
government official has not been truthful, it exposes that person to blackmail.2
(a) Do you agree?
3. When former Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) Director James Comey notified
Congress that he was reopening the investigation into Secretary Clinton’s private email
server just weeks before Election Day, you publicly defended his decision. You argued
that because Director Comey had previously testified to Congress that the investigation
was closed, “he had to correct it.”3 I expect that you will hold yourself to this same
standard.
(a) Is there any additional information you need to tell this Committee about
your contacts with Russian officials, or anyone else connected to any part of
the Russian government, to correct or amend any previous testimony to us?
(b) Are there any additional contacts or conversations you had with Russian
officials, or anyone else connected to any part of the Russian government,
that have not yet been revealed to this Committee?
1

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/sessions-discussed-trump-campaign-related-matterswith-russian-ambassador-us-intelligence-intercepts-show/2017/07/21/3e704692-6e44-11e7-9c15177740635e83_story.html?utm_term=.e11a5e4dc5fe
2
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/05/08/full-transcript-sally-yates-and-james-clappertestify-on-russian-election-interference/
3
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/03/02/six-times-jeff-sessions-talked-about-perjuryaccess-and-special-prosecutors-when-it-involved-the-clintons/?utm_term=.d315b4eec9d7

 4. You assured us during your confirmation hearing in January that you were committed to
our nation’s hard-fought civil rights victories. You testified:
We can never go back. I am totally committed to maintaining the freedom and
equality that this country has to provide to every citizen, and I . . . will assure you
that that is how I will approach it.4
Unfortunately, it took less than a month for the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) to “go
back.” In February, your Department abruptly reversed itself on two major civil rights
cases. First, you reversed the Department’s position that anti-discrimination protections
should extend to transgender students. That same week your Department reversed its
position in a major voting rights case in Texas. A district court has twice found the Texas
law to be intentionally discriminatory, and the Fifth Circuit also recognized its
discriminatory impact. This reversal has real consequences. If the Fifth Circuit agrees
with the district court that the discrimination was intentional, then Texas would again be
subject to preclearance under the Voting Rights Act – and courts could protect against
voter discrimination before it happens.
(a) Did anyone affiliated with the White House, or with the Pence-Kobach
Voting Rights Commission, play any role in the Department’s decision to
reverse itself? I am not asking you to reveal the substance of that
involvement.
(b) You pledged to this Committee to “never go back” on voting rights. What
new or affirmative steps is your Justice Department taking right now to
ensure that no State moves backwards in protecting the right to vote?
5. Earlier this month you issued new executive guidance interpreting religious liberty
protections in federal law. I have heard from Vermonters who are concerned that this
guidance amounts to a license to discriminate. A President who campaigned on banning
members of a certain religion from entering our country cannot credibly claim to defend
“religious liberty,” and certainly cannot weaponize it to discriminate against LGBTQ
individuals and other minorities.
(a) Let’s say a gay man whose husband just died is denied surviving-spouse
benefits because the Social Security Administration employee – a public
servant – is personally opposed to gay marriage. Would that type of
discrimination be permissible under your memorandum?
(b) It’s been reported that you consulted with the Alliance Defending Freedom
on this guidance,5 which the Southern Poverty Law Center classifies as a hate

4

Nomination Hearing of Hon. Jeff Sessions, to be Attorney General of the United States; Tuesday, January 10,
2017; official transcript (“SJC nomination hearing transcript”), p. 86
5
http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/13/politics/jeff-sessions-alliance-defending-freedom-speech-released/index.html

 group for its anti-LGBT positions.6 If accurate, what did the consulting
consist of? What other organizations, if any, did you or your staff meet with
about this guidance?
6. During your confirmation hearing in front of this Committee, you testified:
I deeply understand the history of civil rights in our country, and the horrendous
impact that … the denial of voting rights has had on our African-American
brothers and sisters. I have witnessed it. We must continue to move forward and
never back.7
I find it hard to reconcile that laudable statement with some of DOJ’s recent actions. I
am especially concerned that on June 28, 2017, your Department sent a letter to 44 states,
asking what steps they were taking to remove allegedly ineligible voters from the rolls.8
(a) What new cases or affirmative steps has DOJ taken under your leadership
to ensure that states are actually protecting the right to vote, not just
purging voter rolls?
(b) To your knowledge, when was the last time the Department of Justice sent
a request for this type of information to all states covered by the National
Voter Registration Act? Has such a request ever been made?
(c) What information has the Department received in response to its June 28
request?
(d) Will you provide the information that the Department received to the
Committee? If so, when? (If not, on what basis do you intend to withhold
this information from the Committee?)
(e) How many states have refused to comply with the June 28 request? If
any, on what grounds have they cited?
(f) How does the Department intend to use information it has received or will
receive in response to its June 28 request?
(g) Has the Department shared any of the information it has received with
the Commission on Election Integrity? With the Department of
Homeland Security? With the Social Security Administration? With any
other federal agency or commission?
6

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/alliance-defending-freedom
SJC nomination hearing transcript, p. 42
8
https://www.scribd.com/document/353003811/DOJ-NVRAletter?irgwc=1&content=10079&campaign=Skimbit%2C%20Ltd.&ad_group=38395X1559799X3f39b746d5d3264f
7d0df69fc9d8e57f&keyword=ft750noi&source=impactradius&medium=affiliate#from_embed
7

 (h) How many personnel within the Department are currently tasked with
analyzing, reviewing, or otherwise assessing the information received in
response to the Department’s June 28 request?
On the same day that the Civil Division issued its letter, the so-called Pence-Kobach
Commission on Election Integrity sent its own letters to all 50 states, demanding voters’
personal information.9
(i) Was this timing just an unbelievable coincidence or were they coordinated
in any way?
(j) What role did the White House play in the June 28 Civil Division letter?
7. During the hearing, Senator Klobuchar asked you about whether the Justice Department
had coordinated at all with the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election
Integrity. Senator Klobuchar asked whether you had had any communications with
members of the Commission “about their efforts” and what type of coordination existed
between the Commission and Department.10 You responded that you had had no
communication with any member or staffer on the Commission, but acknowledged that
the Commission had approached the Department for “assistance” with several
issues. You added that you thought it was “appropriate” for the President to establish a
commission to review possible “irregularities” in voting.
(a) Do you have any evidence of widespread “irregularities” in voting in the
2016 Presidential election? Of pervasive fraud?
(b) Do you agree with President Trump’s claim that 3-5 million people voted
illegally in the 2016 Presidential election? If so, on what basis have you
concluded that statement is correct?
(c) Please describe with particularity the “assistance” that the Commission
has requested from the Department of Justice and any assistance, formal
or otherwise, the Department has offered to the Commission.
(d) What policies are currently in place governing contact between Justice
Department officials and White House officials?
(e) Were the contacts between the Justice Department and Commission
consistent with these policies?

9

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/docs/information-requests-to-states-06282017.pdf
http://www.cq.com/doc/congressionaltranscripts-5197564?0

10

 8. Recently, The Washington Post reported that the Justice Department plans to use numeric
case completion quotas when evaluating immigration judges’ overall performance.11 I am
concerned that any such quota will pressure judges to decide cases more rapidly than they
otherwise would, discouraging them from considering the unique and often complicated
facts and applicable law when rendering decisions. Such quotas would convert our
immigration courts into a system of assembly line justice – devoid of the due process we
expect to be a pillar of every kind of court in our country.
(a) Did you personally approve this plan to use numeric case completion quotas
on immigration judges as part of their performance reviews?
(b) How will you ensure that judges will not feel compelled to either deny or
approve claims for relief simply out of pressure to meet case completion
goals?
9. During last week’s oversight hearing, I asked whether you thought “citizenship is a
reliable indicator of a terrorist threat,” to which you replied “I don’t know exactly what
you mean.”12 In May I asked former FBI Director James Comey13 this question and he
testified that citizenship to a particular country is not a reliable indicator of a terrorist
threat. In June I asked then-Secretary of Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly the
same question and he provided the same answer, under oath. These answers are
consistent with a Department of Homeland Security analysis titled “Citizenship Likely an
Unreliable Indicator of Terrorist Threat to the United States.”14
(a) Do you agree with former FBI Director James Comey and the Department of
Homeland Security that citizenship to a particular country is not, by itself, a
reliable indicator of a terrorist threat?
10. Reports indicate that Paul Manafort, former chairman of the Trump campaign, is under
investigation for money laundering by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern
District of New York.15 Reports also indicate that the Kushner Companies is under
investigation in relation to financing a property development by the U.S. Attorney’s
Office for the Eastern District of New York.16 President Trump is also the beneficial
owner of numerous properties in New York as well as the Trump International Hotel
Washington D.C., which is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the

11

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/immigration/immigration-judges-say-proposed-quotas-from-justice-deptthreaten-independence/2017/10/12/3ed86992-aee1-11e7-be94-fabb0f1e9ffb_story.html?utm_term=.48adfb66965e
12
http://www.cq.com/doc/congressionaltranscripts-5197564?0&3%5D
13
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-fbi-threat/fbis-comey-on-trump-travel-ban-citizenship-alone-not-threatindicator-idUSKBN17Z27Y
14
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3474730/DHS-intelligence-document-on-President-Donald.pdf
15
https://www.wsj.com/articles/former-trump-campaign-chairman-paul-manafort-faces-another-money-launderingprobe-1508888106
16
Id.

 District of Columbia and which is the subject of litigation involving the President’s
compliance with the Emoluments Clause.17
It has also been reported that President Trump has personally interviewed U.S. Attorney
candidates for the Southern District of New York,18 the Eastern District of New York,19
and the District of Columbia.20 This is highly unusual given the barriers and protocols
that rightfully exist to insulate federal prosecutors from the White House and the
appearance of political interference.
(a) Have you been present for any interview of, or meeting with, any candidate
for U.S. Attorney where President Trump was also present? If so, which
ones?
(b) Are you aware of any other districts for which President Trump was present
during any interview of, or meeting with, a U.S. Attorney candidate? If so,
which ones?
(c) Has the president only interviewed or met with U.S. Attorney candidates for
districts, such as those noted above, in which the president owns real estate,
is a party to ongoing litigation, or has a close associate or family member tied
to an ongoing investigation?
11. In February, President Trump reportedly complained to Secretary Tillerson about laws
prohibiting American companies from bribing overseas officials.21 This strikes me as a
red flag, given the Trump Organization’s reported business practices abroad. Recent
reporting indicates that Trump Organization projects in the Republic of Georgia,
Azerbaijan, Brazil, Indonesia, Toronto, and even Manhattan are enmeshed in probes over
corruption, bank fraud, money laundering, or have links with shady Kremlin-affiliated
individuals.22
(a) If the DOJ learns of information indicating that the Trump Organization
was involved in fraud, corruption, or violations of the Foreign Corrupt
Practices Act, will you commit to ensuring that the decision to prosecute is
made the same way it would be for any other potential defendant?
(b) If it is discovered that the Justice Department is investigating and potentially
prosecuting such cases involving Trump campaign associates and their
17

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/dc-and-marylands-lawsuit-trump-flagrantly-violatingemoluments-clause/2017/06/12/8a9806a8-4f9b-11e7-be25-3a519335381c_story.html
18
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/19/trump-us-attorney-interviews-243962
19
Id.
20
http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/20/politics/donald-trump-jessie-liu-dc-us-attorney/index.html
21
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/16/rex-tillerson-at-the-breaking-point
22
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/08/21/trumps-business-of-corruption,
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/03/13/donald-trumps-worst-deal, and
https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielasirtori/2017/03/20/brazil-beachfront-bomb/#24cc04e44418

 conduct during the 2016 campaign, will you commit to recusing yourself
from these cases?
(c) If not, why not, given your March 2, 2017 recusal statement promising to
recuse yourself from “any existing or future investigations of any matters
related in any way to the campaigns for President of the United States?”23
12. A news report this week confirmed that the Justice Department is pursuing a public
corruption and bribery investigation involving two companies – the Birmingham-based
law firm, Balch & Bingham, and the Drummond Company – that contributed large
amounts of money to your campaigns as U.S. Senator.24 At your nomination hearing in
January, where a senior partner of Balch & Bingham sat directly behind you, you
committed to recusing yourself from matters where your “impartiality might reasonably
be questioned.”25
(a) Do you believe that your “impartiality might reasonably be questioned” with
respect to the investigation of companies who were, respectively, your second
and third largest sources of campaign contributions as U.S. Senator?26
(b) Do you commit to recusing yourself from any and all investigations and
eventual prosecutions of the Drummond Company and Balch & Bingham? If
not, why not?
13. Earlier this month, President Trump said, “It’s frankly disgusting the way the press is
able to write whatever they want to write. And people should look into it.”27 Apparently
your Justice Department is doing just that. You are reportedly considering changing
DOJ’s rules regarding obtaining information from, or records of, members of the news
media and on charging members of the news media (28 CFR Parts 50 and 59) to make it
easier to subpoena members of the press.28 If this move is an attempt to satisfy the
president, it will no doubt threaten the freedom of our press.
(a) What steps have you taken to revise the DOJ’s rules on obtaining
information from members of the media?
(b) Who have you discussed this issue with, both in the executive branch,
including White House officials, and outside of government?

23

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/attorney-general-sessions-statement-recusal
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/10/jeff-sessions-is-in-charge-of-a-bribery-prosecution-involving-twoof-his-top-donors/
25
Id.
26
https://www.scribd.com/document/358197201/Gasp-Asks-AG-Jeff-Sessions-from-Federal-CorruptionInvestigation#fullscreen&from_embed
27
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-escalates-threats-against-press-calls-news-coverage-franklydisgusting/2017/10/11/32996dba-ae9c-11e7-9e58-e6288544af98_story.html?utm_term=.e31ff831f8ad
28
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/04/doj-reviewing-policies-on-media-subpoenas-sessions-says-241329
24

 14. In 2001, I introduced the 21st Century Department of Justice Appropriations
Authorization Act in the Senate. The House companion legislation was ultimately signed
by President George W. Bush and enacted into law on November 2, 2002 (PL 107-273).
Division C, Title 1, Subtitle A, section 11024 dealt with the FBI Police. The intent of the
legislation was to amend 28 USC § 33 by adding Section 540C, authorizing the
establishment of the FBI Police as a “permanent police force.”29 However, DOJ and the
FBI have not formally exercised this authority to establish a “permanent police force”
under Section 540C, and instead established the uniformed FBI Police pursuant to
authority delegated from other agencies. As a result, in February 2017, FBI Police
officers lost a case seeking back pay and other relief.30 I ask the following two questions
on behalf of both myself and Senator Manchin, who is also concerned with the
interpretation of Section 540C.
(a) Are there legislative or other impediments preventing the Department from
complying with Section 540C as written?
(b) What steps is the Department taking to ensure that uniformed FBI Police
officers are not unfairly penalized through the denial of salary and benefits
to which they would be entitled if the FBI had established the FBI Police
under Section 540C, as Congress intended?
15. The Department is currently prosecuting Ahmed Abu Khattalah, the alleged mastermind
of the 2012 Benghazi attack, in the United States District Court for the District of
Columbia. Yet you have repeatedly expressed support for prosecuting terrorists captured
overseas in military tribunals rather than Article III civilian courts.
(a) Do you disagree with the decision to prosecute Ahmed Abu Khattalah in an
Article III court?
(b) What are the factors your Department will consider in deciding whether to
prosecute such terrorists in a military tribunal or an Article III court?
16. In March 2007, former FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration agent Robert
Levinson was kidnapped from Kish Island, Iran. In 2015, the United States Senate
unanimously resolved to urge the Government of Iran to “act on its promises to assist in
the case of Robert Levinson and to immediately provide all available information from
all entities of the Government of Iran regarding the disappearance of Robert Levinson.”31
Yet, according to press reports, FBI investigators believe that Levinson is still being held
in Iran,32 and the Government of Iran has failed to cooperate in any meaningful way on
Mr. Levinson’s return.

29

https://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/house-bill/2215/text?overview=closed
King v. U.S., United States Court of Federal Claims, case 1:07-cv-00589-NBF.
31
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-resolution/99/text
32
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/22/politics/robert-levinson-family-sues-iran/index.html
30

 (a) What steps has the Department and the Administration taken to engage with
the Government of Iran to ensure that Mr. Levinson is returned to his family
in the United States as soon as possible?
17. On May 1, 2017, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel wrote an opinion
asserting that individual members of Congress who are not chairmen of a committee are
“not authorized to conduct oversight,” and that therefore their requests for information
from the executive branch do not “trigger any obligation to accommodate congressional
needs.”33 Chairman Grassley responded forcefully to this OLC opinion with a letter
characterizing it as “nonsense.”34 Ultimately, the White House responded to Chairman
Grassley in July with a letter asserting that the OLC opinion is not a “statement of
Administration policy,” and that the Administration would “respect the rights of all
individual Members, regardless of political affiliation, to request information about
Executive branch policies and programs.”35
(a) You conducted serious oversight of the Justice Department during your
many years on the Judiciary Committee, including as its ranking member. I
know you understand the importance of congressional oversight. Will you
commit to rescinding the May 1, 2017 OLC opinion?
(b) If not, why not?
18. The President’s budget projects a more than 4,100-person growth, or two percent, in
population at the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) in FY 2018. This is after four years of
dramatic population decline in system-wide crowding – from 36 percent in 2013 to the
current level of 14 percent – stemming largely, as cited in DOJ’s Congressional Budget
Justification, from changes in prosecutorial policies and U.S. Sentencing Commission
changes. Meanwhile, you issued a policy memorandum ordering federal prosecutors to
“charge and pursue the most serious, readily provable offense” for drug crimes – which
will often trigger mandatory minimum sentences that prevent judges from exercising any
discretion based on the circumstances on the case before them at sentencing.36
Additionally, while your budget for BOP salaries and expenses represents an increase of
$76 million – or one percent – above FY 2017 enacted levels, that request also calls for
eliminating thousands of prison guard, program, and administrative staff positions at the
BOP. This is within the context of a request that reflects a $634 million decrease in
discretionary spending for the entire DOJ.
(a) What is your estimate for the increase in prison and detention costs as a
result of your new sentencing policy?

33

https://www.justice.gov/olc/file/966326/download
https://www.grassley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/constituents/2017-0607%20CEG%20to%20DJT%20%28oversight%20requests%29.pdf
35
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2017.07.20%20WHShort%20Response%20to%20CEG%20re%20Oversight.pdf
36
https://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/national/jeff-sessionss-criminal-charging-policy/2432/
34

 (b) What steps are you taking to ensure that BOP can handle the growth in the
prison population and the increase in overcrowding that it is likely to
produce, including how you plan to maintain a safe guard to prisoner ratio,
and preserve the safety of staff, prisoners, and the public?
19. Heroin overdoses killed 15,400 people in 2016 and opioid overdoses killed more than
33,000 people in 2015. Meanwhile, not a single death from overdosing on marijuana has
ever been reported.37 Additionally, research shows that opioid overdoses are significantly
lower in states with legal medical marijuana programs.38
(a) Do you stand by your recently stated view that “marijuana [is] only slightly
less awful then heroin?”39
20. The medical marijuana amendment enacted in the CJS Appropriations Acts since FY
2015 – sometimes referred to as § 542 – has been approved in several House floor votes
and Senate Appropriations Committee markups, prevailing by greater margins each
year.40 The amendment currently applies to 46 states, including your home state of
Alabama, as well as the District of Columbia. You have sought to remove this
amendment as Attorney General, as stated in your May 1, 2017, letter to House and
Senate leadership.
(a) If a business with a license to cultivate and sell marijuana for medical
purposes under state law was involved in money laundering or other conduct
not allowed under a state medical marijuana law, such as shipping
marijuana out of state, would this amendment prevent the Department from
investigating or prosecuting such individuals?
(b) In United States v. McIntosh, the Ninth Circuit held that defendants asserting
compliance with state medical marijuana laws are entitled to an evidentiary
hearing to determine whether their conduct was in violation with state law.41
Is there any example of the Department not being able to pursue a
prosecution of a suspected money launderer or other bad actor purporting to
be acting in compliance with a state medical marijuana law following an
adverse ruling at such an evidentiary hearing? Is the Department keeping
statistics of such evidentiary hearings?

37

https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/index.html
https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2016/04/26/is-marijuana-a-gateway-drug/overdoses-fell-with-medicalmarijuana-legalization
39
https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-jeff-sessions-delivers-remarks-efforts-combat-violent-crimeand-restore
40
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, Pub. L. No. 114-113, § 542, 129 Stat. 2242, 2332–33 (2015)
41
United v. McIntosh, Case No. 15-10117 (9th Cir. 2016), available at:
https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/08/16/15-10117.pdf.
38