July 17, 2019

The Honorable Nancy Pelosi
Speaker

US. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Madam Speaker:

We write to strongly oppose the pending resolution of the Committee on Oversight and
Reform (?Committee?) concerning the decision to reinstate a citizenship question on the 2020
Census. It is unfortunate that in spite of our Departments? substantial efforts to accommodate the
Committee?s interests, the Committee?and now the House of Representatives?has chosen to go
forward with an unjusti?ed contempt vote regarding a citizenship question that, as you know, will
not be asked on the 2020 Census questionnaire.

We regret that the Committee continues to recommend the House wield its criminal
contempt authority even though we remain willing to work towards an appropriate accommodation
notwithstanding the privileged status of the documents at issue and the active litigation that
remains pending in this matter. By taking this action, the House is both unnecessarily undermining
inter-branch comity and degrading the constitutional separation of powers and its own institutional

integrity.

Our Departments are committed to working to accommodate the oversight needs of the
Congress in a manner that is consistent with our respective responsibilities, while also protecting
the Executive Branch?s con?dentiality interests and privileges. In the spirit of that commitment,
the Departments have made signi?cant efforts to accommodate requests from the Committee
concerning the Census matter. We strongly disagree with any suggestion that our Departments
have obstructed this investigation.

It is unfortunate that the House has scheduled a vote to hold two sitting members of the
President?s Cabinet in contempt of Congress given the clear record of cooperation. As the
Committee well knows, the limited materials still at issue are subject to a number of legal
privileges that have been upheld in the pending litigation, as well as the President?s assertion of
executive privilege. Our Departments? records of cooperation with the Committee over the past
several months demonstrates our commitments to the constitutionally required accommodation
process and demonstrates that any contempt vote is, at best, premature.

The Departments? engagement with the Committee in a good-faith accommodation process
is rooted in the separation of powers. As part of that process, both Departments have made
multiple witnesses available for voluntary transcribed interviews and have produced more than
30,000 pages of documents to the Committee. Before the Committee abruptly and prematurely
terminated the accommodation process last month, the Department of Justice intended to provide
a signi?cant number of additional documents identi?ed as responsive to the Committee?s
subpoena.

Rather than seriously engage in the constitutionally mandated accommodation process, the
Committee instead recommended that the House vote on a contempt resolution regarding the
Departments? purported failure to comply with the Committee?s subpoenas (including, notably, a
number of ?priority? documents identi?ed by the Committee). These ?priority? documents
identi?ed by the Committee are within a limited subset that is ?rmly protected from disclosure by
the deliberative process, attomey-client communications, or attorney work product components of
executive privilege. The Departments have been consistent?as have the courts considering the
reinstatement of the citizenship question on the 2020 Decennial Census?that the documents the
Committee seeks are protected from disclosure by these time-honored privileges. In order to
ensure the free-?ow of advice and decision making and to avoid compromising the ongoing
litigation, we have not waived those privileges.

The Departments have already accommodated numerous Committee requests. The key
remaining issue is how the Departments and the Committee will address the material that is
protected by privileges that have been repeatedly reaf?rmed by the courts. There is no information
to hide; there are institutional integrities to preserve. Given that the Departments have been
responsive and accommodating to the Committee?s requests, it is unreasonable, counterproductive,
and contrary to the constitutionally mandated accommodation process that the Committee would
do so little to accommodate the Executive Branch?s legitimate con?dentiality interests.

Accordingly, we urge that the House postpone the contempt vote in order to allow the
constitutionally mandated accommodation process to continue. And we respectfully remind the
Committee that the constitutionally required obligation to engage in good-faith accommodation
cuts both ways.

Sincerely,
William P. Barr Wilbur L. Ross, Jr.
Attorney General Secretary of Commerce

cc: The Honorable Kevin McCarthy, Republican Leader
The Honorable Elijah Cummings, Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Reform
The Honorable Jim Jordan, Ranking Member, Committee on Oversight and Reform