Jonathan F. Mitchell Vs tng Professor of Law July 30, 2018 The Honorable Sheldon Whitehouse Senate Judiciary Committee United States Senate 717 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Re: Crown Quadrange 559 Nathan Abbott Way Stanford, CA 94305 8610 Te 650 723.2465 Fax 650 725.0253 jfm tche@s anford.edu Response to your letter of July 19, 2018 Dear Senator Whitehouse: Thank you for your letter of July 19, 2018. I understand that you would like more information about the class-action lawsuits that I have filed on behalf of public employees who were forced to pay “agency fees” to unions in violation of the First Amendment. Some of the information that you have requested is protected by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work-product privilege, and I hope you will understand that I cannot and will not divulge privileged information of that sort. I can, however, allay some of the concerns that you express in your letter. First, I can assure you that I am not part of any “campaign” or coordinated effort to litigate against public-employee unions. The idea to bring these lawsuits was entirely my own, and it was not made in conjunction or coordination with the Janus litigants or any of the entities that you mention in your letter. Nor are any of those organizations or individuals financing the litigation. Second, my co-counsel and I filed the Carey v. Inslee lawsuit as soon as it was ready to file, and it just so happened that this date fell on March 15, 2018 — the same day I was voted out of committee. Neither I nor my co-counsel held back on filing with the intent of waiting until the committee reported my nomination. Indeed, it would have been unethical for us to do so, because any delay would have diminished our clients’ eventual recovery under the relevant statute of limitations. My co-counsel in the Carey litigation will confirm (if you ask them) that my pending committee vote was never discussed and that we all sought to file the Carey lawsuit as quickly as we could and without any regard to events in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Finally, there is nothing “covert” or “clandestine” about what I am doing. My involvement in these cases is open for all to see and I have signed my name to every court filing that I have been involved with. I have never attempted to hide or conceal my involvement in these cases, and I would have nothing to gain by doing so. I voluntarily disclosed my involvement in these cases to ACUS, to the Office of Government Ethics, and to the Senate Judiciary Committee — and I made these disclosures well in advance of any future Senate vote that might occur on my nomination. I understand and respect the fact that you may disagree with the legal positions that my clients are advancing in these cases. But they are entitled to their day in court, and they are entitled to representation as they seek to recover money that was taken from them in violation of the Constitution. A lawyer’s representation of a client does not signal agreement with the arguments that he makes on the client’s behalf, and it certainly does not indicate how he would resolve similar issues when assuming the role of an impartial government official. Thank you for considering this, and thank you for considering my nomination. Sincerely, Jonathan F. Mitchell mitchell response to senator whitehouse Page 2 of 2