Skip to main content

Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker attends the Annual Veterans Appreciation Day Ceremony at the Justice Department in Washington, U.S., Nov. 15, 2018.

Yuri Gripas/Reuters

Three Senate Democrats filed a lawsuit Monday arguing that Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker’s appointment is unconstitutional and asking a federal judge to remove him.

The suit, filed by Sens. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, Mazie Hirono of Hawaii and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, argues that Whitaker’s appointment violates the Constitution because he has not been confirmed by the Senate.

Whitaker was chief of staff to Attorney General Jeff Sessions and was elevated to the top job after Sessions was ousted by President Donald Trump on Nov. 7.

Story continues below advertisement

The Constitution’s Appointments Clause requires that the Senate confirm all principal officials before they can serve in their office.

The Justice Department released a legal opinion last week that said Whitaker’s appointment would not violate the clause because he is serving in an acting capacity. The opinion concluded that Whitaker, even without Senate confirmation, may serve in an acting capacity because he has been at the department for more than a year at a “sufficiently senior pay level.”

“President Trump is denying senators our constitutional obligation and opportunity to do our job: scrutinizing the nomination of our nation’s top law enforcement official,” Blumenthal said in a statement. “The reason is simple: Whitaker would never pass the advice and consent test. In selecting a so-called ‘constitutional nobody’ and thwarting every senator’s constitutional duty, Trump leaves us no choice but to seek recourse through the courts.”

The lawsuit comes days after a Washington lawyer challenged Whitaker’s appointment in a pending Supreme Court case dealing with gun rights. The attorney, Thomas Goldstein, asked the high court to find that Whitaker’s appointment is unconstitutional and replace him with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

The state of Maryland also made a similar court filing last week in a legal dispute with the Trump administration over the Affordable Care Act.

Rosenstein, the second-ranking Justice Department official, has been confirmed by the Senate and had been overseeing special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation. Whitaker is now overseeing the investigation.

In a court filing Monday, the special counsel’s office said Whitaker’s appointment has “no effect” on a legal challenge to Mueller’s authority brought by an aide to former Trump confidant Roger Stone, Andrew Miller, who defied a grand jury subpoena last summer and was held in contempt by a judge.

Story continues below advertisement

The filing came after the court asked the special counsel’s office and Miller’s lawyers to submit papers that address what, if any, effect Whitaker’s appointment would have on the case.

The Justice Department issued a statement Monday defending Whitaker’s appointment as “lawful” and said it comports with the Appointments Clause, the Federal Vacancies Reform Act and legal precedent.

“There are over 160 instances in American history in which non-Senate confirmed persons performed, on a temporary basis, the duties of a Senate-confirmed position,” Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said. “To suggest otherwise is to ignore centuries of practice and precedent.”

The Federal Vacancies Reform Act allows an acting official to serve in a vacant position for up to 210 days, though the official may continue serving while a president’s nomination to that position is pending before the Senate.

Report an error
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter