On April 10, 2018, President Trump nominated Britt C. Grant to fill a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Grant was nominated to replace Judge Julie E. Carnes, who will take senior status on June 18, 2018. Notably, Grant – only 40 years old with less than 12 years of legal experience (she graduated law school in 2007) – is on President Trump’s short list for the Supreme Court.
Like a vast majority of Trump’s nominees, Grant is a member of the Federalist Society, where she serves on the Atlanta Chapter Executive Board. While Grant has just over one year of judicial experience on the Georgia Supreme Court, her record working at the Office of the Attorney General, including as Solicitor General of Georgia, shows evidence of a narrowminded, elitist approach to cases that raises serious concerns about undermining critical rights and legal protections.
As the Senate Judiciary Committee reviews the troubling positions Grant took in the attorney general’s office, it’s important to note that Senate Republicans have previously articulated their belief that legal work done in an official government capacity is entirely subject to scrutiny as part of the judicial nomination process. As now-Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley said in opposing Caitlin Halligan, then Solicitor General of New York, to be a judge on the D.C. Circuit, “Some of my colleagues have argued that we should not consider this aspect of [Caitlin] Halligan’s record, because at the time she was working as the Solicitor General of New York. But, no one forced Ms. Halligan to approve and sign this brief.”
Likewise, as Sen. Ted Cruz stated in May 2018, opposing Mark Bennett’s nomination to the Ninth Circuit based on Bennett’s work as Hawaii Attorney General, “[Bennett’s] record as Attorney General of Hawaii, I believe, represents an advocacy position that is extreme and inconsistent with fidelity to law, in particular, he was an aggressive advocate as attorney general for gay marriage, he was an aggressive advocate demonstrating hostility to the first amendment and political speech, and most significantly, he was-he is an aggressive advocate for undermining the Second Amendment.”
Similarly, the record Grant established in the attorney general’s office, in our view, “represents an advocacy position that is extreme,” in that she has sought to weaken rights of women, persons of color, LGBTQ Americans, and workers, as well as environmental protections. This record raises serious questions as to whether she will protect critical constitutional rights and legal protections for all persons.
Alliance for Justice opposes Britt Grant’s confirmation. Click here to read our opposition letter.