Committee approval and Senate confirmation of Judge Barrett’s nomination before the election is imperative. History shows abundant evidence of quick confirmations. Justice Ginsburg herself was confirmed 42 days after she was nominated. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's confirmation took 33 days, while Justice John Paul Stevens was confirmed 19 days after being nominated. A more recent example is Chief Justice Roberts’ nomination length as Chief Justice of 23 days. Historical precedent is also on the side of filling the seat. When the same party controls the White House and the Senate, the confirmation process proceeds as usual and the nominee is almost always confirmed. A new justice has been confirmed 8 out of 10 times this has happened.

Today, the Committee for Justice provided a statement for inclusion in the record of the Subcommittee’s September 15th hearing, “Stacking the Tech: Has Google Harmed Competition in Online Advertising?” The letter was submitted by a group of legal experts, economists, and consumer and taxpayer advocates who believe in the importance of promoting competitive markets and defending the rule of law.

As families increasingly rely on delivery and ride-sharing platforms to access supplies, groceries, take-out meals, and prescriptions, app and internet-based businesses have proven critical throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. These platforms have also provided flexible earnings opportunities for hundreds of thousands of Americans during these challenging economic times.

We would like to emphasize the need to distinguish between the proper and improper uses of antitrust in approaching discussions of market power, and are concerned that today’s hearing could lead to the use of antitrust to address concerns surrounding online content moderation, data privacy, equality, or other socio-political issues that are unrelated to the competitive process.

Commissioner O’Rielly served for many years as a leading policy analyst and advisor to the House and Senate Commerce Committees. At the FCC, Commissioner O’Rielly has stayed true to a Constitutionalist regulatory philosophy focused on the rule of law and economic freedom, and regulatory intervention only when it is justified and narrowly tailored. He has built an impressive record of achievements with distinguished leadership on many critical issues including spectrum; 5G and wireless services; broadcast and media; regulatory modernization; FCC process reform; internet freedom; and combatting corruption, waste, fraud, and abuse.

We write in support of your Regulatory Relief to Support Economic Recovery Executive Order (EO). As the focus turns toward restarting the economy and society, this EO will give businesses the flexibility they need to reopen their doors, create jobs, and safely get Americans back to work.

It should not be a point of contention to say that the FCC is the agency of jurisdiction in commercial spectrum policy, but it appears to have become one. Federal law (and more than two decades of federal practice) makes clear the process by which federal agencies work with the FCC to construct a uniform, coherent federal policy. When those processes are not followed, as the Chair and Ranking Member of the House Energy & Commerce Committee ​recently observed​, the interests of the United States suffer and our international leadership on spectrum matters is compromised. In the case of the Ligado Networks license modification, the FCC meticulously followed these processes. The FCC fully consulted with relevant federal agencies at each stage of the process, and proceeded in a careful, deliberate, and open manner, properly balancing competing interests and protecting critical GPS operations.

As leaders of groups representing millions of consumers, taxpayers, and entrepreneurs, we sympathize with businesses struggling due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and support policies to bring them regulatory and tax relief. We object, however, to policy actions proposed in the name of “relief” that benefit some businesses by massively raising costs on other businesses and consumers.

The overt smears of Lawrence VanDyke and the continued mistreatment of conservative-leaning judicial nominees by the ABA is reprehensible. The ABA should no longer have a privileged place at the table in assessing judicial nominations.

The ABA has rated Ms. Pitlyk’s nomination negatively. This calls into question the organization’s fairness, as well as the overall consistency of their ratings. The ABA has been happy to give qualified or well-qualified ratings to nominees who have demonstrated far less litigation experience than Sarah Pitlyk.

The Committee for Justice joined a group of 71 free-market organizations and activists, lead by Americans for Tax Reform, in opposing Speaker Pelosi's proposal to impose a 95 percent tax on pharmaceutical manufacturers.

The Committee for Justice joined a group of free-market organizations and activists, lead by the American Conservative Union, in supporting the Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement (CASE) Act, H.R. 2426.

Facilitating a manageable regulatory environment for business and a fair climate for workers is critical to sustaining the record economic growth that has occurred under this president. Eugene Scalia has the skill set and the track record necessary to fill this role, and he has our unreserved support.

Allowing preemptive vetoes—a step never before taken in the 45-year history of the Clean Water Act—is a blatant abuse of authority.

President Trump and Director Droegemeier need to have Kratsios in place as the confirmed CTO and a vital part of their science and technology leadership team in order to accomplish the remainder of the OSTP's important agenda during the final two years of the President's first term. We ask that the Senate Commerce Committee work to swiftly approve Mr. Kratsios.