JEFF SESSIONS TOP HITS

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Jeff Sessions TOP HITS....................................................................
Table Of Contents...........................................................................
Bad for Latinos...............................................................................

IMMIGRATION REFORM............................................................................................ 2
DACA AND DAPA................................................................................................ 9
UNACCOMPANIED MINORS..................................................................................... 10
BORDER WALL................................................................................................... 12

Bad for African Americans.............................................................12

VOTING RIGHTS.................................................................................................. 12
CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM................................................................................... 15
WELFARE REFORM / DRUG TESTING AND WORK REQUIREMENTS..................................18

Bad For Youth............................................................................... 20

MARIJUANA........................................................................................................ 20
OPIOIDS............................................................................................................ 22
STUDENT LOANS................................................................................................. 22
CLIMATE CHANGE................................................................................................ 23
NET NEUTRALITY................................................................................................. 24

Bad for Women.............................................................................25

ABORTION......................................................................................................... 25
ABORTION AND JUDICIAL NOMINEES........................................................................27
ROE V. WADE.................................................................................................... 29
FOREIGN AID..................................................................................................... 30
VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT...........................................................................31
EQUAL PAY........................................................................................................ 32
PLANNED PARENTHOOD / CONTRACEPTION..............................................................32

Bad for the Middle Class................................................................32

SPENDING......................................................................................................... 32
AUTO RESCUE.................................................................................................... 33
AFFORDABLE CARE ACT....................................................................................... 33
MINIMUM WAGE.................................................................................................. 34

Bad for Seniors............................................................................. 35

Bad for LGBT................................................................................37
MARRIAGE......................................................................................................... 37
NONDISCRIMINATION / ENDA................................................................................40

Bad for Veterans........................................................................... 42

Foreign policy...............................................................................43
TRADE.............................................................................................................. 44
IRAN................................................................................................................. 45
IRAQ WAR......................................................................................................... 46
RIGHT TO IMMIGRATE........................................................................................... 47

Judiciary....................................................................................... 49
JUDICIAL NOMINEES............................................................................................. 49

MERRICK GARLAND............................................................................................. 50

BAD FOR LATINOS

Immigration Reform
JEFF SESSIONS WAS WIDELY CONSIDERED TO HAVE AMONG THE MOST EXTREME
IMMIGRATION POSITIONS OF ANY NATIONAL POLITICIAN
The Guardian: Sessions May Be One Of The Few Elected Officials In Congress Who Has A More
Politically Problematic History On Race Than Trump. Jeff Sessions endorsed Donald Trumps
presidential bid in February - now hes putting himself forward as a potential running mateOne potential
issue: Sessions may be one of the few elected officials in Congress who has a more politically
problematic history on race than Trump. In 1986, prior to being elected to the Senate, he was nominated
to federal judgeship by Ronald Reagan. The nomination was rejected by the Senate judiciary committee
after accusations by former aides that he had repeatedly made racist statements. This included the
allegation that Sessions had said he though the Ku Klux Klan were OK until I learned they smoked pot.
[The Guardian, 5/9/16]
Americas Voices Frank Sharry: Jeff Sessions Was The Most Ardent, Anti-Immigrant
Restrictionist That You Can Find. He Comes From The Kick-Them-Out-And-Keep-Them-Out
Camp. He's the most ardent, anti-immigrant restrictionist that you can find, said Frank Sharry,
executive director of the pro-immigration group America's Voice. He comes from the kick-them-out-andkeep-them-out camp. [Associated Press, 4/25/16]
New York Times Editorial: Jeff Sessions Was One Of Washingtons Leading Nativists. At a
hearing last month in the Senate Judiciary Committee, Jeff Sessions of Alabama, one of Washingtons
leading nativists, raised an alarm about the children at the border not because they were being denied
due process, but because the government was failing to deport them faster. But under international and
American law, they have every right to ask for protection. [Editorial, New York Times, 3/8/16]
Southern Poverty Law Center: Sen. Jeff Sessions Is One Of The Most Outspoken Anti-Immigrant
And Anti-Muslim Federal Officials. Sen. Jeff Sessions key politician in the anti-Muslim movement,
Appointed as Chair of Trumps National Security Advisory Committee on March 3. Sen. Jeff Sessions is
one of the most outspoken anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim federal officials who, unsurprisingly, endorsed
Trump last month. [Southern Poverty Law Center, 3/28/16]
Southern Poverty Law Center: In 2014, Sessions ReceivedAward From Anti-Muslim Hate Group
The David Horowitz Freedom Center For His Efforts To Prevent Undocumented Youth From
Receiving Temporary Status In The United States. In 2014, Sessions received the Daring the Odds
award from anti-Muslim hate group the David Horowitz Freedom Center for his efforts to prevent
undocumented youth from receiving temporary status in the United States. Previous winners of the award
include Pamela Geller, who heads the anti-Muslim groups American Freedom Defense Initiative and Stop
the Islamization of America. [Southern Poverty Law Center, 3/28/16]
HE ALSO WAS DONALD TRUMPS FOREMOST ADVISOR AND IMMIGRATION STRATEGIST
Washington Posts Jennifer Rubin: Jeff Sessions Joined Donald Trumps Campaign Motivated By
An Irrational Fixation On Stopping Immigration. First, we can take off the prospective 2020 list (and

leave out the successor to the Republican Party in the wake of Donald Trump) those who actively enabled
Trump. The worst of the worst in this regard are New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Sen. Jeff Sessions
(R-Ala.)...these two have given Trump cover, cooing over his pronouncements and ignoring his lies and
inanities. [Opinion, Washington Post, 4/28/16]
Politico: Sessions Hardline Views On Immigration Have Had A Particularly Deep Influence In The
2016 GOP Primary. Sessions hardline views on immigration have had a particularly deep influence in
the 2016 GOP primary. He advised Donald Trump as the billionaire GOP frontrunner drafted his own
immigration proposal, and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) has aggressively aligned himself with Sessions and
his immigration policies on the campaign trail. Both candidates are in the top tier in the Republican field.
[Politico, 1/12/16]
SESSIONS IS STRONGLY ASSOCIATED WITH TRUMPS DEPORTATION AND BORDER WALL
PLANS
Rapid City Journals Bob Franken: Jeff Sessions Has Been [Donald] Trump's Idea Man For His
Hateful Immigration Pronouncements. Obviously, there are some serious possibilities out there who
might be willing -- Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, for instance, who's been Trump's idea man for his hateful
immigration pronouncements. Let's not forget, being Donald Trump's VP may not be a full-time job.
Maybe, they can work a deal where whoever it is also moonlights as Kelly's co-host. Strange? No more
so than the campaign has already been. [Bob Franken, Rapid City Journal, 5/1/16]
Right Wing Watch: Jeff Sessions Helped Craft Trumps Plan To Deport All Undocumented
Immigrants Living In The U.S., As Well As His Proposal To Destroy The Mexican Economy By
Blocking Remittances In Order To Force Mexico To Pay For The Border Wall. [Right Wing Watch,
4/28/16]
Breitbart: Jeff Sessions Helped [Donald] Trump Craft His Wildly Popular Immigration Reform
Policy Paper. Again, Sessions hasnt formally endorsed any candidate, but he has appeared with
Trump at a rally in his hometown in Mobile, Alabama, and helped Trump craft his wildly popular
immigration reform policy paper. [Breitbart, 1/25/16]
JEFF SESSIONS HAS WORKED TOWARD PASSING ANTI-IMMIGRATION LAWS ACROSS THE
COUNTRY
Fusions Enrique Acevedo: Senator Jeff SessionsHelped To Orchestrate The 2010-2011 State
Legislative Push To Pass Anti-Immigration Laws Across The Country. Over the past two decades
the Latino vote has grown into an influential force in presidential politics. Now, millions of new voters are
showing up at the polls, driven to a great extent by the anti-immigrant sentiments espoused by
Republicans Trump kicked off his campaign last June by blasting Mexican immigrants as drugtraffickers and rapists, calling for mass deportations and the construction of a beautiful wall across the
U.S.-Mexico border paid by the Mexican government. Trumps campaign recently outlined it would
pressure the Mexican government into paying for its ridiculous plan by preventing undocumented
immigrants in the United States from sending money back home to their families. Two of Trumps senior
advisors, Senator Jeff Sessions and Kris Kobach, helped to orchestrate the 2010-2011 state legislative
push to pass anti-immigration laws across the country. [Commentary, Fusion, 4/26/16]
JEFF SESSIONS HAS SPOKEN AT ANTI-IMMIGRANT EVENTS, INCLUDING ONE WHERE A
SPEAKER CLAIMED HISPANIC PEOPLE WERE GENETICALLY INFERIOR
The Nations George Zornick: On 7/15/13, Jeff Sessions Gave The Keynote Address At An AntiImmigration Rally Where Another Speaker Claimed Hispanic People Were Genetically Inferior To
Americans. Several hundred people gathered in Upper Senate Park to denounce immigration reform as
a job-killer Ken Crow, who used to be president of the Tea Party of America until he bungled logistics of
a Sarah Palin speech and is now affiliated with Tea Party Community, got up and started talking about

well-bred Americans. At minimum, Craw was making a crude nativist argument that people from other
cultures have the heritage of a donkey, compared to our race-horse DNA. And, although he worked in a
Martin Luther King reference, the breeding talk made it pretty tempting to see this in racial terms as
well Not only was this said in the presence of hundreds of people on Capitol Hill, but many important
Republican politicians were present. Senator Jeff Sessions, who helped lead the opposition to the
immigration bill in the Senate, was directly behind me, glad-handing attendees, as I shot this video.
Congressman Steve King, who is taking up Sessions mantle in the House, was also there. Both men
spoke (Sessions is the keynote). [The Nation, 7/15/13]
JEFF SESSIONS OPPOSED COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM AND FOUGHT TO
WEAKEN THE 2013 SENATE LEGISLATION
New York Magazine: Sessions Led The Right-Wing Revolt To Scuttle Comprehensive Immigration
Reform. Its hard to overstate Sessionss influence on trade and immigration policy within the GOP. As
far back as 2007, Sessions led the right-wing revolt to scuttle comprehensive immigration reform. [New
York Magazine, 4/3/16]
Office of Senator Sessions: The Gang Of Eight Bill Eviscerated Immigration Enforcement,
Opened Up Welfare And Citizenship To Millions Of Illegals [Sic] Aliens, Issued An Astonishing 33
Million Green Cards In A Single Decade, And Doubled The Annual Flow Of Temporary Workers To
Fill Jobs At Lower Wages. Senator Sessions is committed to immigration reform that serves the
national interest not the special interests and that curbs the unprecedented flow of immigration that is
sapping the wages and job prospects of those living and working here today. Sessions was a leading
opponent of the 2007 amnesty bill and 2013 Gang of Eight amnesty bill. The Gang of Eight bill
eviscerated immigration enforcement, opened up welfare and citizenship to millions of illegals [sic] aliens,
issued an astonishing 33 million green cards in a single decade, and doubled the annual flow of
temporary workers to fill jobs at lower wages. [Office of Senator Jeff Sessions, accessed 4/25/16]
Wall Street Journal Editorial: Jeff Sessions And Ted Cruz Led The U.S. Senate Deportation
Caucus. Earlier this week Speaker John Boehner had his caucus lined up to pass a modest bill that
would have provided the Obama Administration with $659 million to deal with the border influx, while
tweaking a provision in a 2008 law that even President Obama has said has encouraged the flood of
unaccompanied minors to the U.SInstead, the GOP's Deportation Caucusled by Alabama Senator
Jeff Sessions and Ted Cruz of Texaslobbied House conservatives to resist any immigration compromise
and pick a fight with Mr. Boehner. The dissenters demanded an array of policy changes, most notably
new restrictions on the President's executive order allowing some undocumented immigrants who were
brought here as children to remain in the country. [Editorial, Wall Street Journal, 8/3/14]
Wall Street Journal Editorial: Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions And Ted Cruz Of TexasLobbied
House Conservatives To Resist Any Immigration Compromise And Pick A Fight With [John]
Boehner. Earlier this week Speaker John Boehner had his caucus lined up to pass a modest bill that
would have provided the Obama Administration with $659 million to deal with the border influx, while
tweaking a provision in a 2008 law that even President Obama has said has encouraged the flood of
unaccompanied minors to the U.SInstead, the GOP's Deportation Caucusled by Alabama Senator
Jeff Sessions and Ted Cruz of Texaslobbied House conservatives to resist any immigration compromise
and pick a fight with Mr. Boehner. The dissenters demanded an array of policy changes, most notably
new restrictions on the President's executive order allowing some undocumented immigrants who were
brought here as children to remain in the country. [Editorial, Wall Street Journal, 8/3/14]
JEFF SESSIONS BLAMED ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION FOR TENS OF THOUSANDS OF
PREVENTABLE CRIMES EACH YEAR
Jeff Sessions: In America, Tens Of Thousands Of Preventable Crimes Occur Each Year, Including
The Most Violent And Heinous, Because Of Our Failure To Enforce Our Immigration Laws. Too
Many People Are Living In Fear Of Violent Gangs And Drug Cartels As A Result. On Oct. 24,
Marquez and a female accomplice went on a rampage in Sacramento, ensnaring the city and surrounding

area in terror and killing the two police officers, according to the Sacramento Bee. Sen. Sessions argued
the incident would never had happened if ICE enforced the nation's immigration laws properly, stating that
Marquez had been deported twice and had an extensive criminal history. In America, tens of thousands
of preventable crimes occur each year, including the most violent and heinous, because of our failure to
enforce our immigration laws. Too many people are living in fear of violent gangs and drug cartels as a
result, he said. [Latin Times, 6/23/15]
JEFF SESSIONS DISAPPROVED OF THE POPES POSITION ON IMMIGRATION, BECAUSE U.S.
LAW IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN FOLLOWING THE GOLDEN RULE
Jeff Sessions, Opposing Pope Franciss Position On Illegal Immigration: I Dont Think The
Golden Rule Can Be Used To Justify Violating A Nations Immigration Laws. I Dont Know That He
Meant That, But I Dont Think Thats True. Pope Francis implored Congress to act to combat climate
change and to embrace immigrants in his Thursday address to lawmakers Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.)
took issue with the pope citing the Golden Rule Do unto others as you would have them do unto you
in the context of having compassion for immigrants. I dont think the Golden Rule can be used to
justify violating a nations immigration laws, Sessions said. I dont know that he meant that, but I dont
think thats true. [Huffington Post, 9/24/15]
JEFF SESSIONS WORKED TO MAKE H-1B VISAS HARDER TO GET
Ted Cruz Campaign: Cruz Introduced Legislation With Sen. Jeff SessionsRequiring That
Anybody Brought In Through The H-1B Program Holds An Advanced DegreeWith Preference
Given To Degrees From American Universities. Cruz introduced legislation with Sen. Jeff Sessions
to protect American workers by, for example, requiring that anybody brought in through the H-1B program
holds an advanced degreenot simply a bachelors degree but a masters degree or a PhD, with
preference given to degrees from American universities. The bill would also require companies that bring
in workers to pay as a minimum salary of $110,000, so that they do not use the program to bring in lowcost foreign workers to replace American workers. The full list of Cruzs protections for American workers
can be found in his immigration plan here. [Ted Cruz for President, accessed 5/17/16]
AND DONALD TRUMP REVERSED HIS PREVIOUS SUPPORT FOR H-1B VISAS AFTER JEFF
SESSIONS CRITICIZED IT
New York Magazine: When [Jeff] Sessions Called [Donald] Trump Last Month And Criticized Him
For Coming Out In Favor Of H-1B VisasTrump Promptly Changed His Position. And when
Sessions called Trump last month and criticized him for coming out in favor of H-1B visas, which allow
companies to recruit high-level talent abroad, Trump promptly changed his position. [New York
Magazine, 4/3/16]
JEFF SESSIONS BLAMED IMMIGRANTS, PRESUMABLY EVEN LEGAL ONES, FOR STEALING
JOBS AND LOWERING WAGES IN AMERICA
Office of Senator Sessions: The Unprecedented Flow Of ImmigrationIs Sapping The Wages
And Job Prospects Of Those Living And Working Here Today. Senator Sessions is committed to
immigration reform that serves the national interest not the special interests and that curbs the
unprecedented flow of immigration that is sapping the wages and job prospects of those living and
working here today. Sessions was a leading opponent of the 2007 amnesty bill and 2013 Gang of Eight
amnesty bill. The Gang of Eight bill eviscerated immigration enforcement, opened up welfare and
citizenship to millions of illegals [sic] aliens, issued an astonishing 33 million green cards in a single
decade, and doubled the annual flow of temporary workers to fill jobs at lower wages. [Office of Senator
Jeff Sessions, accessed 4/25/16]
JEFF SESSIONS REPEATEDLY MISREPRESENTED POLICY STUDIES AND EXPERT OPINIONS TO
ARGUE THAT IMMIGRATION REFORM PLANS WOULD HARM AMERICAN WORKERS

Factcheck.Org: Jeff Sessions And Mike Lee Telling Only Half The Story With Their Claims That
The Nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office Warned The [Gang Of Eight Immigration] Bill
Would Be Bad For Wages And Unemployment. Two senators opposed to the Gang of Eight
immigration bill are telling only half the story with their claims that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget
Office warned the bill would be bad for wages and unemployment. That may be true over the next
decade, but the CBOs conclusion was just the opposite for the long term. Moreover, the CBO said it is
not clear whether the bill would negatively impact most current American workers even in the short term.
[FactCheck.org, 6/25/13]
Factcheck.Org: Sessions Cited An Article Written For The Center For Immigration Studies, A
Nonprofit That Advocates Low Immigration. Lastly, Sessions cited the work of Harvard economist
George Borjas although incorrectly in the plural as Harvard economists in making his case that all
U.S. workers will be adversely affected by the Senate bill. Sessions office referred us to an April article
Borjas wrote for the Center for Immigration Studies, a nonprofit that advocates low immigration.
[FactCheck.org, 6/25/13]
Factcheck.Org: Sessions Goes Too Far When He Concludes That The CBO, The Atlanta Fed And
Borjas All Show There Is Really Little Doubt That All U.S. Workers Would Be Adversely Affected
By The Senate Bill[Other Economists] Have Found That Immigration Has A Positive Impact On
The Wages Of Most U.S. Workers. Sessions goes too far when he concludes that the CBO, the
Atlanta Fed and Borjas all show there is really little doubt that all U.S. workers would be adversely
affected by the Senate bill. That is a debatable point as Borjas himself illustrates in his April article.
Borjas article reviews current literature on the issue including the work of economists Gianmarco
Ottaviano and Giovanni Peri, who have found that immigration has a positive impact on the wages of
most U.S. workers. [FactCheck.org, 6/25/13]
JEFF SESSIONS CITED A DISCREDITED POLICY PAPER TO BACK UP A CLAIM THAT ALL
EMPLOYMENT GAINS FROM 2000 TO 2013 WENT TO IMMIGRANTS
Jeff Sessions Op-Ed: A Recent Report From The Center For Immigration Studies Shows That All
Net Employment Gains From 2000 To 2013 A Period Of Record Legal Immigration Went To
Immigrant Workers. A recent report from the Center for Immigration Studies shows that all net
employment gains from 2000 to 2013 a period of record legal immigration went to immigrant
workers, and yet the immigration plan championed by the White House and congressional Democrats
would triple the number of immigrants given permanent legal status over the next decade, and it would
double the annual flow of guest workers to compete for jobs in every sector of the U.S. economy.
[National Review, 3/13/14]

Factcheck.Org: All Of The Net Job Growth Since 2000 Didnt Go To Immigrants. In fact,
the CIS report says that the job growth numbers for the native-born improve substantially when
the over-65 age group is included, a cohort in which the proportion with jobs was growing in
recent years while the proportion of younger workers with jobs wasnt, as shown in these 2012
BLS charts produced by the New York Times. A footnote in the CIS report says: [L]ooking at all
workers 16-plus shows that natives over age 65 did make employment gains. As a result, there
are 2.6 million more natives of all ages working in 2014 than in 2000. The immigrant net job gains
for all workers was 6.2 million, as shown in the data CIS used. This makes Santorums claim
simply not true. All of the net job growth since 2000 didnt go to immigrants. [Factcheck.Org,
1/30/15]

JEFF SESSIONS AGGRESSIVELY REWORKED ECONOMIC DATA TO ARGUE FOR A REDUCTION

OF LEGAL IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES
Jeff Sessions: Low Immigration Between 1948 and 1973 Coincided With An Increase In The
Median Wage Of More Than 90 Percent From 1948 To 1973. During the first great wave of U.S.
immigration took place from roughly 1880 to 1930. During this time, according to the Census Bureau, the

foreign-born population doubled from about 6.7 million to 14.2 million people. Changes were then made to
immigration law to reduce admissions, decreasing the foreign-born population until it fell to about 9.6
million by 1970. Meanwhile, during this low-immigration period, real median compensation for U.S.
workers surged, increasing more than 90 percent from 1948 to 1973, according to the Economic Policy
Institute. [Opinion, The Washington Post, 4/9/15]
IN WHICH HE BLAMED LEGAL IMMIGRATION FOR MIDDLE CLASS DECLINE
Jeff Sessions: The Rise Of Immigration Into The United States Coincides With A Period Of
Middle-Class Contraction. In the 1960s, Congress lifted immigration caps and ushered in a second
great wave. The foreign-born population more than quadrupled, to more than 40 million today. This
ongoing wave coincides with a period of middle-class contraction. The Pew Research Center reports:
The share of adults who live in middle-income households has eroded over time, from 61% in 1970 to
51% in 2013. Harvard economist George Borjas has estimated that high immigration from 1980 to 2000
reduced the wages of lower-skilled U.S. workers by 7.4 percent a stunning drop with particularly
painful reductions for African American workers. Weekly earnings today are lower than they were in
1973. [Opinion, The Washington Post, 4/9/15]
Jeff Sessions: Harvard Economist George Borjas Has Estimated That High Immigration From
1980 To 2000 Reduced The Wages Of Lower-Skilled U.S. Workers By 7.4 PercentWeekly
Earnings Today Are Lower Than They Were In 1973. This ongoing wave coincides with a period of
middle-class contraction. The Pew Research Center reports: The share of adults who live in middleincome households has eroded over time, from 61% in 1970 to 51% in 2013. Harvard economist George
Borjas has estimated that high immigration from 1980 to 2000 reduced the wages of lower-skilled U.S.
workers by 7.4 percent a stunning drop with particularly painful reductions for African American
workers. Weekly earnings today are lower than they were in 1973. [Opinion, The Washington Post,
4/9/15]

Cato Institutes Alex Nowrasteh: This Recent Paper Used Borjas Methods But Includes
The Wage Data Up Through 2010, Finding Effects So Small That They Are Insignificant.
That Is A Significant Rebuttal To Borjas Findings. Applying Borjas research methods to
different periods of time yields less negative results. This recent paper used Borjas methods but
includes the wage data up through 2010, finding effects so small that they are insignificant. That
is a significant rebuttal to Borjas findings. [Cato Institiute, 4/10/15]

ARGUED FOR SLASHING LEGAL IMMIGRATION

Jeff Sessions: What We Need Now Is Immigration Moderation: Slowing The Pace Of New Arrivals
So That Wages Can Rise, Welfare Rolls Can Shrink And The Forces Of Assimilation Can Knit Us
All More Closely Together. It is not mainstream, but extreme, to continue surging immigration beyond
any historical precedent and to do so at a time when almost 1 in 4 Americans age 25 to 54 does not have
a job. What we need now is immigration moderation: slowing the pace of new arrivals so that wages can
rise, welfare rolls can shrink and the forces of assimilation can knit us all more closely together. [Opinion,
The Washington Post, 4/9/15]
ASSERTED THAT IMMIGRANTS WASTE WELFARE RESOURCES
Jeff Sessions On The Effect Of More Immigrants In The United States: Imagine The Pressure This
Will Put On Wages, As Well As Schools, Hospitals And Many Other Community Resources. If no
immigration curbs are enacted, the Census Bureau estimates that another 14 million immigrants will come
to the United States between now and 2025. That means we will introduce a new population almost four
times larger than that of Los Angeles in just 10 years time.The percentage of the country that is foreignborn is on track to rapidly eclipse any previous historical peak and to continue rising. Imagine the
pressure this will put on wages, as well as schools, hospitals and many other community resources.
[Opinion, The Washington Post, 4/9/15]

AND COMPLAINED THAT NEW IMMIGRANTS WOULD EVENTUALLY BE ELIGIBLE TO VOTE AS

CITIZENS
Jeff Sessions: Each Year, The United States Adds Another Million Mostly Low-Wage Permanent
Legal Immigrants Who Can Work, Draw Benefits And Become Voting Citizens. Yet each year, the
United States adds another million mostly low-wage permanent legal immigrants who can work, draw
benefits and become voting citizens. Legal immigration is the primary source of low-wage immigration into
the United States. In other words, as a matter of federal policywhich can be adjusted at any time
millions of low-wage foreign workers are legally made available to substitute for higher-paid Americans.
[Opinion, The Washington Post, 4/9/15]
PROMPTING BOTH THE LIBERTARIAN CATO INSTITUTE AND THE NEW YORK TIMES
EDITORIAL BOARD TO PUBLISH DETAILED REBUTTALS TO THE COLUMNS ASSERTIONS
Cato Institutes Alex Nowrasteh Published A Detailed Rebuttal Of Jeff Sessions Anti-LegalImmigration Op-Ed, Refuting Sessions Claim That Legal Immigration Harms The U.S. Economy.
Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) Washington Post op-ed calls for an honest discussion on immigration. He
then lays out his case against legal immigration. Although I appreciate Sessions honesty in calling for
large reductions in legal immigrationa level of candor too often shrouded by immigration-restrictionists
political correctness (Im only against illegal immigration)his op-ed makes a poor case for more
government regulation of international labor markets. [Cato Institiute, 4/10/15]
Cato Institutes Alex Nowrasteh: Having More Immigrants Is Correlated With A More Quickly
Growing Economy, Not Increasing Poverty And Joblessness. [Cato Institiute, 3/4/13]
Cato Institute: Poor Immigrants Use Public Benefits At A Lower Rate Than Poor Native-Born
Citizens Low-income immigrants use public benefits like Medicaid or the Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly the Food Stamp Program) at a lower rate than low-income nativeborn citizens.1 Many immigrants are ineligible for public benefits because of their immigration status.
Nonetheless, some claim that immigrants use more public benefits than the native born, creating a
serious and unfair burden for citizens.2 This analysis provides updated analysis of immigrant and nativeborn utilization of Medicaid, SNAP, cash assistance (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and similar
programs), and the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program based on the most recent data from the
Census Bureaus March 2012 Current Population Survey (CPS). [Cato Institiute, 3/4/13]
New York Times Editorial: Jeff Sessions Philosophy On Immigration Echoed An Uglier Time In
Our History, When Nativists Wielded The Spurious Argument That The More Immigrants Taken In
By America, The Worse Off America Is. Even hard-liners on the same side of the issue as Mr.
Sessions like Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, Representative Lamar Smith of Texas and Representative
Steve King of Iowa take pains to cloak anti-immigration arguments with benign-sounding words of
tolerant welcome. They say they support legal immigration. Its illegal immigration they oppose. But here
is Mr. Sessions, ditching the usual Republican talking points on immigration, choosing instead to echo an
uglier time in our history, when nativists wielded the spurious argument that the more immigrants taken in
by America, the worse off America is. Hes advocating for slowing the pace of legal immigration,
supposedly to increase job opportunities for native-born, low-skilled workers, particularly AfricanAmericans. [Editorial, New York Times, 4/15/15]
New York Times Editorial: Mr. Sessions Ignores The Truth, Proved Over Centuries, That
Immigration Over All Is Good For The American Economy. Politicians on the left like Senator
Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts; Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York; and Zephyr Teachout, the Fordham
law professor who ran a spirited campaign for New York governor have persuasively argued that
corporatist forces are making life difficult for the working woman and man. To excite Democratic voters in
her presidential campaign, Hillary Rodham Clinton may have to adopt the same stance, or at least
convincingly fake it. But nowhere in that argument is there a case for yanking Americas welcome mat. Mr.
Sessions ignores the truth, proved over centuries, that immigration over all is good for the American
economy. [Editorial, New York Times, 4/15/15]

New York Times Editorial: Jeff Sessions Tears For Low-Income Americans Fail To Impress, Given
His Partys Obdurate Hostility To Policies That Help The Poor And Working Class. Mr. Sessions
ignores the truth, proved over centuries, that immigration over all is good for the American economy. His
tears for low-income Americans fail to impress, given his partys obdurate hostility to policies that help the
poor and working class. If he truly wanted to lift them up, he would be better off supporting labor unions
and womens rights, higher minimum wages, tougher wage-and-hour enforcement, more access to childcare and reproductive rights. [Editorial, New York Times, 4/15/15]
New York Times Editorial: Americas Long Success As An Immigration Nation Is Hard To Argue
Against. Unless You Never Wanted The Immigrants Here In The First Place, Which Mr. Sessions
Now Seems Willing To Admit. Mr. Sessions ignores the truth, proved over centuries, that immigration
over all is good for the American economy. His tears for low-income Americans fail to impress, given his
partys obdurate hostility to policies that help the poor and working class. If he truly wanted to lift them up,
he would be better off supporting labor unions and womens rights, higher minimum wages, tougher
wage-and-hour enforcement, more access to child-care and reproductive rights. And immigration reform
that unleashes the economic power of the nations shadow unauthorized population and welcomes the
newcomers that our society and economy need. Americas long success as an immigration nation is hard
to argue against. Unless you never wanted the immigrants here in the first place, which Mr. Sessions now
seems willing to admit. [Editorial, New York Times, 4/15/15]
JEFF SESSIONS CLAIMED THAT IMMIGRANTS ARE INCREASINGLY RELIANT ON PUBLIC
ASSISTANCE
Jeff Sessions: One Of The Bedrock Legal Principles Of Immigration Is That Those Coming To
America Should Not Be Reliant On Federal Assistance. That Principle Has Been Steadily Eroded.
Congress must also look at how welfare reform can strengthen our immigration system. One of the
bedrock legal principles of immigration is that those coming to America should not be reliant on federal
assistance. That principle has been steadily eroded. [Press Release, U.S. Senate Committee On The
Budget, 11/13/12]

DACA and DAPA

JEFF SESSIONS OPPOSED PRESIDENT OBAMAS DACA PROGRAM AND WORKED TO STOP IT
2014: Jeff Sessions Introduced A Measure In The U.S. Senate That Would Sunset Barack Obamas
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program And Stop Future Executive Actions On
Immigration. The Senate is poised to vote on a Republican-led measure Thursday to prohibit President
Barack Obama from unilaterally granting deportation relief to any undocumented immigrant. The motion
to table will be pushed by outspoken immigration hawk Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) prior to the vote on a
House-passed bill to keep the government funded through Dec. 11 and let Obama arm Syrian rebels to
fight the Islamic militant group ISIS. Sessions' office says he'll bring up the House-approved measure to
sunset DACA (Obama's deferred action program for qualified young people) and prohibit further
executive actions Obama has promised to take after the midterm elections, which is expected to grant
temporary deportation relief and work permits for low-priority migrants. [Talking Points Memo, 9/18/14]
Jeff Sessions On Deferred Action For Childhood Arrivals Program: This Is The Time. It's Either
Stopped Now, Or It May Never Be StoppedAnd We Need To Vote On It, And People Need To Be
Held Accountable. And Every American Needs To Know Where Their Senator Stands On The
President's Unlawful Assumption Of Power. Sessions' office says he'll bring up the House-approved
measure to sunset DACA (Obama's deferred action program for qualified young people) and prohibit
further executive actions Obama has promised to take after the midterm elections, which is expected to
grant temporary deportation relief and work permits for low-priority migrants. This is the time. It's either
stopped now, or it may never be stopped, Sessions said, calling the idea executive amnesty. And we
need to vote on it, and people need to be held accountable. And every American needs to know where
their senator stands on the president's unlawful assumption of power. [Talking Points Memo, 9/18/14]

Wall Street Journal Editorial: Jeff Sessions DemandedNew Restrictions On The President's
Executive Order Allowing Some Undocumented Immigrants Who Were Brought Here As Children
To Remain In The Country. Earlier this week Speaker John Boehner had his caucus lined up to pass a
modest bill that would have provided the Obama Administration with $659 million to deal with the border
influx, while tweaking a provision in a 2008 law that even President Obama has said has encouraged the
flood of unaccompanied minors to the U.SInstead, the GOP's Deportation Caucusled by Alabama
Senator Jeff Sessions and Ted Cruz of Texaslobbied House conservatives to resist any immigration
compromise and pick a fight with Mr. Boehner. The dissenters demanded an array of policy changes,
most notably new restrictions on the President's executive order allowing some undocumented
immigrants who were brought here as children to remain in the country. [Editorial, Wall Street Journal,
8/3/14]
JEFF SESSIONS OPPOSED PRESIDENT OBAMAS DAPA PROGRAM
Office of Senator Sessions: Sessions HasBeen A Leading Opponent Of President Obamas
Unconstitutional Executive Amnesties, Which Gives Jobs And Benefits To Illegal Workers At The
Expense Of Struggling Families. Sessions has also been a leading opponent of President Obamas
unconstitutional executive amnesties, which gives jobs and benefits to illegal workers at the expense of
struggling families. [Office of Senator Jeff Sessions, accessed 4/25/16]
Jeff Sessions On USCIS Money Funding DACA And DAPA: The Presidents Directives Will
Redirect Scarce Resources From This Core Mission To Activities That Congress Has Never
Approved, And Will Very Likely Jeopardize The Financial Health Of The Agency. On November 20,
2014, the President announced several executive actions, including plans to expand the Deferred Action
for Childhood Arrivals Program (DACA) and to extend Deferred Action to Parents of Americans and
Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA). These events raise serious legal questions and may have
significant budgetary consequences. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is the federal
agency that oversees lawful immigration to the United States.[1] The Presidents directives will redirect
scarce resources from this core mission to activities that Congress has never approved, and will very
likely jeopardize the financial health of the agency. If USCIS has a budget shortfall, the agency will no
doubt ask the taxpayers to shoulder the burden. [Press Release, Office of Senator Jeff Sessions,
1/27/15]
,SIGNING ONTO AN AMICUS BRIEF WITH MOST OF THE SENATE REPUBLICAN CAUCUS
Yellowhammer: Alabamas U.S. Senators Richard Shelby And Jeff Sessions [Joined An Amicus
Brief] Against President Obamas Amnesty Plan In The U.S. Supreme Court. Alabamas U.S.
Senators Richard Shelby and Jeff Sessions are joining in the fight against President Obamas amnesty
plan in the U.S. Supreme Court. The senators from the Yellowhammer state were joined by 42 of their
Senate colleagues in filing a brief that supports a challenge to the Obama Administrations executive
actions on immigration, questioning the constitutionality of President Obamas Deferred Action for Parents
of Americans (DAPA) policy. [Yellowhammer News, 4/4/16]

Unaccompanied Minors
JEFF SESSIONS AUTHORED A BILL THAT REQUIRED FORCIBLE REMOVAL OF MINORS WHO
CROSS THE BORDER WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION, RETURNING THEM TO OFTEN VIOLENT,
IMPOVERISHED COUNTRIES FROM WHICH THEY CAME
Jeff Sessions: The Only Way To Stop The Illegality Is To Ensure Those Who Enter Unlawfully,
Including Children, Are Treated Well But Returned Home Quickly. This crisis is the natural
consequence of this Administrations policies and continued exploitation of our immigration laws. The only
way to stop the illegality is to ensure those who enter unlawfully, including children, are treated well but
returned home quickly. Assurance of being returned sends a powerful message louder than words. The

word will spread and the number attempting illegal entry will quickly fall. This legislation will send the
message that America is going to enforce its laws and its borders by closing loopholes, eliminating fraud,
and removing dangerous incentives for illegal immigration." [Press Release, Office of Senator Jeff
Sessions, 2/23/16]
AS LONG AS THEY HAD NOT BEEN TRAFFICKED AND DO NOT HAVE A VALID ASYLUM
CLAIM
Office Of Senator Sessions: Jeff Sessions Proposed A Bill That Would Send All Unaccompanied
Alien Children Back To Their Home Country If They Had Not Been Trafficked And Do Not Have A
Valid Asylum Claim. The Protection of Children Act (S. 2561) wouldeliminate the laws that subject
unaccompanied alien children to two sets of rules depending on their country of origin, and instead
subject all such individuals to the same process to ensure their expeditious return home if they have not
been trafficked and do not have a valid asylum claim. [Press Release, Office of Senator Jeff Sessions,
2/23/16]
BANNED THE LEGAL MANEUVER THAT WOULD ALLOW UNACCOMPANIED MINORS TO HAVE
THEIR CASES HEARD TWICE
Office Of Senator Sessions: Jeff Sessions Proposed A Bill That Would Deprive Children Of The
Ability To Have Their Asylum Claims Heard Twice, Instead Of Just Once. The Protection of
Children Act (S. 2561) wouldclose a loophole that allows these individuals to have their asylum claims
heard twice, instead of just once. [Press Release, Office of Senator Jeff Sessions, 2/23/16]
REQUIRED CLOSING OTHER MEANS BY WHICH MINORS CAN RECEIVE TEMPORARY LEGAL
STATUS
Office Of Senator Sessions: Jeff Sessions Proposed A Bill That Would Prevent Certain
Individuals Living With A Parent In The U.S., From Receiving Special Immigrant Juvenile
Status. The Protection of Children Act (S. 2561) wouldclose a loophole that allows certain individuals
living with a parent in the U.S. to receive Special Immigrant Juvenile status, which is supposed to be
reserved for children abandoned by both parents. [Press Release, Office of Senator Jeff Sessions,
2/23/16]
AND EFFECTIVELY CUT OFF THESE CHILDREN FROM PUBLICLY-FUNDED LEGAL
REPRESENTATION
Office Of Senator Sessions: Jeff Sessions Proposed A Bill That Would Ban Tax Dollars From
Paying For The Legal Fees Of Unaccompanied, Undocumented Children. The Protection of Children
Act (S. 2561) wouldensures [sic] that taxpayer dollars do not pay for attorneys for these individuals,
consistent with decades of precedent. [Press Release, Office of Senator Jeff Sessions, 2/23/16]
ALL WHILE ONLY REQUIRING BASIC INFORMATION FROM THE ADULT WHO TAKES
CUSTODY OF THE CHILD UPON RETURN TO THEIR HOME COUNTRY
Office Of Senator Sessions: Jeff Sessions Proposed Immigration Bill Would Only Require Basic
Information From Individuals To Whom Undocumented Minors Would Be Released When Forced
To Return To Their Home Country. The Protection of Children Act (S. 2561) wouldrequire the
collection of certain basic information about individuals to whose custody unaccompanied alien children
are released. [Press Release, Office of Senator Jeff Sessions, 2/23/16]
Jeff Sessions: Our Nations Schools, Hospitals, And Social Services Are Facing Massive,
Unsustainable Strain, Because Of An Influx Of Unaccompanied, Undocumented Minors Crossing
The Southern Border. The American people want and deserve a lawful immigration system, but instead
we have a system that is manipulated at every turn resulting in a virtual collapse of enforcement. Not
surprisingly, in recent months the number of purported unaccompanied alien children crossing our

southern border has more than doubled. As a result, our nations schools, hospitals, and social services
are facing massive, unsustainable strain. [Press Release, Office of Senator Jeff Sessions, 2/23/16]

Border Wall
JEFF SESSIONS MADE AN INACCURATE CLAIM THAT A PROVISION IN THE 2013
COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM BILL COULD EXEMPT THE SECRETARY OF
HOMELAND SECURITY FROM BUILDING ANY BORDER FENCING THEY DONT WISH TO BUILD
Politifact Gave Jeff Sessions A Rating Of False For His Claim That The Immigration Bill Has A
Specific Provision That Says That Secretary Napolitano Does Not Have To Build Any Fence If She
Chooses Not To." Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., says he opposes an immigration bill working its way
through the Senate because it offers a mere promise of enforcement in the future. For example, the bills
promised 700 miles of border fencing it just isnt going to happen, he argues. He told Face the Nation
host Bob Schieffer on June 23, 2013, that even with a security-boosting amendment from Republican
Sens. Bob Corker and John Hoeven, the bill doesnt fulfill its promises. It has a specific provision that
says that Secretary (Janet) Napolitano does not have to build any fence if she chooses not to, Sessions
saidSessions said the immigration bill has a specific provision that says that Secretary Napolitano does
not have to build any fence if she chooses not to. His press secretary pointed to an opt-out provision in
the bill. But it would take a dramatic leap of legal interpretation to argue that provision allows Napolitano
to skip fence-building altogether. Legal experts we spoke to said, instead, it gives her discretion about
where to build border fencing.We rate Sessions claim False.
JEFF SESSIONS IS THE INTELLECTUAL PARENT OF DONALD TRUMPS PLAN TO THREATEN
CUTTING OFF THE FLOW OF REMITTANCES TO MEXICO, IN ORDER TO FORCE THE REPUBLIC
OF MEXICO TO PAY FOR A BORDER FENCE
Washington Post: Donald Trumps Plan To Threaten To Cut Off Remittances To Mexico To Force
Them To Pay For A Wall On The Mexico Border Echoes Suggestions That Have Long Been Made
By Sen. Jeff Sessions Of Alabama. Donald Trump says he will force Mexico to pay for a border wall
as president by threatening to cut off the flow of billions of dollars in payments that immigrants send home
to the country, an idea that could decimate the Mexican economy and set up an unprecedented
showdown between the United States and a key diplomatic allyThe playbook outlined in Trumps memo
echoes suggestions that have long been made by Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, a key Trump ally and a
hard-line voice on immigration policy within the Republican Party. Stephen Miller, a former top aide to
Sessions, is Trumps policy adviser. [Washington Post, 4/5/16]

BAD FOR AFRICAN AMERICANS

Personal Racism
JEFF SESSIONS WAS SAID TO HAVE A MORE POLITICALLY PROBLEMATIC HISTORY ON RACE
THAN DONALD TRUMP
The Guardian: Sessions May Be One Of The Few Elected Officials In Congress Who Has A More
Politically Problematic History On Race Than Trump. Jeff Sessions endorsed Donald Trumps
presidential bid in February - now hes putting himself forward as a potential running mateOne potential
issue: Sessions may be one of the few elected officials in Congress who has a more politically
problematic history on race than Trump. In 1986, prior to being elected to the Senate, he was nominated
to federal judgeship by Ronald Reagan. The nomination was rejected by the Senate judiciary committee
after accusations by former aides that he had repeatedly made racist statements. This included the

allegation that Sessions had said he though the Ku Klux Klan were OK until I learned they smoked pot.
[The Guardian, 5/9/16]
JEFF SESSIONS CAME UNDER FIRE FOR ALLEGED USE OF RACIALLY CHARGED LANGUAGE
WITH BLACK COLLEAGUES AND SUBORDINATES
Washington Post: Jeff Sessions Denied A Sworn Affidavit Claiming He Had Called A Black
Official In Mobile A Nigger. Repeatedly questioned about his statements as recounted in the sworn
depositions [given to former colleagues of Jeff Sessions by Judiciary Committee staff], Sessions denied
that he had called a black official in Mobile a nigger. [Washington Post, 3/14/86]
Former Subordinate Of Jeff Sessions: I Was Regularly Called Boy, By Jeff Sessions And Two
Of His Aides. Thomas Figures, who resigned last July after seven years as an assistant U.S. attorney in
Mobile, Ala., told the Senate Judiciary Committee that he was called boy by U.S. Attorney Jefferson B.
Sessions III and by two of Sessions' white assistants. Figures, responding to questions from Sen. Edward
Kennedy, D-Mass., said he was regularly called boy, and if you grew up in the South, and perhaps the
border states, you know what that means. [Associated Press, 3/20/86]
Former Assistant U.S. Attorney: Jeff Sessions Once Cautioned Me To Be Careful What I Said To
White Folks. The former deputy, Thomas Figures, who was an assistant United States Attorney for
seven years, said in a written statement that Mr. Sessions once admonished him to be careful about what
he said 'to white folks.' Mr. Figures is blackIn an eight-page statement provided to reporters, Mr. Figures
said Mr. Sessions made the 'white folks' comment to him after Mr. Figures had been in a dispute with a
secretary in the United States Attorney's office in Mobile. 'Mr. Sessions called me into his office and
indicated he felt I had been unduly harsh with the secretary,' the statement said. 'Mr. Sessions
admonished me to be careful what you say to white folks. Mr. Figures said he was offended. 'Had Mr.
Sessions merely urged me to be careful about what I said to folks, that admonition would have been
quite reasonable,' Mr. Figures explained. 'But that was not the language that he used.' He added: 'There
was a period in our own lifetimes when blacks were regularly admonished to be particularly polite or
deferential, and a remark of that sort may just have slipped out inadvertently. [New York Times, 3/20/86]
Jeff Sessions Used Racist Language With Black Colleagues While Serving As U.S. Attorney. A
black former assistant U.S. Attorney in Alabama named Thomas Figures--testified thatafter overhearing
him chastise a secretary, warned him to be careful what you say to white folks.... In his defense, he said
he was not a racist, pointing out that his children went to integrated schools and that he had shared a
hotel room with a black attorney several times. [New Republic, 12/30/02]
Jeff Sessions: Civil Rights Attorney A Disgrace To His Race. Sessions also was asked about other
statements. According to Hebert, the nominee said he agreed with a comment that a white civil rights
attorney was a disgrace to his race for representing blacksIn regard to the remark on the civil rights
lawyer, Sessions said, I may have said, 'Maybe he is (a disgrace). I don't know why I may have said
that. [Associated Press, 3/13/86]
OTHERS ALLEGED THAT SESSIONS DESCRIBED THE NAACP AND ACLU AS TRYING TO FORCE
CIVIL RIGHTS DOWN THE THROATS OF PEOPLE
Friend And Former Colleague Of Jeff Sessions: He Described The Work Of The NAACP AND ACLU
As, Trying To Force Civil Rights Down The Throats Of People. A number of allegations against the
nominee were made in a sworn statement signed Wednesday by J. Gerald Hebert, a Justice Department
civil rights attorney who worked with Sessions on voting rights cases. According to Hebert's statement, It
was in the context of my talking to Jeff about the NAACP that he made some comments about the
NAACP and the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union). He said he thought they were un-American. He
said that he thought they did more harm than good when they were trying to force civil rights down the
throats of people who were trying to put problems behind them. Sessions said he did not make such an

accusation. But he acknowledged using the word un-American in a conversation about the NAACP and
the National Council of Churches, not the ACLU. [Associated Press, 3/13/86]
AND SAID THAT HE WOULD SUPPORT THE KU KLUX KLAN, IF NOT FOR THE FACT THEY
SMOKED POT
Jeff Sessions: Ku Klux Klan Was O.K. Until I Found Out They Smoked Pot. Mr. Figures also
presented the committee with an affidavit. Both Mr. Figures and Mr. Hebert quoted Mr. Sessions as saying
that he used to think the Ku Klux Klan was O.K. until I found out they smoked pot.' Referring to that
allegation, Mr. Biden asked, 'Don't you think it was insensitive to say such a thing in the presence of a
black man, after a black man had just been hanged by Klan members?' Mr. Sessions replied, 'Sir, the
statement was so ludicrous. There is something in the familiar relationship that I thought he wouldn't have
been offended and if he had, he would have said something about it. [New York Times, 3/14/86]
COLLEAGUES WHO TESTIFIED AT SESSIONS 1986 CONFIRMATION HEARINGS ADMITTED
SESSIONS SHOWED RACIAL INSENSITIVITY
A Former Justice Department Colleague Testified Under Oath That Jeff Sessions Showed A
Racial Insensitivity. The most dramatic moment came when Hebert, whose deposition had been
quoted all day, walked into the hearing room and was invited to the witness table. Hebert said he had
been through a wrenching day, that he came because he considers Sessions a friend and knew his
testimony had been damaging. I want Jeff to know . . . I didn't really intend for things to get to the point
where they did, Hebert said. But I had a duty to do what I did. I told the truth. Hebert said he did not
know whether Sessions was a racist, but that some of the comments he's made showed a racial
insensitivity. [Washington Post, 3/17/86]
JEFF SESSIONS ADMITTED THAT HIS PAST STATEMENTS WERE INAPPROPRIATE AND
HAPPENED BECAUSE, IM LOOSE WITH MY TONGUE ON OCCASION
Jeff Sessions On Why Hed Call The NAACP A Pinko Organization That Hates White People
But May Not Remember It: Im Loose With My Tongue On Occasion. [Sessions] acknowledged
that he had agreed with another person's statement that a prominent white civil rights attorney was a
disgrace to his race. I don't know why I would have said that, Sessions said. I certainly don't believe
that. He also said he did not remember calling the NAACP a pinko organization that hates white people,
as one of the sworn statements said, but added that he had criticized the group for taking positions
viewed as un-American. I'm loose with my tongue on occasion, Sessions said. I may have said
something similar to that. [Washington Post, 3/14/86]

Voting Rights
JEFF SESSIONS APPLAUDED THE SUPREME COURT RULING THAT GUTTED THE VOTING
RIGHTS ACT
Jeff Sessions On The Supreme Court Striking Down Parts Of The Voting Rights Act: I Think,
Fundamentally, The Supreme Court Was Correct In Its Ruling. SESSIONS: Well, I have to say that
the South has improved tremendously. And I dont think its commitment on voting rights is any less than
any other area of the country, which is what the Supreme Court found in the Section 5 case. So they
knocked out part of the Voting Rights Act, but not the heart of it. The federal government still has the
power to prosecute, investigate anyone that violates the Voting Rights Act. So, as we govoting rights.
And as we go forward, maybe there are some other things that need to be done, but it doesnt haveI
think, fundamentally, the Supreme Court was correct in its ruling. [Democracy Now!, 3/10/15]
CALLING IT GOOD NEWSFOR THE SOUTH

Jeff Sessions: The Supreme Courts Ruling Striking Down Section 5 Of The Voting Rights Act,
Was Good News, I Think, For The South. Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama said the Court decision
was good news, I think, for the South, in that [there was] not sufficient evidence to justify treating them
disproportionately than say Philadelphia or Boston or Los Angeles or Chicago. But even Sessions, who
voted for reauthorization in 2006, stopped short of saying he'd oppose a new version of the Voting Rights
Act today. [The Atlantic, 6/28/13]
AND HE INSISTED THAT THE RULING DID NOT HARM ANY OF THE MORE POWERFUL
DISCRIMINATION PROTECTIONS IN THE ACT
Jeff Sessions On The Supreme Court Striking Down Parts Of The Voting Rights Act: The
Supreme Court Only Struck Down A Small Part And There Remains Very Powerful Provisions ... To
Stop Any Form Of Discriminatory Voting Actions. Congress is now debating legislation that would
write a new formula, based on more recent findings of discrimination. But Sessions said that is
unnecessary. The Supreme Court only struck down a small part and there remains very powerful
provisions ... to stop any form of discriminatory voting actions, Sessions said in an interview after a
hearing at the Senate Judiciary Committee. To pass a law in the U.S. Congress that provides penalties
only to some states and not to others can only be justified for the most extraordinary circumstances. And
the justification no longer exists. [Montgomery Advertiser, 6/25/14]
JEFF SESSIONS DENIED THAT SOUTHERN STATES WERE LESS COMMITTED THAN OTHERS TO
VOTING RIGHTS
Jeff Sessions: I Dont Think [The Souths] Commitment On Voting Rights Is Any Less Than Any
Other Area Of The Country. SESSIONS: Well, I have to say that the South has improved
tremendously. And I dont think its commitment on voting rights is any less than any other area of the
country, which is what the Supreme Court found in the Section 5 case. So they knocked out part of the
Voting Rights Act, but not the heart of it. The federal government still has the power to prosecute,
investigate anyone that violates the Voting Rights Act. So, as we govoting rights. And as we go forward,
maybe there are some other things that need to be done, but it doesnt haveI think, fundamentally, the
Supreme Court was correct in its ruling. [Democracy Now!, 3/10/15]
JEFF SESSIONS DENIED THAT PEOPLE IN ALABAMA, GEORGIA, OR NORTH CAROLINA WERE
BEING DENIED VOTING RIGHTS BASED ON RACE
Jeff Sessions: Now If You Go To Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, People Aren't Being Denied
The Vote Because Of The Color Of Their Skin. I voted for the VRA extension, he explained. I
wanted to vote for it, but at the very last minute I was very uneasy, because all of a sudden they
expanded it to 25 years, and that probably wasn't justified. It would be an appropriate time for Congress
to identify what we need in terms of the Voting Rights Act. It was passed in direct response to blatant
voting rights denial based on the color of one's skin. That's how it was justified, correctly I think, in
applying to states that had a real history of that. But now if you go to Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina,
people aren't being denied the vote because of the color of their skin. [Slate, 6/25/13]
Jeff Sessions On Supporting The US Supreme Court Striking Down Parts Of The Voting Rights
Act: If You Move A Voting Place Across The Street In An Area Of North Carolina That Never Had
Racial Discrimination, Do You Need To Get The Approval Of The Attorney General Of The United
States, Even Though It Has Zero Impact On Voting? Roll Call's Meredith Shiner prodded Sessions a
bit, pointing out that most of the successful VRA lawsuits happened in states that had been subjected to
pre-clearance. Well, it only applied to those districts, see? said Sessions. It doesn't apply to inner-city
Philadelphia. It only applied to those. A lot of this is pre-clearance, and look, if you move a voting place
across the street in an area of North Carolina that never had racial discrimination, do you need to get the
approval of the attorney general of the United States, even though it has zero impact on voting? Any
change of any kind had to be approved. The concern is, has the situation improved to the extent to which
that's no longer acquired? [Slate, 6/25/13]

2013: JEFF SESSIONS OPPOSED A 25 YEAR REAUTHORIZATION OF THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT
Jeff Sessions: "I Voted For The [Voting Rights Act] Extension. I Wanted To Vote For It, But At The
Very Last Minute I Was Very Uneasy, Because All Of A Sudden They Expanded It To 25 Years, And
That Probably Wasn't Justified. I voted for the VRA extension, he explained. I wanted to vote for it,
but at the very last minute I was very uneasy, because all of a sudden they expanded it to 25 years, and
that probably wasn't justified. It would be an appropriate time for Congress to identify what we need in
terms of the Voting Rights Act. It was passed in direct response to blatant voting rights denial based on
the color of one's skin. That's how it was justified, correctly I think, in applying to states that had a real
history of that. But now if you go to Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, people aren't being denied the vote
because of the color of their skin. [Slate, 6/25/13]
JEFF SESSIONS EXPRESSED SKEPTICISM OF POLICIES INTENDED TO MAKE IT EASIER TO
VOTE, LIKE EARLY VOTING
Jeff Sessions On Early Voting: Im Uneasy About This Law On Pre-VotingOftentimes People
AreUrged ToVote Before Theyre Ready To Vote. Well, Im uneasy about this law on pre-voting.
Things happen between two weeks or more to the Election Day, and oftentimes people areare, you
know, urged to go to vote and vote before theyre ready to vote. And so I think theres nothing wrong with
voting on Election Day. Thats the way weve had since the founding of the republic. [Democracy Now!,
3/10/15]
Jeff Sessions On Early Voting: Theres Nothing Wrong With Voting On Election Day. Thats The
Way Weve Had Since The Founding Of The Republic. Well, Im uneasy about this law on pre-voting.
Things happen between two weeks or more to the Election Day, and oftentimes people areare, you
know, urged to go to vote and vote before theyre ready to vote. And so I think theres nothing wrong with
voting on Election Day. Thats the way weve had since the founding of the republic. [Democracy Now!,
3/10/15]
Jeff Sessions: Im Just Not For Extending The Time, Voters Can Cast Their Ballots Outside Of
Election Day. AMY GOODMAN: But especially for SESSIONS: Thats what weve done
GOODMAN: for poorer people, when its hard to, in a working day, be able to get out and vote.
SESSIONS: Well, you can vote absentee, and if youre employed and cant go to work, you can vote
absentee, and you can vote absentee if youre ill or have a number of other reasons. So, Im just not for
extending the time. [Democracy Now!, 3/10/15]
OR SAME-DAY REGISTRATION, WHICH HE CALLED DANGEROUS
Jeff Sessions: I Think Same-Day Registration Is Very Dangerous It Can Allow Fraud To Occur,
And People Can Vote More Than Once. AMY GOODMAN: Same-day registration? More places?
SESSIONS: No, I think same-day registration is very dangerous. GOODMAN: Because? SESSIONS:
Well, because it can allow fraud to occur, and people can vote more than once. [Democracy Now!,
3/10/15]
SUGGESTING THAT VOTERS VOTE ABSENTEE, INSTEAD
Jeff Sessions On Making It Easier To Vote: Well, You Can Vote Absentee, And If Youre Employed
And Cant Go To Work, You Can Vote Absentee, And You Can Vote Absentee If Youre Ill Or Have A
Number Of Other Reasons. AMY GOODMAN: But especially for SESSIONS: Thats what weve
done GOODMAN: for poorer people, when its hard to, in a working day, be able to get out and
vote. SESSIONS: Well, you can vote absentee, and if youre employed and cant go to work, you can
vote absentee, and you can vote absentee if youre ill or have a number of other reasons. So, Im just not
for extending the time. [Democracy Now!, 3/10/15]

JEFF SESSIONS SUGGESTED THAT AFRICAN-AMERICAN POLITICIANS USE CLAIMS OF RACIAL

DISCRIMINATION AS AN EXCUSE TO SUE PEOPLE THEY DONT LIKE
Jeff Sessions: You've Got A City, And Now You've Gotta Draw Districts And Gerrymander
Districts To Try To Get An African-American [Representative], And You Can Have Honest
Disagreements, And They Can Sue You. Republicans haven't exactly raced off the starting blocks to
celebrate today's Voting Rights Act decisionAlabama Sen. Jeff Sessions was more talkative. The
decision, after all, was rooted in a dispute in his state's own Shelby County. Shelby County is a majoritywhite county, he said. I know they elected an African-American Republican county commissioner. I think
they have a five-member county commission. You've got a city, and now you've gotta draw districts and
gerrymander districts to try to get an African-American [representative], and you can have honest
disagreements, and they can sue you. [Slate, 6/25/13]

Criminal Justice Reform

JEFF SESSIONS WAS ONE OF A FEW REPUBLICAN SENATORS WHO OPPOSE ALL CRIMINAL
JUSTICE REFORM
Reasons Scott Shackford: Jeff Sessions Is One Of The Handful Of Republican Senators Who
Oppose [Any Federal Sentencing] Reform At All. Unfortunately there's still the matter of the handful
of Republican senators who oppose reform at all, guys like Jeff Sessions of Alabama and Tom Cotton of
Arkansas. [Reason, 4/7/16]
Reasons Scott Shackford: Jeff SessionsWant[s] The Public To Believe That These Harsh
Mandatory Sentences Are Necessary To Keep Us All Safe From Violent Anarchy, Facts Be
Damned. Unfortunately there's still the matter of the handful of Republican senators who oppose reform
at all, guys like Jeff Sessions of Alabama and Tom Cotton of Arkansas who want the public to believe that
these harsh mandatory sentences are necessary to keep us all safe from violent anarchy, facts be
damned. [Reason, 4/7/16]
JEFF SESSIONS: CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM COULD SIGN DEATH WARRANTS FOR
THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN INNOCENT CITIZENS
Jeff Sessions: Criminal Justice Reform Could Mean Signing Death Warrants For Thousands Of
American Innocent Citizens. When you have 20, 30, 40 percent increases in crime, you're talking
about doubling the crime rate, the murder rate in America in two or three years, after we spent 20 years
bringing it down by half. We've got to be sure what we are doing here, colleagues, is smart and we're not
signing death warrants for thousands of American innocent citizens. [Press Release, Office of Senator
Jeff Sessions, 5/18/16]
SESSIONS PREDICTED A LONG-TERM INCREASE IN CRIME AFTER THE LONG-TERM TREND OF
REDUCTION IN CRIME IN RECENT HISTORY
Jeff Sessions: "When You Have 20, 30, 40 Percent Increases In Crime, You're Talking About
Doubling The Crime Rate, The Murder Rate In America In Two Or Three Years, After We Spent 20
Years Bringing It Down By Half. When you have 20, 30, 40 percent increases in crime, you're talking
about doubling the crime rate, the murder rate in America in two or three years, after we spent 20 years
bringing it down by half. We've got to be sure what we are doing here, colleagues, is smart and we're not
signing death warrants for thousands of American innocent citizens. [Press Release, Office of Senator
Jeff Sessions, 5/18/16]

JEFF SESSIONS, WAS AT THE FOREFRONT OF TOUGH ON CRIME LEGISLATION THAT

MANDATED EXTREME SENTENCES FOR EVEN MINOR CRIMES
Nieman Reports: Senators Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Powerful Chair Of The Judiciary Committee, And
Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama) Introduced Legislation That Would Jail Runaways With Adult Prisoners
And Expel Kids From School Up To Six Months For Smoking Cigarettes. One might think that in
stemming an onslaught of the teenaged superpredators in 2010, we might see legislation directed at
diverting these who were then two- and three-year-old toddlers from a life of violent crime. No such luck!
Indeed, legislative proposals focused instead on fingerprinting juveniles, photographing them, housing
them in adult jails, meting out mandatory sentences, escalating sanctions, and imposing sanctions on
states that shy from prosecuting 13-year-olds in adult courts. Things werent much better on the Senate
side. Senators Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), powerful Chair of the Judiciary Committee, and Jeff Sessions (RAlabama) introduced legislation that would jail runaways with adult prisoners and expel kids from school
up to six months for smoking cigarettes. [Nieman Reports, 12/15/98]
EVEN PUSHING FOR A LAW THAT WOULD EXPEL KIDS FROM SCHOOL FOR SMOKING
CIGARETTES
Nieman Reports: Senators Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Powerful Chair Of The Judiciary Committee, And
Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama) Introduced Legislation That Would Jail Runaways With Adult Prisoners
And Expel Kids From School Up To Six Months For Smoking Cigarettes. One might think that in
stemming an onslaught of the teenaged superpredators in 2010, we might see legislation directed at
diverting these who were then two- and three-year-old toddlers from a life of violent crime. No such luck!
Indeed, legislative proposals focused instead on fingerprinting juveniles, photographing them, housing
them in adult jails, meting out mandatory sentences, escalating sanctions, and imposing sanctions on
states that shy from prosecuting 13-year-olds in adult courts. Things werent much better on the Senate
side. Senators Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), powerful Chair of the Judiciary Committee, and Jeff Sessions (RAlabama) introduced legislation that would jail runaways with adult prisoners and expel kids from school
up to six months for smoking cigarettes. [Nieman Reports, 12/15/98]
2016: JEFF SESSIONS COSPONSORED LEGISLATION THAT WOULD DELAY THE RELEASE OF
FEDERAL PRISONERS UNDER SENTENCING REDUCTIONS
Jeff Sessions Cosponsored A Bill That Would Have Required A Study Before Federal Prisons
Could Begin Releasing Prisoners Under The Sentencing Reform And Corrections Act. On the
Senate floor, Cotton called the bill a massive social experiment in criminal leniency and introduced his
own bill to study the recidivism rates of criminals who are released early. If supporters of this bill and
President Obama are wrong, if this grand experiment in criminal leniency goes awry, how many lives will
be ruined? Cotton asked. How many dead? How much of the anti- crime progress of the last generation
will be wiped away for the next? Cotton was joined by Sens. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, David Perdue, R- Ga.,
and Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., on his bill requiring a study of those who might be released under the
Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act, which was passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee in
November by a 15-5 vote. [Washington Examiner, 2/10/16]
JEFF SESSIONS CLAIMED SENTENCING REFORM WOULD RESULT IN THE RELEASE OF
CONVICTED FEDERAL DRUG TRAFFICKERS AND OTHER DANGEROUS FEDERAL FELONS
Jeff Sessions Press Release: The Obama Administration And Some In Congress Have Been
Advocating For Legislation That Would Roll Back [Mandatory Minimum Laws], And Provide For
The Early Release Of Thousands More Convicted Federal Drug Traffickers And Other Dangerous
Federal Felons. [Press Release, Office of Jeff Sessions, 4/4/16]
...THAT THE FEDERAL PRISON POPULATION WAS FALLING DANGEROUSLY
Jeff Sessions: The Federal Prison Population Is Already Falling Rapidly And Dangerously.
Federally convicted criminals are generally serious criminals, kingpins, cartel members, and non-

citizens. The federal prison population is already falling rapidly and dangerously, Sessions said.
[Breitbart, 5/15/16]
THAT PASSING THE SENTENCING REFORM ACT WOULD BE UNSAFE
Office Of Senator Jeff Sessions On The Senators Opposition To The Sentencing Reform Act of
2015: Passing This Legislation Would Not Only Be Unwise, It Would Be Unsafe. According to
Gallup, Americans are more concerned about crime than they have been in 15 years. If ever there was a
time to release more violent felons into our communities, it most certainly is not now. Passing this
legislation would not only be unwise, it would be unsafe. [Press Release, Office Of Senator Jeff
Sessions, 4/28/16]
AND EXACERBATE THE DRUG CRISIS
Aide To Jeff Sessions: Prosecuting Fewer Dangerous Drug Traffickers And Giving Lighter
Sentences To Those Who Are Prosecuted Would Exacerbate, Not Alleviate, [The Drug] Crisis.
While there are a number of causes for this tragic trend in overdoses, prosecuting fewer dangerous drug
traffickers and giving lighter sentences to those who are prosecuted would exacerbate, not alleviate, this
crisis, a Sessions aide told The Daily Caller. Yet that is exactly what the president has done and too
many in Congress are trying to do. Going any further down this road would only lead to further ruin for far
too many. [The Daily Caller, 4/1/16]
SESSIONS DEFENDED MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCES FOR FEDERAL CRIMES AND SAID
THEY ARE PROVEN TO REDUCE CRIME
Jeff Sessions: Minimum Mandatory Sentences, Are Preferable To Randomness And Has
Proven To Reduce Crime. The last bulwark against liberal federal judges is the already modified
sentencing guidelines. As serious crime starts to rise, this sentencing floor should not be further eroded.
The purpose and good effect of minimum mandatory sentences is to ensure that serious crimes, and
serious criminals, objectively evaluated, get at least certain minimum sentences. This is preferable to
randomness and has proven to reduce crime. Now is the time to make our most vulnerable communities
safer allowing schools and families and commerce to thrive in peace not to increase early releases of
dangerous federal felons. [Breitbart, 5/15/16]
JEFF SESSIONS BLAMED A MODEST 2015 SENATE SENTENCING REFORM BILL FOR MURDERS
IN OHIO
Weatherford Democrat: A Letter Sent By Four Senators, Including Jeff Sessions, Connected The
Sentencing Reform And Corrections Act Of 2015 Currently Being Considered By The US Senate To
Multiple Murders In Ohio. Sen. David Perdue is taking the kind of tough-on-crime stance that other
Republicans usually applaud. But attacking a bipartisan effort to reform prison sentences, which he
derides as the Criminal Leniency Act, is drawing fire to the first-term senator from Georgia from other
conservativesIn a letter sent to senators before the bills latest revision, Perdue and three colleagues,
including Alabamas Jeff Sessions, described the heinous murders in Ohio as a cautionary tale of the
consequences of releasing thousands of violent criminals. The proposal, the wrote, is a risky and
possibly devastating social experiment in criminal leniency. [Weatherford Democrat, 5/4/16]
JEFF SESSIONS BLAMED JUDGES FOR CREATING THE 1970S CRIME WAVE
Jeff Sessions: The American PeopleAre Well Aware That Judges Helped Create The Crime
Wave In The 70s. In a speech to the National Realtors Association on Wednesday, Garland received an
endorsement from influential journalist Bob Woodward. He called Garland somebody who should be on
the court. And among the reasons: It would produce a liberal lock on the court. He's kind of in the center
of the liberal lock. Well think about it then, if Garland replaced Scalia, you would have a liberal lock of five

justices, which would be a majority, he said. Sessions slapped that down and said the court's direction
will be a huge issue in the fall election. There will be no clearer issue in the campaign than that one. And
in my view consistently the American people prefer the Republican view of judges, that they are well
aware that judges helped create the crime wave in the 70s, said the Alabama senator. [Washington
Examiner, 5/11/16]

Welfare Reform / Drug Testing and Work Requirements

JEFF SESSIONS CRITICIZED FOOD STAMPS FOR TAKING UP 80% OF FEDERAL FARM BILL
DOLLARS
Office of Senator Sessions: Senator Sessions Unwaveringly Fights Against Fraud, Waste, And
Abuse In The Food Stamp Program Which, Regrettably, Now Consumes Almost 80% Of All Federal
Farm Bill Dollars. In the Senate, Sessions fights to maintain a strong safety net for Southern
agriculture and to promote our rural economies. He supports common-sense reforms that, over the longterm, will help in the effort to reduce, not grow, the involvement of government in the agriculture sector.
He supports affordable crop insurance for farmers, cost-effective loan programs, conservation, and
technical assistance and disaster assistance programs. He believes that, given a level playing field,
Alabamas farmers can compete with any in the world. He supports efforts to give farmers and their
families the certainty they need to make prudent planting decisions and to select the programs that best
meet their needs. Alabama farmers have a critical role to play to help our nation remain a global leader in
the production of food and fiber, which is critical to our economic and national security. In addition,
Senator Sessions unwaveringly fights against fraud, waste, and abuse in the food stamp program which,
regrettably, now consumes almost 80% of all federal farm bill dollars, and he strongly opposes measures
that ask our farmers to accept a disproportionate share of cuts to the programs that they rely upon.
[Office of Senator Jeff Sessions, accessed 4/25/16]
JEFF SESSIONS: GOVERNMENT MEASURES ITS SUCCESS BY HOW MANY PEOPLE IT
ENROLLS IN WELFARE
Jeff Sessions: Government Measures Its Success By How Many People It Enrolls In Welfare; We
Need To Measure Our Success By How Many People We Help Lift Off Welfare And Out Of Poverty.
Government measures its success by how many people it enrolls in welfare; we need to measure our
success by how many people we help lift off welfare and out of poverty. For each person we help to find a
job, or get a pay raise, we are reducing spending while increasing real benefits. [Press Release, Office of
Senator Jeff Sessions, 3/08/15]
Jeff Sessions: WelfareThe Largest Budget ItemHas Been Largely Exempt From Discussions
Of Fiscal Reform. Federal spending alone on welfare and poverty programsexcluding state
contributions to federal programswill reach approximately $1 trillion in 2016. Yet, amazingly, welfare
the largest budget itemhas been largely exempt from discussions of fiscal reform. A modest reduction in
growth, along with improved standards and work requirements, can produce substantial savings. This will
help place mandatory spending overall on a more sustainable path while targeting resources to those in
true need. [Press Release, U.S. Senate Committee On The Budget, 11/13/12]
JEFF SESSIONS MADE THOROUGHLY DEBUNKED CLAIMS ABOUT THE COST OF MEANSTESTED WELFARE
Jeff Sessions: Based On Data From The Congressional Research Service, We Know That We Are
Now Spending More On Means-Tested Federal WelfareSuch As Food Stamps, Public Housing,
And Cash AidThan On Medicare, Social Security, Or Defense. Based on data from the
Congressional Research Service, we know that we are now spending more on means-tested federal
welfaresuch as food stamps, public housing, and cash aidthan on Medicare, Social Security, or
defense. The nation spends enough on federal poverty programs to send every household beneath the

poverty line a yearly check for $60,000. [Press Release, U.S. Senate Committee On The Budget,
11/13/12]

Washington Post: Health-Care Spending, Especially Medicaid, Makes Up Nearly 50

Percent Of The Total Figure. But A Majority Of Medicaid Spending Goes To The Elderly And
Disabled, Not Families With Children. The chart concludes that welfare spending equates to
$168 in cash per day for each household in poverty, which it says exceeds the median income by
20 percent. Alternatively, as Sessions put it at the hearing, this amounts to $60,000 per year,
compared to a median income of $50,000 in 2011First, health-care spending, especially
Medicaid, makes up nearly 50 percent of the total figure. But a majority of Medicaid spending
goes to the elderly and disabled, not families with children. [Washington Post, 2/21/13]

Jeff Sessions: The Nation Spends Enough On Federal Poverty Programs To Send Every
Household Beneath The Poverty Line A Yearly Check For $60,000. Based on data from the
Congressional Research Service, we know that we are now spending more on means-tested federal
welfaresuch as food stamps, public housing, and cash aidthan on Medicare, Social Security, or
defense. The nation spends enough on federal poverty programs to send every household beneath the
poverty line a yearly check for $60,000. [Press Release, U.S. Senate Committee On The Budget,
11/13/12]

Washington Post: Robert Rector Of The Heritage Foundation Said That Simply Dividing
The Means-Tested Spending By The Number Of The Poor Can Be Misleading Because
Many Persons With Incomes Above The Official Poverty Levels Also Receive MeansTested Aid. In testimony before the House Budget Committee in 2012, Robert Rector of the
Heritage Foundation said that simply dividing the means-tested spending by the number of the
poor can be misleading because many persons with incomes above the official poverty levels
also receive means-tested aid. He recommended dividing the figure by the bottom third of the
income distribution, which yielded a figure of $36,000 for a family of four. [Washington Post,
2/21/13]

JEFF SESSIONS WANTED TO DOUBLE DOWN ON THE 1996 WELFARE REFORM LAW
Jeff Sessions: Like The 1996 Reform, Welfare Reform For The 21st Century Will Help Confront
Poverty, Strengthen The Family, And Improve The Outlook For Millions Of Struggling Americans.
Sound, careful, compassionate reforms will help not only the Treasury but the recipient. Like the 1996
reform, welfare reform for the 21st century will help confront poverty, strengthen the family, and improve
the outlook for millions of struggling Americans. [Press Release, U.S. Senate Committee On The Budget,
11/13/12]
JEFF SESSIONS WANTED TO REDUCE WELFARE SPENDING
Jeff Sessions: We Must Also Convert More Of Our Welfare SpendingTo Job Training And
Employment Preparation Programs. We must also convert more of our welfare spendingthe 80
means-tested support programs for lower-income Americans, on which the federal government spends
$750 billion per year, larger than Social Security or the defense budgetto job training and employment
preparation programs. Shouldnt we focus more on getting our unemployed citizens trained and ready to
move into the workforce? Those are some of the fundamental questions I think we as Americans need to
be asking. [Press Release, Office of Senator Jeff Sessions, 9/19/13]

BAD FOR YOUTH

Marijuana

JEFF SESSIONS OPPOSES THE LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA

Jeff Sessions: We Need Grown-Ups To Take Charge In Washington To Say Marijuana Is Not The
Thing That Ought To Be Legalized. SESSIONS: And were going to see more marijuana use. Its not
going to be good. Were gonna see more drug useillegal drug use, also. Which is damaging. I mean,
we need grown-ups to take charge in Washington to say marijuana is not the thing that ought to be
legalized. It ought not to be minimized. That it is, in fact, a very real danger. [Hearing, U.S. Senate
Caucus on International Narcotics Control, 4/5/16]
IN A SENATE HEARING, SESSIONS CLAIMED THAT GOOD PEOPLE DONT SMOKE
MARIJUANA
Jeff Sessions: Good People Dont Smoke Marijuana. SESSIONS: This drug is dangerous. You
cannot play with it. It is not funny. Its not something to laugh about. And trying to send that message with
clarity, that good people dont smoke marijuana. And the result of that is -- to give that away and make it
socially acceptable creates the demand that results in people being addicted or impacted adversely.
[Hearing, U.S. Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control, 4/5/16]
HE CONNECTED THE USE OF MARIJUANA TO ADDICTION AND USE OF OTHER DRUGS
Jeff Sessions Said Legalization Of Marijuana Will Cause Increased Use Of Other Illegal Drugs.
Colorado was one of the leading states that started the movement to suggest that marijuana is not
dangerous. And were gonna find it, in my opinion, throughout the entire American citizenry. And were
going to see more marijuana use. Its not going to be good. Were gonna see more drug useillegal drug
use, also. Which is damaging. [Hearing, U.S. Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control, 4/5/16]
Jeff Sessions Said Legalization Of Marijuana Will Lead To More People Being Addicted To
Marijuana. SESSIONS: I would just comment, that I was talking to someone who was experienced in
this it was a prevention movement that really was so positivelythat really was so positive. And it led to
this decline. The creating of knowledge. This drug is dangerous. You cannot play with it. It is not funny. Its
not something to laugh about. And trying to send that message with clarity, that good people dont smoke
marijuana. And the result of that is, to give that away and make it socially acceptable creates the demand
that results in people being addicted or impacted adversely. [Hearing, U.S. Senate Caucus on
International Narcotics Control, 4/5/16]
AND ALSO CONFLATED THE INCIDENCE OF COCAINE AND HEROIN USE WITH SOCIETAL
APPROVAL OF MARIJUANA
Jeff Sessions: Cocaine And Heroin [Use Increased] More Than It Would Have, I Think Had We Not
Talked About It. SESSIONS: I mean we need grown-ups to take charge in Washington to say
marijuana is not the thing that ought to be legalized. It ought not to be minimized. That it is, in fact, a very
real danger. You can see the accidentstraffic deaths related to marijuana, jump 20%. These are the
kind of things were going to see throughout the country. Cocaine and heroin increase more than it would
have, I think had we not talked about it. Is there any sense that Colorado might reevaluate what theyve
done? [Hearing, U.S. Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control, 4/5/16]
Jeff Sessions Said Legalization Of Marijuana Will Cause Increased Use Of Other Illegal Drugs.
Colorado was one of the leading states that started the movement to suggest that marijuana is not
dangerous. And were gonna find it, in my opinion, throughout the entire American citizenry. And were
going to see more marijuana use. Its not going to be good. Were gonna see more drug useillegal drug
use, also. Which is damaging. [Hearing, U.S. Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control, 4/5/16]
JEFF SESSIONS SAID BARACK OBAMA SHOULD HAVE SHOWN MORE CONTRITION FOR USING
MARIJUANA WHEN HE WAS A YOUNG MAN

Jeff Sessions On The Presidents Responsibility To Discourage Marijuana Use: I Think It Needs
To Be Said That The President Should Never Have Said Smoking Marijuana Is Like Smoking
Cigarettes: Oh, I Wish I Hadnt Done It, Amid a lengthy speech calling for increased penalties for
drug offenders, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) noted that Obama had admitted to smoking marijuana. Last
year, the president said that marijuana is not more dangerous than alcohol. I think it needs to be said that
the president should never have said smoking marijuana is like smoking cigarettes: Oh, I wish I hadnt
done it, Sessions said on the Senate floor. That is the kind of message people hear. Now we have states
legalizing it, and they are already talking about recriminalizing it. It is a mistake. We have seen that
experiment before. Lives are at stake. The Republican senator linked marijuana to fatal overdoses
even though experts say it is impossible to die from consuming too much of the drug. [Raw Story, 10/9/15]
Vocativ: In March Of This Year, Rep. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) Lamented That Obama Was Open
About Being A Former Smoker: You Cant Have The President Of The United States Of America
Talking About Marijuana Like It Is No Different Than Taking A Drink, Saying, I Used Marijuana
When I Was In High School. Not many members of Congress openly admit to having smoked pot
but they sure like to talk about it. In fact, since 1996, theyve mentioned marijuana on the House and
Senate floors at least 4,238 times. Republicans significantly outpace Democrats, having said the word
2,660 times to their counterparts 1,578. While certain issues have caused mentions to spike over the
years, its a perpetually popular topic. In March of this year, Rep. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) lamented that
Obama was open about being a former smoker: You cant have the President of the United States of
America talking about marijuana like it is no different than taking a drink, saying, I used marijuana when I
was in high school. [Vocativ, 4/20/16]
JEFF SESSIONS FALSELY CLAIMED IT IS POSSIBLE TO DIE OF A MARIJUANA OVERDOSE
Raw Story: Jeff Sessions Linked Marijuana To Fatal Overdoses Even Though Experts Say It Is
Impossible To Die From Consuming Too Much Of The Drug. A U.S. senator on Thursday connected
President Barack Obamas comments on marijuana to drug overdose deaths. Amid a lengthy speech
calling for increased penalties for drug offenders, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) noted that Obama had
admitted to smoking marijuana. Last year, the president said that marijuana is not more dangerous than
alcohol. I think it needs to be said that the president should never have said smoking marijuana is like
smoking cigarettes: Oh, I wish I hadnt done it, Sessions said on the Senate floor. That is the kind of
message people hear. Now we have states legalizing it, and they are already talking about recriminalizing
it. It is a mistake. We have seen that experiment before. Lives are at stake. The Republican senator
linked marijuana to fatal overdoses even though experts say it is impossible to die from consuming too
much of the drug. [Raw Story, 10/9/15]
SESSIONS PRAISED THE DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY FOR FIGHTING THE LEGALIZATION
OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA AT THE STATE LEVEL
Jeff Sessions: Im A Big Fan Of The DEA. Perhaps due to the failure of Prop 19 in California (and
despite the passage of medical marijuana in Arizona), Kohl, along with Democratic Sens. Sheldon
Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Al Franken of Minnesota, made no mention of medical marijuana.
Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, however, made it his prime focus. Im a big fan of the DEA,
said Sessions, before asking Leonhart point blank if she would fight medical marijuana legalization.
[Daily Caller, 11/18/10]
SESSIONS DECLARED ATTEMPTS AT MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION IN U.S. STATES TO BE
FAILURES
Jeff Sessions On Marijuana Legalization: They Say, We Could Just End The Problem Of Drugs If
We Could Just Make It Legal. But Any Country Thats Tried That, Alaska And Other Places Have
Tried It, Have Failed. It Does Not Work. Perhaps due to the failure of Prop 19 in California (and
despite the passage of medical marijuana in Arizona), Kohl, along with Democratic Sens. Sheldon
Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Al Franken of Minnesota, made no mention of medical marijuana.
Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, however, made it his prime focus. Im a big fan of the DEA,

said Sessions, before asking Leonhart point blank if she would fight medical marijuana legalization. I
have seen what marijuana use has done to young people, I have seen the abuse, I have seen what its
done to families. Its bad, Leonhart said. If confirmed as administrator, we would continue to enforce the
federal drug laws. These legalization efforts sound good to people, Sessions quipped. They say, We
could just end the problem of drugs if we could just make it legal. But any country thats tried that, Alaska
and other places have tried it, have failed. It does not work, Sessions said. [Daily Caller, 11/18/10]

Opioids
JEFF SESSIONS BLAMED THE OPIOID EPIDEMIC ON LACK OF ENFORCEMENT AT THE
SOUTHERN BORDER
Breitbart: In A Senate Hearing In January, [Jeff] Sessions Said The Increased Supply Of Cheap
Heroin Is Because Of A Lack Of Enforcement At The Border, Which, He Said, Is A Big Part Of
This. More than 11,000 people died from heroin use in 2014 alone. Fentanyl, a drug 200 times more
powerful than heroin, has been sending drug users to the hospital and the morgue for the last several
years. Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions linked the rise in deaths and the growth of abuse of the drug to our
weak southern border, where a steady caravan of drug dealers are smuggling the drug into the country. In
a Senate hearing in January, Sessions said the increased supply of cheap heroin is because of a lack of
enforcement at the border, which, he said, is a big part of this. [Breitbart, 5/4/16]
Jeff Sessions On Drug Addiction: "The Solution: We Got To Control The Border. All The Heroin
And A Big Chunk Of The Methamphetamine Is Coming Across The Mexican Border. ... We Need To
Enforce Our Laws And We Have To Make The Consequences Of Drug Trafficking A Deterrent."
Sessions, who said he was concerned that the country just may be beginning to experience a rise in drug
abuse following 30 years of steep declines, added that the southern border needs to be secured and that
the U.S. needs to hire more border security agents to stop the flow of heroin and methamphetamine from
Mexico. The bill instead focuses on treatment. I think we need to be careful of this, Sessions said
Monday on the Senate floor about the bill, called the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act. The
solution: We got to control the border. All the heroin and a big chunk of the methamphetamine is coming
across the Mexican border. ... We need to enforce our laws and we have to make the consequences of
drug trafficking a deterrent. [AL.com, 3/7/16]
AL.com: Jeff Sessions Believed The Major Drivers Of Increased Use Of Heroin Were Increased
Accessibility, Lower Prices And Half Purity Of Heroin. A procedural vote on the bill easily passed
the Senate shortly after Sessions's floor speech. Alabama's senior senator was among those to vote in
favor of moving the bill forward. He suggested that market forces, including increased accessibility, lower
prices and half purity of heroin appear to be the major drivers of its increased use. But Sessions said the
bill doesn't address those issues. [AL.com, 3/7/16]

Student Loans
JEFF SESSIONS: PELL GRANTS ARE WELFARE
Washington Post: Jeff Sessions Called The Pell Grant Program A Form Of Welfare. Sessions
who says he went to college on Pell Grants, which he lists as a welfare program clearly wants to jar
some of the conventional wisdom about anti-poverty programs. Calling attention to their cost and
questioning their effectiveness are certainly worthy endeavors for a lawmaker. [Washington Post,
2/21/13]
SESSIONS SUGGESTED TYING FEDERAL SUBSIDIZED STUDENT LOANS TO THE MARKET,
INSTEAD OF THEIR CURRENT FIXED RATES

AL.com: Jeff Sessions Supported Legislation That Would Have Tied The Interest On Federal
Subsidized Student Loans To The U.S. Treasury 10-Year Rate Plus 3 Percentage Points And
Direct Any Savings To Deficit Reduction. Two weeks have passed since the U.S. Senate allowed the
interest rates on certain student loans to double, and there is still little evidence of a compromise in the
worksSessions goes on to throw his support behind Republican proposals that would tie interest rate on
student loans to a market-based rates, joining with calls from Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., and Rep.
Martha Roby, R-Ala. The Republican proposal would, to an extent, take Congress out of the student-loan
business, doing away with the need for federal lawmakers to set student loan interest rates annually. But
Democrats say the proposal -- one of which would tie the interest to the U.S. Treasury 10-year rate plus 3
percentage points and direct any savings to deficit reduction -- does not provide enough protections for
students and their families. [AL.com, 7/16/13]
DEMOCRATS SAID THE VOLATILITY OF THAT RATE LEAVES STUDENTS AND FAMILIES
UNPROTECTED
AL.com: Democrats Say The Proposal -- One Of Which Would Tie The Interest To The U.S.
Treasury 10-Year Rate Plus 3 Percentage Points And Direct Any Savings To Deficit Reduction -Does Not Provide Enough Protections For Students And Their Families. Sessions goes on to
throw his support behind Republican proposals that would tie interest rate on student loans to a marketbased rates, joining with calls from Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., and Rep. Martha Roby, R-Ala. The
Republican proposal would, to an extent, take Congress out of the student-loan business, doing away
with the need for federal lawmakers to set student loan interest rates annually. But Democrats say the
proposal -- one of which would tie the interest to the U.S. Treasury 10-year rate plus 3 percentage points
and direct any savings to deficit reduction -- does not provide enough protections for students and their
families. [AL.com, 7/16/13]
SESSIONS OPPOSED A MEASURE TO ALLOW STUDENTS TO REFINANCE STUDENT DEBT
2014: Jeff Sessions Voted Against Legislation That Would Have Allowed People With Large
Student Debt Burdens To Refinance Their Loans. [S. 2432, Vote 185, 113th Congress, 6/11/14]

Huffington Post: The Measure, Proposed By Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Would
Have Allowed People To Refinance Their Student Loan Debt At Lower Rates. President
Barack Obama Got Behind The Measure Earlier This Week. On Wednesday, the Senate
voted 56-38 against a measure that would have helped millions of Americans with expensive
student loans. The measure, proposed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), would have allowed
people to refinance their student loan debt at lower rates. President Barack Obama got behind
the measure earlier this week. Other than Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who voted
against the measure on procedural grounds in order to preserve Democrats ability to reconsider
it at a later date, only Republicans voted against the proposal, which failed to get the 60 votes
needed to avoid a filibuster. Only three Republican senators Susan Collins of Maine, Bob
Corker of Tennessee and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska voted in favor of Warrens proposal.
[Huffington Post, 6/11/14]

Climate Change
JEFF SESSIONS VOTED TO STOP THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY FROM
REGULATING GREENHOUSE GASES
Jeff Sessions Voted In Favor Of Barring The EPA From Regulating Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
[S.Amdt. 183,S.49, Vote 54, 112th Congress, 4/6/11]
2012: SESSIONS BECAME VISIBLY AGITATED WHEN SENATOR BARBARA BOXER REJECTED
HIS DENIAL OF CLIMATE CHANGE

ThinkProgress: Jeff SessionsWas More Than Surprised When Informed By Senator Barbara
Boxer That Roughly 98 Percent Of Climate ScientistsAccepted That Anthropogenic Warming
Was Real And Serious He Was Outraged. The Senate hearing on climate science this Wednesday,
unsurprisingly enough, appears to have changed little with respect to the politics of climate change on
Capitol Hill. Indeed, a significant portion of the discussion was dominated by debate over Dr. John
Christys particular brand of denialism, a well-trod debate. Nonetheless, Senator Jeff Sessions (RAlabama) was more than surprised when informed by Senator Barbara Boxer that roughly 98 percent of
climate scientists, contra Christy, accepted that anthropogenic warming was real and serious he was
outraged: [ThinkProgress, 8/1/12]

Jeff Sessions: Madam Chairman, I Am Offended By That. Sessions: Madam Chairman, I

am offended by that, Im offended by that I didnt say anything about the scientists. I said the
data shows [sic] it is not warming to the degree that a lot of people predicted, not close to that
much Boxer: The conclusion that youre coming to is shared by 1-2 percent of the scientists.
You shouldnt be offended by that. Thats the fact. Sessions: I dont believe thats correct.
[ThinkProgress, 8/1/12]

SESSIONS HOPED TO GET CONGRESS TO LET MOST RENEWABLE ENERGY TAX CREDITS TO
EXPIRE
A Letter From Jeff Sessions And Several Other Republican Senators Asked Congress To Allow
Most Renewable Energy Tax Credits To Expire. Despite concerns and after months of negotiation,
Congress approved the extension of more than $600 billion in expiring tax provisions, including renewable
energy provisions such as the solar Investment Tax Credit (ITC) and the wind Production Tax Credit
(PTC). In December, a deliberate decision was made to omit certain credits like those for fuel cells, small
wind turbines, and combined heat and power. This latest effort to hastily extend market-distorting tax
policies is imprudent It is past time to let these technologies stand on their own. [Press Release, Office
of Senator Jeff Flake, 4/11/16]
2015: JEFF SESSIONS VOTED TO BLOCK THE CLEAN POWER PLAN
2015: Jeff Sessions Voted To Block The Clean Power Plan. [S.J. Res. 24, Vote 306, 114th Congress,
11/17/15]
HEADLINE: Amid Record Global Temperatures, Senate Votes To Block Obamas Clean Power
Plan. [Washington Post, 11/17/15]
When Vetoing The Resolution Opposing The Clean Power Plan, The White House Highlighted That
The Opposing Resolution Would Have Eliminated $54 Billion In Public Health Benefits, Including
Thousands Fewer Premature Deaths From Air Pollution And Tens of Thousands Of Fewer Asthma
Attacks Each Year. Speaking on the Senate floor Tuesday, Capito invoked a war on coal and called the
Clean Power Plan the most expensive environmental regulation that the EPA has ever proposed on our
nations power sector. Democrats had objected to the vote and, particularly, its timing. We are not here
on the floor to discuss national security. We are here on the floor right now because the Republican
leadership is taking a run at the presidents Clean Power Plan, said Rhode Island Democratic Sen.
Sheldon Whitehouse in a Senate floor speech earlier Tuesday, objecting to the planned votes. Paris has
not recovered from the devastation of the other day, and we have important billsthat would improve the
capacity of our Department of Justice, of our FBI, of our Department of Homeland Security to address
these threats. And are we on those bills? No. In announcing that Obama would veto the resolution
opposing the Clean Power Plan, the White House noting that by nullifying the Clean Power Plan,
S.J.Res. 24 seeks to block progress towards cleaner energy, eliminating public health and other benefits
of up to $54 billion per year by 2030, including thousands fewer premature deaths from air pollution and
tens of thousands of fewer childhood asthma attacks each year. [Washington Post, 11/17/15]

Net Neutrality
JEFF SESSIONS CO-SPONSORED A BILL TO BLOCK NET NEUTRALITY
The Hill: Jeff Sessions Co-Sponsored A Bill Designed To Block The Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) From Imposing Net Neutrality And Other Regulations. Sen. Jim DeMint (RS.C.) introduced a bill on Wednesday designed to block the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
from imposing net neutrality and other regulations. The Freedom for Consumer Choice Act (FCC Act)
would force the commission to prove consumers are being harmed by lack of choice before it can impose
new rules. It would also force the FCC to weigh the potential cost of action against benefits while
imposing a five-year sunset on FCC regulations. Rules can be renewed if they pass muster under a
market-based standard. Original co-sponsors will include Sens. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), John Ensign (RNev.), Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), John Cornyn (R-Texas) and John Thune (R-S.D.).
[The Hill, 7/21/10]
SESSIONS SAID NET NEUTRALITY WAS GOVERNMENT ASSERTING UNPRECEDENTED
CONTROL OVER THE ECONOMY
Jeff Sessions On FCC Regulation Of The Internet Service Providers: Over The Last Two Years We
Have Seen An Explosion Of Federal Interference In The Free Market, With The Government
Asserting Unprecedented Control Over The Economy. Over the last two years we have seen an
explosion of federal interference in the free market, with the government asserting unprecedented control
over the economy. Now, bureaucrats at the FCC appear poised to place unnecessary regulations on the
Internet, despite serious questions regarding their legal authority. [Press Release, Office of Senator Jeff
Sessions, 7/21/10]
AND AN UNNECESSARY REGULATION ISSUED UNDER QUESTIONABLE LEGAL AUTHORITY
Jeff Sessions On FCC Regulation Of The Internet Service Providers: Bureaucrats At The FCC
Appear Poised To Place Unnecessary Regulations On The Internet, Despite Serious Questions
Regarding Their Legal Authority. Now, bureaucrats at the FCC appear poised to place unnecessary
regulations on the Internet, despite serious questions regarding their legal authority. Congress must make
clear that the power of the FCC - like all government agencies - is not without limit. This legislation would
permit the FCC to use its authority only in response to market failures where consumers have clearly
been harmed. [Press Release, Office of Senator Jeff Sessions, 7/21/10]

Gun Control
2005: JEFF SESSIONS VOTED TO PROTECT GUN DEALERS AND MANUFACTURERS FROM
LAWSUITS
2005: Jeff Sessions voted for the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. A bill to prohibit civil
liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers
of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their
products by others. [S.397, Vote 219, 109th Congress, 6/29/05]
2015: JEFF SESSIONS VOTED AGAINST A MEASURE TO PREVENT SALES OF FIREARMS TO
SUSPECTED TERRORISTS
2015: Jeff Sessions Voted Against A Measure To Deny Firearm Sales To Suspected Terrorists.
[S.Amdt. 2910, Vote 319, 114th Congress, 12/3/15]
2013: JEFF SESSIONS VOTED AGAINST ENDING THE GUN SHOW LOOPHOLE

2013: Jeff Sessions Voted Against A Bipartisan Amendment That Would Have Mandated
Background Checks For Gun Purchases. [S.Amdt. 715, Vote 97, 113th Congress, 4/17/13]
JEFF SESSIONS VOTED AGAINST REGULATING CIVILIAN SALES OF ASSAULT WEAPONS
2013: Jeff Sessions Voted Against A Measure To Regulate Assault Weapons. [S.Amdt. 711, S.649,
Vote 101, 113th Congress, 4/17/13]

BAD FOR WOMEN

Abortion
JEFF SESSIONS OPPOSED ABORTION
Jeff Sessions In 1995: I Am Anti-Abortion Except In The Case Of Rape, Incest Or The Life Of The
Mother. I Heartly [Sic] Support A 24-Hour Waiting Period, Parental Notification And Required
Malpractice Insurance For All Abortion Clinics. I Strongly Oppose Public Funding Of Abortion.
[Birmingham News, 1/18/95]
WITH EXCEPTIONS FOR RAPE, INCEST, OR THE LIFE OF THE WOMAN
Jeff Sessions In 1995: I Am Anti-Abortion Except In The Case Of Rape, Incest Or The Life Of The
Mother. I Heartly [Sic] Support A 24-Hour Waiting Period, Parental Notification And Required
Malpractice Insurance For All Abortion Clinics. I Strongly Oppose Public Funding Of Abortion.
[Birmingham News, 1/18/95]
SESSIONS SUPPORTED A 24-HOUR WAITING PERIOD AND PARENTAL NOTIFICATION
Jeff Sessions In 1995: I Am Anti-Abortion Except In The Case Of Rape, Incest Or The Life Of The
Mother. I Heartly [Sic] Support A 24-Hour Waiting Period, Parental Notification And Required
Malpractice Insurance For All Abortion Clinics. I Strongly Oppose Public Funding Of Abortion.
[Birmingham News, 1/18/95]
JEFF SESSIONS OPPOSED ABORTION WITH EXCEPTIONS FOR RAPE, INCEST, OR THE LIFE OF
THE WOMAN
Jeff Sessions In 1995: I Am Anti-Abortion Except In The Case Of Rape, Incest Or The Life Of The
Mother. I Heartly [Sic] Support A 24-Hour Waiting Period, Parental Notification And Required
Malpractice Insurance For All Abortion Clinics. I Strongly Oppose Public Funding Of Abortion.
[Birmingham News, 1/18/95]
SESSIONS BELIEVED IN LIFE AT CONCEPTION
Office Of Senator Jeff Sessions: Jeff Sessions Believes That Sanctity Of Life Begins At
Conception. Sessions has been a consistent supporter of pro-life policies. He is an original co-sponsor
of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 and believes that sanctity of life begins at conception. [Office
of Senator Jeff Sessions, accessed 4/25/16]
JEFF SESSIONS VOTED AGAINST ALLOWING WOMEN TO ACCESS ABORTION SERVICES ON
OVERSEAS MILITARY BASES IN 1997
Congressional Quarterly: Jeff Sessions Voted Against Allowing Privately Funded Abortions On
Overseas Military Bases. Privately funded abortions were permitted at overseas military hospitals
between 1973 and 1988, when President Reagan banned them. President Clinton overturned the ban in

1993, but Congress reinstated it in 1995. Voting against allowing privately funded abortions were
Republicans Jeff Sessions and Richard Shelby. [Congressional Quarterly, 7/13/97]
AND 2003
Congressional Quarterly: Jeff Sessions Voted Against An Amendment To The Defense
Department Authorization BillTo Allow American Women To Have Abortions At Overseas Military
Facilities. Department of Defense Authorization Act (S. 1050): The Senate on May 22 rejected an
amendment to the Defense Department authorization bill, sponsored by Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., to
allow American women to have abortions at overseas military facilities. Proponents said the ban on
abortions at overseas military facilities unconstitutionally restricted women's abortion rights. Opponents
argued that removing the ban would mean that taxpayers were financing abortions. The vote was 48 yeas
to 51 nays. NAYS: Sen. Jeff Sessions R-AL, Sen. Richard C. Shelby R-AL [Congressional Quarterly,
5/23/03]
JEFF SESSIONS OPPOSED AN AMENDMENT THAT MADE IT HARDER FOR VIOLENT ANTIABORTION EXTREMISTS TO AVOID PAYING DAMAGES TO THEIR VICTIMS
Congressional Quarterly: The Senate Reached A Compromise Deal On H.R. 833 (106 th), The
Bankruptcy Reform Act Of 2000, That Stopped Perpetrators Of Abortion Clinic Violence (As Well
As Other Acts Of Violence) From Using Bankruptcy Protection To Shield Their Assets From Debts
Related To Violence. Leahy also was unhappy with changes to a Senate provision intended to prevent
those convicted of violence at abortion clinics from avoiding debts related to the violence. The Republican
compromise drops references to abortion clinics and broadens the language to include all intentional acts
of violence, said Jeff Sessions, R-Ala. Democrats are playing politics with this bill, Sessions said when
told of Leahy's objections to the abortion language. There is no reason the judgment of an abortion clinic
incident should be treated differently. [Congressional Quarterly, 5/23/00]

Credit Union Journal: Jeff Sessions OpposedA Schumer Amendment To Prevent

Perpetrators Of Abortion Clinic Violence From Escaping Paying Damages To Victims,
Saying I Am Not Going To Vote For A Bill That Targets One Group That One Senator
Doesn't Agree With. New York Democrat Chuck Schumer was adamant in his defense of a
proposal to prevent abortion clinic protesters from using the bankruptcy courts to shield their
assets from civil suit awards. The Schumer amendment is related to a case in Buffalo, N.Y.,
where an abortion protester named Randell Terry killed the doctor there, then filed for bankruptcy
to prevent the surviving family from gaining access to his financial assets through a civil suit.
Alabama Republican Jeff Sessions, an abortion opponent, was just as adamant in his opposition
to the Schumer amendment. I am not going to vote for a bill that targets one group that one
senator doesn't agree with, proclaimed Sessions. [Credit Union Journal, 11/6/00]

Congressional Quarterly: In 2002, Jeff Sessions Opposed Adding Another Schumer

Amendment Aimed At Anti-Abortion Crimes To A New Version Of The Bankruptcy Reform
Act. Social conservatives opposed the measure because it included language sponsored by
Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., that would have barred abortion protesters from filing for
bankruptcy to escape fines for offenses committed during demonstrations. Schumer said he
would continue to press for restricting bankruptcy filings by abortion protesters who commit
crimes. I think it needs to be done, he said. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said he and other Republicans
will work to keep Schumer's abortion protester language off the bill next year. I think it may be
easier to get it done next year, he said. For one, thing we will have a conference committee that
is more favorable. [Congressional Quarterly, 11/19/02]

Jeff Sessions On Chuck Schumers Amendment To The Bankruptcy Reform Act: One
Little Amendment Killed This Legislation, An Amendment That I Believe Is Bad Policy,
Certainly Not Necessary And, I Submit To You, Could Result In Killing This Legislation
Again If We Move It Forward. WELNA: And Alabama Republican Jeff Sessions warned that

attaching the Schumer amendment to the bankruptcy bill would ensure its defeat in the House,
where anti-abortion Republicans have blocked it before. SESSIONS: I mean, it's unbelievable.
As much as we had in this bill, all the pages of this legislation, one little amendment killed this
legislation, an amendment that I believe is bad policy, certainly not necessary and, I submit to
you, could result in killing this legislation again if we move it forward. So let's don't do it. [All
Things Considered, NPR, 3/8/05]
JEFF SESSIONS APPLAUDED STATE-LEVEL RESTRICTIONS ON ABORTION
Jeff Sessions: Congress Voting On Abortion Restrictions Shows That The Congress Is Getting
More In Synch With The American People, Who Are Less And Less Enamored With Abortion On
Demand. In recent years, the House has been more active than the Senate in pushing abortion
restrictions. But Republicans now have a 55-45 Senate majority, and yesterday's vote while complicated
by other factors was an early marker in the current term's abortion fight, said Senator Jeff Sessions,
Republican of Alabama. It shows that the Congress is getting more in synch with the American people,
who are less and less enamored with abortion on demand, he said. [Boston Globe, 3/9/05]
JEFF SESSIONS OPPOSED REPEALING A REGULATION BANNING FUNDING TO FOREIGN NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS THAT ASSIST YOUNG ADOLESCENT INCEST AND RAPE
VICTIMS
Birmingham News: Jeff Sessions Voted Against An Amendment To Restore Foreign Aid To NonGovernmental Organizations That Provide Any Support For Abortion. Lifting abortion support
restrictions on foreign health providers: The Senate on Thursday accepted 53-41 an amendment to H.R.
2764 that lifts a ban on funding for non-governmental health organizations that provide any support for
abortion. Proponents said that health organizations have lost funding for aiding young adolescent incest
and rape victims. They said the ban is extreme, forcing the closure of clinics that provide services to
women in impoverished countries. Opponents said supporting such organizations is supporting the death
of unborn children. Voting against: Sessions and Shelby. [Birmingham News, 9/9/07]
Mobile Register: Jeff Sessions Voted For An Amendment To The Affordable Care Act That Would
Ban Any Insurance Plan Getting Taxpayer Dollars From Offering Abortion Coverage. After days of
secret talks, Senate Democrats tentatively agreed Tuesday night to drop a government-run insurance
option from sweeping health care legislation, several officials said, a concession to party moderates
whose votes are critical to passage of President Barack Obama's top domestic priorityThe vote
sidetracked an amendment by Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Republican Sen. Orrin
Hatch of Utah that would ban any insurance plan getting taxpayer dollars from offering abortion coverage.
Alabama Republicans Jeff Sessions and Richard Shelby and Mississippi Republicans Thad Cochran and
Roger Wicker all voted for the proposed amendment. The Senate bill currently allows insurance plans to
cover abortions, but requires that they can only be paid for with private money. [Mobile Register, 12/9/09]

Abortion and Judicial Nominees

SESSIONS, A METHODIST, FOUND A CAUSE CLBRE IN DEFENDING CATHOLIC ANTIABORTION JUDICIAL NOMINEES
Washington Times: Jeff Sessions Supported The Nomination Of William Pryor to the 11th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals And Led The Pryor Defense Team That Buffered Criticism Of Pryors
Opposition To Abortion Even In The Case Of Rape And Incest. Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama
Republican and leader of the Pryor defense team, attacked committee Democrats for holding against Mr.
Pryor his opposition to abortion even in the case of rape and incest. Let me tell you, the doctrine that
abortion is not justified for rape and incest is Catholic doctrine, Mr. Sessions said. Its the position of the
pope, and its the position of the Catholic Church. Are we saying that if you believe in that principle, you
cant be a federal judge? Mr. Sessions said. [Washington Times, 7/23/03]

Washington Times: Jeff Sessions Supported The Nomination Of William Pryor And Led The Pryor
Defense Team That Buffered Criticism Of His Views On Abortion. [Washington Times, 7/23/03]
ABC 33/40 Birmingham: Jeff Sessions Suggested That William Pryor Should Be On Any
Republican [President]s Short List For The Supreme Court. INTERVIEWER: Who would you like to
see nominated? Theres been a couple names floating around, Mr. Trump has suggested a couple
names. Who would you like to see nominated? SESSIONS: Well he did suggest Judge Bill Pryor, a
judge from Alabama, whos one of the finest judgesjustices in America. And he would absolutely
should be on any Republicans short list for the Supreme Court. So, Im a big fan of Judge Pryors. [ABC
33/40 Birmingham, 2/17/16]
Jeff Sessions: The Doctrine That Abortion Is Not Justified For Rape And Incest Is Catholic
DoctrineSo Are We Saying That If You Believe In That Principle, You Can't Be A Federal Judge?
Are We Not Saying Then Good Catholics Need Not Apply? KWAME HOLMAN: This morning,
Alabama Republican Jeff Sessions said [William] Pryor's [George W. Bush nominee to the 11th Circuit
Court of Appeals in Atlanta] views on abortion simply are consistent with his views as a practicing Roman
Catholic. SEN. JEFF SESSIONS: The doctrine that abortion is not justified for rape and incest is catholic
doctrine. It is the position of the pope and it is the position of the Catholic Church in unity. So are we
saying that if you believe in that principle, you can't be a federal judge? Is that what we're saying? And are
we not saying then good Catholics need not apply? [The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, PBS, 7/23/03]
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) Said That While [George W. Bush
Judicial Nominee William] Pryor's Views On Abortion Follow Catholic Doctrine, He Would Not Let
Them Interfere With Applying The Law As It Exists. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) said that while
Pryor's views on abortion follow Catholic doctrine, he would not let them interfere with applying the law as
it exists. Sessions said he has been made sick to my stomach by the campaign against Pryor. He does
have political views, but his commitment to the law is extraordinary, [The Atlanta Journal-Constitution,
7/24/03]
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: [Jeff] Sessions Said He Has Been Made Sick To My Stomach
By The Campaign Against [George W. Bush Judicial Nominee William] Pryor. Sen. Jeff Sessions
(R-Ala.) said that while Pryor's views on abortion follow Catholic doctrine, he would not let them interfere
with applying the law as it exists. Sessions said he has been made sick to my stomach by the campaign
against Pryor. He does have political views, but his commitment to the law is extraordinary, [The Atlanta
Journal-Constitution, 7/24/03]
JEFF SESSIONS SUPPORTED GEORGE W. BUSH NOMINEE, FENDING OFF CRITICS WHO
DEMANDED SPECIFICS ON ROBERTS POLICY VIEWS
Jeff Sessions, After Meeting With John Roberts: I Think Judge Roberts Has The Proper Values
And Proper Judicial Philosophy For This Judgeship, And I Do Not Believe That We Should
Demand Of Him That He Say How He's Going To Rule On Matters Relating To Interstate
Commerce, Abortion Or Church And State. I think Judge Roberts has the proper values and proper
judicial philosophy for this judgeship, and I do not believe that we should demand of him that he say how
he's going to rule on matters relating to interstate commerce, abortion or church and state. U.S. Sen. Jeff
Sessions, R-Ala., after meeting with Judge John Roberts, President Bush's first Supreme Court nominee.
[Montgomery Advertiser, 7/24/05]
AND CLAIMED THAT SUPPORTING ABORTION RIGHTS DID NOT DISQUALIFY POTENTIAL
SUPREME COURT NOMINEES
5/13/09: Jeff Sessions Met With Barack Obama And Joe Biden To Discuss David Souters
Replacement On The Supreme Court. [Mobile Register, 5/14/09]
Mobile Register: Jeff Sessions Said He Does Not View Support For Legalized Abortion As A
Litmus Test For A Future U.S. Supreme Court Nominee. After meeting with President Barack

Obama on Wednesday morning, U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Mobile, said he does not view support for
legalized abortion as a "litmus test" for a future U.S. Supreme Court nominee. [Mobile Register, 5/14/09]
Jeff Sessions On Confirming Judicial Nominees When The Nominee Is Conservative: Surely, We
Cant Vote For Or Against A Nominee On Whether They Agree With Us On Any Number Of A Host
Of Moral And Religious Issues. SESSIONS. Surely, we can't vote for or against a nominee on
whether they agree with us on any number of a host of moral and religious issues. But these are the facts
on it. Although he is a pro-life individual--in 1997, Alabama banned partial-birth abortion by State statute.
As attorney general, Judge Pryor was aware that parts of that statute had gone too far under the current
state of the law, so he issued a letter, a directive, to the district attorneys throughout the State of Alabama
telling them that they could only construe that statute narrowly because it would violate, otherwise, the
Constitution as defined by the U.S. Supreme Court. [Floor Statement, Office of Senator Sessions, 6/9/05]
BUT BLOCKED A BARACK OBAMA NOMINEE ON JUST THOSE GROUNDS
CNN: Jeff Sessions And A Minority Of Conservative Senators On The Judiciary Committee
Successfully Blocked One Of Obamas Nominees To A Federal Appeals Court On Account Of Her
Views On Gun Rights, Abortion, The Death Penalty And Others. A top judicial nominee has
withdrawn her name from consideration after a successful Republican filibuster, with President Obama
saying Friday he was deeply disappointed.Ms. Halligan has a well-documented record of advocating
extreme positions on constitutional issues, pushing legal arguments beyond what I think is reasonable,
including in cases involving Second Amendment gun rights, abortion, the death penalty and others, said
Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Alabama, who's on the Judiciary Committee. Her attempts to distance herself from
her record were simply unconvincing. There is no question where she stands on these issues. She herself
has said that the courts are the special friend of liberty ... the dynamics of our rule of law enables
enviable social progress and mobility. [CNN Wire, 3/22/13]
Jeff Sessions: Democrats Want Judges Who Will Impose Their Own Views, Their Personal
Views, On Same-Sex Marriage, Partial Birth Abortion, And Christmas Displays In Public. Sen. Jeff
Sessions (R-Ala.) said Democrats are imposing a new political and ideological standard on nominees,
and want only judges who will follow their liberal agenda. He said that includes allowing same-sex
marriages and partial birth abortion, and rejecting Christmas displays in public spaces. They want judges
who will impose their own views, their personal views, said Sessions. [The Star-Ledger, 1/26/06]

Roe v. Wade
JEFF SESSIONS PRAISED BILL PRYOR, WHO CALLED ROE V. WADE THE WORST
ABOMINATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW IN OUR HISTORY
Gannett: Jeff Sessions Praised The Record Of A Judicial Nominee Who Called Roe V. Wade The
Worst Abomination Of Constitutional Law In Our History. President Bush disappointed several civil
and human rights groups, and The Washington Post, this week by nominating Alabama Attorney General
Bill Pryor to the Atlanta-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. Pryor is an advocate of relaxing
the wall between church and state and a champion of Judge Roy Moore, the Alabama chief justice who
suggested the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks may be a consequence of Americans turning away from God. Pryor
also has called Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion, the worst abomination
of constitutional law in our history. Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Mobile, a member of the Senate Judiciary
Committee that will hold a hearing on the nomination, praised Bush's decision. Bill Pryor's career has
been marked by integrity, fairness and a keen legal mind, and he is eminently well qualified for a seat on
the 11th Circuit, Sessions said. [Gannett, 4/12/03]

Foreign Aid

JEFF SESSIONS VOTED TO CONTINUE A BAN ON FUNDING TO FOREIGN NON-GOVERNMENTAL

ORGANIZATIONS THAT PROVIDE ABORTIONS TO YOUNG ADOLESCENT INCEST AND RAPE
VICTIMS
Birmingham News: Jeff Sessions Voted Against An Amendment To Restore Foreign Aid To NonGovernmental Organizations That Provide Any Support For Abortion. Lifting abortion support
restrictions on foreign health providers: The Senate on Thursday accepted 53-41 an amendment to H.R.
2764 that lifts a ban on funding for non-governmental health organizations that provide any support for
abortion. Proponents said that health organizations have lost funding for aiding young adolescent incest
and rape victims. They said the ban is extreme, forcing the closure of clinics that provide services to
women in impoverished countries. Opponents said supporting such organizations is supporting the death
of unborn children. Voting against: Sessions and Shelby. [Birmingham News, 9/9/07]
JEFF SESSIONS COMPARED STEM-CELL RESEARCH TO NAZI SCIENCE EXPERIMENTS
Newsdays Ellis Henican: Jeff Sessions Used A Nazi Analogy To Describe Stem-Cell Research. A
two-minute Google search turned up a long list of prominent Republicans who'd used very similar Nazi
analogies to score political points on a whole range of issues - let me put this gently - that fell quite a bit
shy of mass extermination. Sen. Rick Santorum (on the Senate filibuster), Sen. Tom Cole (on John Kerry
voters), Sen. James Inhofe (for Kyoto climate treaty), Sen. Jeff Sessions (for stem-cell research), Rep.
Steven King (for abortion rights) and Republican strategist Grover Norquist (on estate taxes). [Ellis
Henican, Newsday, 6/24/05]
Chicago Tribune: In October 2005, Jeff Sessions Likened Embryonic Stem Cell Research To Nazi
Germany's Abuses Of Science. [Chicago Tribune, 6/26/05]
Birmingham News: Jeff Sessions Voted Against A Bill Allowing Human Embryos Slated For
Destruction To Be Used In Federally Funded Stem Cell Research. The Senate on Wednesday
passed S. 5 63-34, allowing human embryos slated for destruction to be used in federally funded stem
cell research. While the bill lifts the restriction that only stem cells in existence before August 2001 can be
used for research, it stipulates that the embryos are donated from in-vitro fertilization clinics with the
consent and without compensation to the donors Voting against: Republicans Sen. Jeff Sessions and
Richard Shelby. [Birmingham News, 4/15/07]
Birmingham News: In What Was Described As A Show Vote, Jeff Sessions Voted For A Bill
Allowing The Use Of Naturally Dead Embryos To Be Used In Federally Funded Stem Cell
Research. Allowing research on stem cells from dead embryos: Wednesday, the Senate passed S. 30
70-28, allowing the use of naturally dead embryos to be used in federally funded stem cell research. The
bill also encourages the gathering and growth of stem cells in other ways that do not require the
destruction of an embryo, such as from amniotic fluid. Proponents said the bill allows research to be
expanded without the destruction of human life. Opponents said the bill was a political move to allow
senators to say they had voted in favor of stem cell research. They added that the lack of guidance on
how and when an embryo would be declared naturally dead would create problems. Voting for: Sessions
and Shelby. [Birmingham News, 4/15/07]
AND DENIED THAT STEM CELL RESEARCH HAD PRODUCED PROVEN BENEFITS
Jeff Sessions: According To Former Senator Bill Frist, Only Adult Stem Cell Research Today Has
Shown Progress In Medical Research. The Embryonic Stem Cells Have Not. Dr. Frist explained
last night only adult stem cell research today has shown progress in medical research. The embryonic
stem cells have not. Senator Sam Brownback has talked about this. He said scientists are finding that the
embryonic stem cell tends to be volatile and not as capable of being utilized in a therapeutic way as adult
stem cells. Regardless of how it may turn out in the future, that appears to be the state of the science
today. [Jeff Sessions Senate Floor Speech, 10/11/04]

Jeff Sessions On Opposing Public Funding For Embryonic Stem Cell Research: I See No Reason
In Science, I See No Reason In Ethics-That Requires That We Blindly Go In And Destroy Life For
Scientific Experimentation When There Is No Clear Indication That Experimentation Will Result In
Health Benefits To American People. As we go forward, as we continue to debate these ethical and
moral matters, as we continue to see the improvements in science and learn more from science, we may
adjust and be able to come up with different ideas as we go forward on stem cell research. Who knows
what we will learn as time goes forward. Based on what I understand today, I see no reason in science, I
see no reason in ethics-that requires that we blindly go in and destroy life for scientific experimentation
when there is no clear indication that experimentation will result in health benefits to American people.
[Jeff Sessions Senate Floor Speech, 10/11/04]

Violence Against Women Act

SESSIONS NOT ONLY VOTED AGAINST THE REAUTHORIZATION OF THE VIOLENCE AGAINST
WOMEN ACT
Jeff Sessions Voted Against The Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act Of 2013. [S. 47,
Vote 19, 113th Congress, 2/12/13]
HE LED THE OPPOSITION TO REAUTHORIZATION BECAUSE HE OBJECTED TO ITS DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE VICTIM PROTECTIONS
American Constitution Society For Law and Policy: Jeff Sessions Led Opposition To The
Reauthorization Of The Violence Against Women Act On The Grounds That The Bills Efforts To
Expand The Reach Of Domestic Violence Programs Were Meant To Invite Opposition. Today
reauthorization of the bipartisan Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), as noted on this blog, is mired in
mindless obstructionism. The reauthorization measure was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee
in February, and finally passed the Senate today on a 68-31 vote. But House Republicans are itching to
keep obstructionism alive, promising their own reauthorization measureMoreover since enactment of
the VAWA it has become apparent that services need to be extended, such as free legal services to
victims, authority for Native American officials to respond to abuse of Indian women by those not covered
by Indian jurisdiction, more help to undocumented people who are victims of domestic violence, and to
gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender victims of domestic violence. It is this effort to help more people
that spurred opposition. Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) complained about the reauthorization measures
additional services. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) said the bills efforts to expand the reach of domestic
violence programs were meant to invite opposition. [American Constitution Society For Law and Policy,
4/26/12]
Jeff Sessions On The Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization: There Are Matters Put On
That Bill That Almost Seem To Invite Opposition. With emotions still raw from the fight over
President Obamas contraception mandate, Senate Democrats are beginning a push to renew the
Violence Against Women Act, the once broadly bipartisan 1994 legislation that now faces fierce
opposition from conservatives. I favor the Violence Against Women Act and have supported it at various
points over the years, but there are matters put on that bill that almost seem to invite opposition, said
Senator Jeff Sessions, Republican of Alabama, who opposed the latest version last month in the Judiciary
Committee. You think thats possible? You think they might have put things in there we couldnt support
that maybe then they could accuse you of not being supportive of fighting violence against women?
[New York Times, 3/14/12]
AND DID NOT DISPUTE THAT HE OBJECTED TO PROVISIONS PROTECTING UNDOCUMENTED
IMMIGRANTS AND THE LGBT COMMUNITY
CNN: Jeff Sessions Accused Reporters Of Carrying [Senator Chuck] Schumer's Water, When
They Asked Him Whether He Opposed The [Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization] Bill

Because It Would Include Illegal Immigrants And Gays And Lesbians. Sen. Jeff Sessions, RAlabama, accused reporters of carrying Schumer's water, when they asked him whether he opposed the
bill because it would include illegal immigrants and gays and lesbians. Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York
is the Democrats' top message strategist in the Senate. Republicans think it was his idea to suddenly put
VAWA on the floor, just after high-profile battles over other women's issues -- like abortion and
contraception -- were in the news. [CNN, 3/15/12]

Equal Pay
2014: JEFF SESSIONS VOTED TO BLOCK EQUAL PAY
2014: Jeff Sessions Voted Against Proceeding To A Vote On The Paycheck Fairness Act. [S. 2199,
113th Congress, Vote 103, 4/9/14]

Planned Parenthood / Contraception

JEFF SESSIONS VOTED TO DEFUND PLANNED PARENTHOOD
2015: Jeff Sessions Voted To Defund Planned Parenthood. [S.1881, Vote 262, 114th Congress, 8/3/15]
JEFF SESSIONS SUPPORTED THE HOBBY LOBBY DECISION
Office Of Jeff Sessions Press Release On The Supreme Court Ruling In Burwell V. Hobby Lobby:
Todays Ruling Is An Important Step Towards Restoring The Religious Freedoms That The
Presidents Health Care Law Suppressed. Hobby Lobby is a family business that objected to a
federal government mandate requiring them to pay for drugs like Plan B and Ella, which they argued was
a violation of their pro-life religious views. Todays ruling is an important step towards restoring the
religious freedoms that the Presidents health care law suppressed. And it is yet another rebuke for an
Administration that does not recognize the limits on its power. [Press Release, Office of Senator Jeff
Sessions, 6/30/14]
AND VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE BLUNT AMENDMENT
Jeff Sessions Voted For The Blunt Amendment, Which Would Have Allowed Any Employer To OptOut Of Providing Contraceptive Care In Health Care Plans Offered To Their Employees. [S.Amdt.
1520, Vote 24, 112th Congress, 3/1/12]

BAD FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS

Spending
JEFF SESSIONS CALLED SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICARE, FOOD STAMPS, CERTAIN PELL
GRANTS ENTITLEMENTS
Jeff Sessions: Social Security, Medicare, Food Stamps, Certain Pell Grants Are What We Call
Entitlement Programs. SESSIONS: And so Social Security, Medicare, food stamps, certain Pell
Grants are what we call entitlement programs, where you get that benefit whether the government has
any money or not. And if the government doesnt have any money, it has to borrow money to pay these
benefits. And that portion of the budget that includes interest is now pushing 60%. [WHNT-19 (AL),
4/25/14]

AND SAID THAT THEY ALL NEEDED TO BE "ADJUSTED TO REVERSE THE BUDGET GAP
Jeff Sessions: To Reverse Budget Gap, We Need To Make Some Adjustments To Social
Security, Medicare, Food Stamps, Certain Pell Grants. SESSIONS: So Defense, Marshall [Flight
Center], highways are less than 50%. A majority of the budget are in those programs [Social Security,
Medicare, food stamps, Pell Grants] and theyre growing at a pace thats unsustainable. And so we need
to make some adjustmentssmaller series of adjustments. They can put those programs on a sound
basis. And everybody thats going home at night, working hard can sleep well, knowing that theyre going
to have these benefits in the future. I think we can do that. And well have to do that. There cannot be
we cannot have a failure. [WHNT-19 (AL), 4/25/14]
2014: SESSIONS SUGGESTED SIGNIFICANT CUTS TO GOVERNMENT TO BALANCE THE
BUDGET
2014: Jeff Sessions Advocated Significant Cuts Across Government To Balance The Budget.
SESSIONS: Adding $600 billion in an annual interest payment cannot be. We must not allow that to
happen. And weve just got to tighten our belts, do the right things, and well surprise ourselves how much
progress we can make. And the governments not going to sink into the ocean. Well still be here.
INTERVIEWER: Now, I had an economist, sitting just where youre sitting, tell me that, we got this way
over a period of years, its going to take us a while to get out of it. But I think you think this is more of an
emergency than that, that we gotta get to it quick. SESSIONS: Well weve gotta rally the American
people. This economist idea, like, Oh, well just work our way out of it, could be true. But its going to
well, were not going to be able to do it overnight. So were looking at, for example, 10 years of looking to
balance the budget. This will be hard to do it over ten years. If the Republicans are given the majority in
the Senate, and I could be chair of the Budget Committee, we have no option. We must produce a budget
that will balance in a sensible way, that allows the economy to grow. [WHNT-19 (AL), 4/25/14]

Auto Rescue
2008: SESSIONS VOTED AGAINST THE AUTO RESCUE
2008: Jeff Sessions Voted Against The Auto Rescue. [H.R.7005, Vote 215, 110th Congress, 12/11/08]

Affordable Care Act

JEFF SESSIONS CALLED THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT UNWISE AND CONTROVERSIAL
Office Of Senator Sessions: The Affordable Care Act Was Unwise And Controversial. Sessions
has expressed grave concern over the unwise and controversial health care law, which was upheld by the
Supreme Court on a narrow 5-4 ruling. He disagrees with the Court's decision that individuals can be
required to purchase health insurance, believing that if the government can tax individuals merely for
choosing not to buy something, then it gains the power to coerce them into taking other actions that it
desires as well. Sessions has stated that it is unwise, even dangerous, to entrust politicians with such
broad authority over the lives of the citizenry. [Office of Senator Jeff Sessions, accessed 4/25/16]
JEFF SESSIONS VOTED MULTIPLE TIMES TO REPEAL OBAMACARE
Jeff Sessions On Voting For Obamacare Repeal Bills That Would Not Become Law: It
Demonstrates That If You Have A President Prepared To Support Health Care Reform, It Could
Pass Next Time. Republican leaders also want to send an unmistakable message to voters: If you elect
a GOP president next year and keep the them in charge of Congress, Obamacare will go. It
demonstrates that if you have a president prepared to support health care reform, it could pass next time,
said Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Alabama, a vocal critic of the Affordable Care Act who insisted this was not a
show vote just because the President will veto the bill. [CNN, 12/4/15]

AND ARGUED THAT WITH A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT IN OFFICE, A BIPARTISAN EFFORT

WOULD EMERGE TO CHANGE HEALTH CARE
Jeff Sessions On Voting For Obamacare Repeal Bills That Would Not Become Law: If This Vote
Occurred After The Next Presidential Election, Instead Of Vetoing It The President Would Sign It.
This Would Force A Bipartisan Reevaluation Of Health Care In America And Put Us In A Position
To Make Major Changes. It demonstrates that if you have a president prepared to support health care
reform, it could pass next time, said Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Alabama, a vocal critic of the Affordable Care
Act who insisted this was not a show vote just because the President will veto the bill. If this vote
occurred after the next presidential election, instead of vetoing it the President would sign it. This would
force a bipartisan reevaluation of health care in America and put us in a position to make major changes.
[CNN, 12/4/15]
SESSIONS SAID THAT DEMOCRATS CRAMMED THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT THROUGH THE
SENATE
Jeff Sessions: Democrats Crammed Obamacare Through The Senate. During floor debate,
Republicans recounted with frustration the 7 a.m. vote on Christmas Eve morning in 2009 when the 60
Democrats who held a filibuster-proof margin of control "crammed" the bill through Senate, in Sessions'
words, without a single Republican vote. [CNN, 12/4/15]
SESSIONS BELIEVED THE SUPREME COURT ACTED INAPPROPRIATELY, BY PRESERVING
OBAMACARE
Jeff Sessions On The Supreme Court Affirming The Affordable Care Act: The Supreme Courts
Obamacare Acrobatics Should Dispel For Good The Comforting Illusion That We Can Rely On
Judges To Save Us. The Supreme Courts Obamacare acrobatics should dispel for good the
comforting illusion that we can rely on judges to save us. Whether on socialized medicine, executive
amnesty, or any other action which erodes our Constitution and the powers of Congress, conservatives
will have to rally the everyday voting citizen. There is no greater power than winning the trust and loyalty
of the American people. We will need to put down the donor agenda, pick up the banner of the American
worker, and carry it to victory. [Yellowhammer News, 6/25/15]
SESSIONS BELIEVED THE GOVERNMENT WOULDNT BE ABLE TO PAY FOR OBAMACARE
Jeff Sessions On Obamacare Funding: The More We Learn About The Bill, The More We Learn It
Is Even More Unaffordable Than Was Suspected. The Bill Has To Be Removed From The Books
Because We Dont Have The Money. Senate Republican staffers continue to look though the 2010
health care reform law to see whats in it, and their latest discovery is a massive $17 trillion funding gap.
The more we learn about the bill, the more we learn it is even more unaffordable than was suspected,
said Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, the Republicans budget chief in the Senate. The bill has to be
removed from the books because we dont have the money, he said. [Daily Caller, 3/30/12]

Minimum wage
2007: JEFF SESSIONS VOTED TO RAISE THE MINIMUM WAGE
Jeff Sessions Voted To Increase The Minimum Wage To $7.25 Per Hour. [H.R.2, Vote 42, 110th
Congress, 2/1/07]
BUT HAS FIRMLY OPPOSED ANY FURTHER INCREASE SINCE THAT VOTE, EVEN EXPRESSING
SKEPTICISM ABOUT THE MINIMUM WAGE ENTIRELY
CNSNews.com: Jeff Sessions Said A Minimum-Wage Hike Needs To Be Looked At Very Carefully.
In General, Mandating Price And Wage Factors Are Not Good Policy. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.)

said a minimum-wage hike needs to be looked at very carefully. In general, mandating price and wage
factors are not good policy, in my opinion. But Im telling you, the middle class in America is hurting,
Sessions said. Weve got a lot of problems both in the ability to get jobs; and wages have been stagnant.
So as always, the government likes to come in and say, were just going to pass a law to raise the wages,
Sessions continued. But what we need to do is create a growing economy and drive wages up -- not to
$9 an hour, but $15, $18, $20 an hour. Thats the kind of thing we need to be looking at, and that comes
only from economic growth, and an unwise minimum wage may even do damage. [CNSNews.com,
2/13/13]
CLAIMING THAT THE MINIMUM WAGE CANNOT BE ADDRESSED WHILE IMMIGRATION
REMAINS AT CURRENT LEVELS
Breitbart: Jeff Sessions Opposed Congress Raising The Minimum Wage While Also Discussing
Any Increase Or Reform To The Immigration System. On Thursday Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) blasted
Senate Democrats for their hypocritical fair shot for everyone campaign to raise the minimum wage after
passing massive amnesty legislation that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office determined would
actually lower the wages of American workers. Sessions called the Democrats hypocrisy on the minimum
wage increase breathtaking, because instead of tightening the labor market, Senate Democrats want to
raise the wage floor while expanding the labor supply, which Sessions said would predictably result in
pushing out millions of American workers from the labor force. [Breitbart, 5/1/14]
SESSIONS CALLED DONALD TRUMPS WRONG FOR ENTERTAINING THE POSSIBILITY OF
RAISING THE MINIMUM WAGE
Roll Call: Jeff Sessions Said That Donald Trump Was Wrong To Reverse His Position And
Endorse A Higher Minimum Wage. While forcefully defending Trump's conservative credentials to
reporters, Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, an early Trump backer, said the presumptive GOP nominee
was wrong to reverse his position and endorse a higher minimum wage. [Roll Call, 5/9/16]

BAD FOR SENIORS

SESSIONS SUGGESTED MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO SOCIAL SECURITY TO REDUCE THE
BUDGET GAP
Jeff Sessions: To Reverse Budget Gap, We Need To Make Some Adjustments To Social
Security, Medicare, Food Stamps, Certain Pell Grants. SESSIONS: So Defense, Marshall [Flight
Center], highways are less than 50%. A majority of the budget are in those programs [Social Security,
Medicare, food stamps, Pell Grants] and theyre growing at a pace thats unsustainable. And so we need
to make some adjustmentssmaller series of adjustments. They can put those programs on a sound
basis. And everybody thats going home at night, working hard can sleep well, knowing that theyre going
to have these benefits in the future. I think we can do that. And well have to do that. There cannot be
we cannot have a failure. [WHNT-19 (AL), 4/25/14]
AND SAID WE WOULD HAVE TO RAISE THE SOCIAL SECURITY RETIREMENT AGE
Jeff Sessions On The Social Security Retirement Age: I Think We're Going To Have To Raise The
Age Limit. COSTELLO: I don't think anyone would disagree with you there. I'd like to talk a little bit
about Social Security and this idea to raise the SESSIONS: Yes. COSTELLO: -- the retirement age
to the age of 70. Are you for that? SESSIONS: I hate to think that we've got to make any change in
Social Security, but we do. And there are a lot of things that can be done that don't devastate the
program, guarantee that present -- current recipients or those near retiring don't receive changes. But
some changes are going to have to be made, and that's one of the changes that many people think is a
realistic way to make this program sound. COSTELLO: How about you? Do you think it's a realistic
way? SESSIONS: I think we're going to have to raise the age limit, yes. I don't know how far, but I do

believe that's a factor. These kind of changes don't have to be dramatic. They don't have to be done all at
once. They don't have to impact people on Social Security today, but we have to make some changes.
[CNN Newsroom, CNN, 4/14/11]
JEFF SESSIONS VOTED AGAINST REDUCING THE MEDICARE ADVANTAGE PROGRAM
Jeff Sessions Voted Against The Medicare Improvements For Patients And Providers Act Of 2008.
[H.R. 6331, Vote 177, 110th Congress, 7/9/08]

MedicareVotes: Every Health-Care-Providing Group In Our Country Supports This

Legislation, Except [The] Health Insurance Industry. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told
the New York Times: Seniors' organizations and disabilities groups support this legislation. Just
about every health-care-providing group in our country supports this legislation, except one, and
that is health insurance industry. I guess the president is voting with them and not with America's
seniors. [MedicareVotes, accessed 5/12/16]

MedicareVotes: The Bill [H.R. 6331]Called For Cuts In Privately Administered Medicare
Advantage Plans. This legislation set out to nix a 10.6 percent cut in Medicare payments to
doctors scheduled for 2008, and a 5.4 percent reduction scheduled for 2009. Instead, the bill
called for a 1.1 percent increase in Medicare reimbursements to physicians. The bill also called
for cuts in privately administered Medicare Advantage plans. [MedicareVotes, accessed 5/12/16]

EVEN THTOUGH MEDICARE ADVANTAGE COST THE GOVERNMENT MORE THAN

TRADITIONAL, MEDICARE-RUN PLANS

MedicareVotes: In Theory, Private Sector Medicare Advantage Plans Were Supposed

To Be More Efficient Than Traditional Government-Run Medicare, But Independent
Studies Had Reported[They] Cost The Government More Per Person. In theory,
private sector Medicare Advantage plans were supposed to be more efficient than traditional
government-run Medicare, but independent studies had reported that the private Medicare
Advantage plans, sold by insurers like Humana and UnitedHealth, cost the government more
per person. This was in part because some offered additional benefits, such as eye care and
reduced fees for gym memberships, but the value of the new benefits did not add up to justify
the higher payments from Medicare. [MedicareVotes, accessed 5/12/16]

MedicareVotes: The Legislation [H.R. 6331] Set Out To Curtail High-Pressure

Advantage Sales Tactics That Had Prompted Complaints From Beneficiaries And State
Insurance Regulators. [MedicareVotes, accessed 5/12/16]

JEFF SESSIONS VOTED FOR THE 2011 RYAN BUDGET

Jeff Sessions Voted For The 2011 Ryan Budget Bill. [H.Con.Res. 34, Vote 77, 112th Congress, 5/25/11]

MedicareVotes: The 2011 Paul Ryan Budget Bill Would Have Ended Medicare As We Know
It, Replacing It With A Voucher System For Seniors To Buy Health Insurance Coverage On
The Open Market. [MedicareVotes, accessed 5/12/16]

MedicareVotes: Actuaries Say The Amount Of The Vouchers Would Not Be Enough For
Seniors To Replace The Coverage They Would Lose With The End Of Medicare.
[MedicareVotes, accessed 5/12/16]

BAD FOR LGBT

Marriage
JEFF SESSIONS CLAIMED THAT GAY MARRIAGE COULD WIPE OUT HETEROSEXUAL
MARRIAGE
Jeff Sessions In 2004: Heterosexual Marriage Is In Danger Of Being Wiped Out By The Federal
Courts. This cannot be won at the ballot box. It can only be imposed on the people of America through
a judicial ruling under the guise of interpreting the Constitution. That is what activism is. It is judges
allowing personal political views to infect their decision-making process, where they override the actions
of the legislatureWe have one of the great institutions of our entire culture, for which there is virtually
unanimous public support, virtually unanimous support among all the legislatures who have ever sat in
the States of the United States of America, and it is in danger of being wiped out by the Federal courts.
[Press Release, Office of Senator Jeff Sessions, 7/9/04]
AND LEAD TO THE STATE RAISING ALL CHILDREN
2004: Jeff Sessions Said That If The United States Legalizes Same-Sex Marriage, The State Will
Raise All Children. I am not putting down single parents. I am not condemning people who have a
different sexual orientation. I don't mean that in any way whatsoever. But the State, the government, has
a right to define marriage in the classical term because that is where children are born, that is where they
are nurtured, raised, and cared for. If the parents don't do it, I guess the State has to, which is what is
happening in Europe. [Press Release, Office of Senator Jeff Sessions, 7/9/04]
JEFF SESSIONS IMPLIED THE SUPREME COURT DECISION LEGALIZING MARRIAGE EQUALITY
NATIONWIDE WAS ILLEGITIMATE
Jeff Sessions On The Supreme Court Decision Legalizing Gay Marriage Nationwide: What This
Court Did Was Unconstitutional, What This Court DidThey Cant To Do, Nothing In The
Constitution For Such A Result No Mention Of Marriage In The Constitution. Speaking at a
meeting of the Eastern Shore Chamber of Commerce Monday morningJeff Sessions is the first to admit
conservatives didnt have a good week between the supreme courts rulings on Obamacare subsidies and
same-sex marriagea ruling he says can threaten the future. Because if a court can do that on a question
of marriage then it can do it on almost any other issue, said Sessions. Sessions says the court essentially
made up a new right to marry. What this court did was unconstitutional, what this court didthey cant to
do, nothing in the constitution for such a result no mention of marriage in the constitution, says Sessions.
Its an issue that evokes a lot of passion on both sides and may not be over. [CBS News 5, 6/29/15]
JEFF SESSIONS OPPOSES SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
Office Of Senator Sessions: Sessions Believes That A Marriage Is Union Between A Man And
A Woman, And Has Routinely Criticized The U.S. Supreme Court And Activist Lower Courts When
They Try To Judicially Redefine Marriage. Throughout his years of public service, Senator Sessions
has been a strong champion and defender of traditional Alabama values. Senator Sessions recognizes
that the family serves a critical role in America as the foundation of our society. He supports legislation
that would ease the tax-burden on working middle-class families, allowing them to have more control over
their own money. Sessions has been a consistent supporter of pro-life policies. He is an original cosponsor of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 and believes that sanctity of life begins at
conception. Sessions believes that a marriage is union between a man and a woman, and has routinely
criticized the U.S. Supreme Court and activist lower courts when they try to judicially redefine
marriage.[Office of Senator Jeff Sessions, accessed 4/25/16]

Roll Call: Jeff Sessions Opposed A Federal Court Ruling Legalizing Gay Marriage In Alabama. An
Alabama senator is decrying a federal court ruling effectively legalizing gay marriage in his state, after the
Supreme Court declined to block it. I think it's an unhealthy trend that judges feel that they're somehow
reflecting popular opinion when first of all, it's not popular opinion, and secondly, who are they to be ruling
on cases based on how they feel, Sen. Jeff Sessions, a senior Republican on the Judiciary Committee,
told CQ Roll Call. [Roll Call, 2/9/15]

Roll Call: Jeff Sessions Supported An Appeal Of The Decision That Legalized Gay Marriage
In Alabama, Made By What Sessions Called An Act Of Activist Judiciary. "The attorney
general of the state of Alabama has appealed, which I support. And while a number of courts
have held the way [the] Alabama court has, others have not, and to me this line of cases ...
represents an activist judiciary, Sessions said. No Congress has ever passed a law or a
constitutional amendment that would ever would ever have been thought to have this result.
[Roll Call, 2/9/15]

SESSIONS SAID JUSTICES RULING AGAINST SAME-SEX MARRIAGE BANS WERE DOING SO
BASED ON HOW THEY FEEL
Jeff Sessions On Same-Sex Marriage: Judges Feel That They're Somehow Reflecting Popular
Opinion When First Of All, It's Not Popular Opinion, And Secondly, Who Are They To Be Ruling On
Cases Based On How They Feel? An Alabama senator is decrying a federal court ruling effectively
legalizing gay marriage in his state, after the Supreme Court declined to block it. I think it's an unhealthy
trend that judges feel that they're somehow reflecting popular opinion when first of all, it's not popular
opinion, and secondly, who are they to be ruling on cases based on how they feel, Sen. Jeff Sessions, a
senior Republican on the Judiciary Committee, told CQ Roll Call. [Roll Call, 2/9/15]
IN BOB JONES UNIVERSITY V. UNITED STATES, THE SUPREME COURT RULED THAT THE IRS
COULD RESCIND TAX EXEMPTION FROM AN INSTITUTION THAT BANNED INTERRACIAL DATING
AND MARRIAGE
The Daily Beast: In Bob Jones University V. United States The Court Ruled The Federal
Government Could Take Away The Tax-Exempt Status Of The Fundamentalist School Because It
Refused To Recognize Interracial Marriages Or Allow Blacks And Whites To Date While Attending
The School. In Bob Jones University v. United States the court ruled the federal government could take
away the tax-exempt status of the fundamentalist school because it refused to recognize interracial
marriages or allow blacks and whites to date while attending the school (one could even be expelled for
arguing in favor of interracial marriage!). [The Daily Beast, 7/20/15]
A RULING THAT SESSIONS CALLED PROBLEMATIC
Jeff Sessions On The Bob Jones University Ruling: I Think That Was A Problematic Ruling And
At The Time It Was Widely Discussed How Broadly That Ruling Could Be Extended And Potential
Problems It Would Create. Seems like an odd case to hinge a contemporary proposal on, right? Not to
Alabama Senator Jeff SessionsI think that was a problematic ruling and at the time it was widely
discussed how broadly that ruling could be extended and potential problems it would create, Sessions
said in the basement of the Capitol.Anybody that denies that doesnt understand law. According to
Sessions, the slippery slope set up by Bob Jones University v. United States has now been realized
some 30 years later in its ruling on gay marriage. [The Daily Beast, 7/20/15]
AND CREDITED WITH CREATING A SLIPPERY SLOPE THAT LED TO THE LEGALIZATION OF
GAY MARRIAGE
The Daily Beast: According To Sessions, The Slippery Slope Set Up By Bob Jones University V.
United States Has Now Been Realized Some 30 Years Later In Its Ruling On Gay Marriage. Seems
like an odd case to hinge a contemporary proposal on, right? Not to Alabama Senator Jeff SessionsI

think that was a problematic ruling and at the time it was widely discussed how broadly that ruling could
be extended and potential problems it would create, Sessions said in the basement of the
Capitol.Anybody that denies that doesnt understand law. According to Sessions, the slippery slope set
up by Bob Jones University v. United States has now been realized some 30 years later in its ruling on
gay marriage. [The Daily Beast, 7/20/15]
SESSIONS COSPONSORED A BILL TO INVALIDATE THE SUPREME COURTS RULING IN UNITED
STATES V. WINDSOR, REVERTING THE POWER TO LEGALIZE SAME-SEX MARRIAGE TO THE
STATES
Yellowhammer News: Senators Richard Shelby And Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) Have Signed On To A
Bill That Would Allow Each State To Set Its Own Marriage Policy. Senators Richard Shelby and Jeff
Sessions (R-Ala.) have signed on to a bill that would allow each state to set its own marriage policy. The
State Marriage Defense Act is sponsored by conservative firebrand Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), with
eleven other Republican senators, including Sessions and Shelby, signing on as co-sponsors. Even
though the Supreme Court made clear in United States v. Windsor that the federal government should
defer to state choices about who may be married, the Obama Administration has disregarded state
marriage laws enacted by democratically-elected legislatures to uphold traditional marriage, Cruz said in
a press release Tuesday. [Yellowhammer News, 2/12/15]
JEFF SESSIONS SUPPORTED A FEDERAL MARRIAGE AMENDMENT, LIKENING THE FIGHT TO
PASS A MARRIAGE AMENDMENT TO THE FIGHT TO ABOLISH SLAVERY
2004: Jeff Sessions Compared The Effort To Amend The Constitution To Ban Same-Sex Marriage
To The Movement To Abolish Slavery. When the Supreme Court hears a case on same-sex marriage,
many scholars believe [there is] a very high likelihood, that the Court would rule that traditional marriage
is too restrictive, it has to be changed from the way the people have defined it. We do not have to accept
that. We have every right to amend the Constitution. The laws in the Constitution provided for slavery -that was changed. The laws of the Constitution provide for free speechThe American people can define
what marriage is. [Press Release, Office of Senator Jeff Sessions, 7/9/04]
Jeff Sessions: We Have Every Right To Amend The Constitution. The Laws In The Constitution
Provided For Slavery -- That Was Changed. The Laws Of The Constitution Provide For Free
SpeechThe American People Can Define What Marriage Is. When the Supreme Court hears a
case on same-sex marriage, many scholars believe [there is] a very high likelihood, that the Court would
rule that traditional marriage is too restrictive, it has to be changed from the way the people have defined
it. We do not have to accept that. We have every right to amend the Constitution. The laws in the
Constitution provided for slavery -- that was changed. The laws of the Constitution provide for free
speechThe American people can define what marriage is. [Press Release, Office of Senator Jeff
Sessions, 7/9/04]
BUT WAS NO LONGER A VOCAL ADVOCATE OF A MARRIAGE AMENDMENT IN 2014
ThinkProgress: Jeff Sessions Dropped His Advocacy For A Federal Amendment Banning SameSex Marriage For His 2014 Reelection Campaign. Take Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL). Before voting for
the 2004 FMA, Sessions announced on the Senate floor, It is time for us as a people to utilize the power
of the Constitution given us through our elected representatives to amend the Constitution.[now]
Neither senator calls for a constitutional amendment on their re-election websites now; Sessions simply
says that He has worked hard to strengthen families by protecting the institution of marriage.
[ThinkProgress, 6/6/14]
Jeff Sessions 2014 Re-Election Website: He Has Worked Hard To Strengthen Families By
Protecting The Institution Of Marriage. Senator Sessions has fought for those Alabama values since
he was first appointed by President Ronald Reagan to serve as a federal prosecutor in 1981. He has
worked hard to strengthen families by protecting the institution of marriage. He has opposed partial birth
abortion and public funding for abortions. He supports religious freedoms, and he believes that local faith

based groups are often better suited to provide relief for those in need than unwieldy government
bureaucracy. [Jeff Sessions Campaign Website, Wayback Machine, accessed 4/28/16]

Nondiscrimination / ENDA
2015: JEFF SESSIONS VOTED AGAINST AN AMENDMENT AIMED AT ENDING DISCRIMINATION
BASED ON SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND GENDER IDENTITY IN PUBIC SCHOOLS
2015: Jeff Sessions Voted Against An Amendment To End Discrimination Based On Actual Or
Perceived Sexual Orientation Or Gender Identity In Public Schools. [S.Amdt. 2093, Vote 236, 114th
Congress, 7/14/15]
2013: JEFF SESSIONS VOTED AGAINST THE MOTION TO PROCEED TO A VOTE ON ENDA
2013: Jeff Sessions Voted Against Cloture On The Employment Non-Discrimination Act Of 2013.
[S. 815, Vote 231, 113th Congress, 11/7/13]
BUT DID NOT SPEAK OUT AGAINST OR VOTE ON PASSAGE OF ENDA
2013: Jeff Sessions Did Not Vote On The Employment Non-Discrimination Act Of 2013. [S. 815,
Vote 232, 113th Congress, 11/7/13]

Roll Call: There's One Thing That Hasn't Been Heard On The Senate Floor As The
Chamber Debates Legislation To Ban Employment Discrimination Based On Sexual
Orientation: Any Opposition. There's one thing that hasn't been heard on the Senate floor as
the chamber debates legislation to ban employment discrimination based on sexual orientation:
any opposition. Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin, D-Ill., noted the radio silence from senators
opposed to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act during his own floor speech on Tuesday. I
searched the Congressional Record of yesterday to look for one statement in opposition to the
Employment Non-Discrimination Act. There is not one. There was a specific opportunity given for
anyone opposed to that measure to stand and speak, Durbin said. Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa
supported it. He spoke eloquently from this desk yesterday before the vote, and then time was
allocated to those in opposition. No one stood to speak. But then 30 voted against it. [Roll Call,
11/7/13]

Roll Call: Sen. Jeff Sessions Of Alabama Was Among The Republicans Voting Against
Cloture On The Motion To Proceed He Had No Intentions Of Making A Speech In
Opposition To The Bill. For instance, Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama was among the
Republicans voting against cloture on the motion to proceed. Sessions told CQ Roll Call on
Wednesday that he had no intentions of making a speech in opposition to the bill. [Roll Call,
11/7/13]

JEFF SESSIONS DESCRIBED HOMOSEXUALITY AS GAY TENDENCIES

Mobile Register: Jeff Sessions Indicated That A Nominee's Sexual Orientation Would Not Be A
Factor For Him When Considering A Supreme Court Nominee. Sessions, who recently became the
top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, also indicated that a nominee's sexual orientation
would not be a factor for him. I don't think that's the question, he told reporters later in the day. For a
nominee, he said, the most important thing(s) are their personal integrity and high legal skills, good
judgment and (to) understand that their role is to declare the law and not make law. Gay rights groups are
lobbying the Obama administration to select an openly gay nominee to replace retiring Supreme Court
Justice David Souter. [Mobile Register, 5/14/09]

Jeff Sessions: I Dont Think A Person Who Acknowledges That They Have Gay Tendencies Is
Disqualified Per Se From Consideration For Supreme Court Justice." After meeting with

President Barack Obama on Wednesday morning, U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Mobile, said he does
not view support for legalized abortion as a litmus test for a future U.S. Supreme Court nominee.
Sessions, who recently became the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, also
indicated that a nominee's sexual orientation would not be a factor for himLast week, Sessions
appeared to hedge on the issue by saying that he did not think a person who acknowledges that they
have gay tendencies is disqualified per se for the job." [Mobile Register, 5/14/09]
SESSIONS VOTED AGAINST ADDING SEXUAL ORIENTATION TO THE DEFINITION OF HATE
CRIMES
Jeff Sessions Voted Against The Local Law Enforcement Act Of 2001, Which Added Sexual
Orientation To The Definition Of Hate Crimes. [S.625, Vote 147, 107th Congress, 6/11/02]
SESSIONS CO-SPONSORED THE ANTI-LGBT FIRST AMENDMENT DEFENSE ACT
Jeff Sessions Co-Sponsored The First Amendment Defense Act, A So-Called Religious Liberty
Law. [Press Release, Office of Senator Mike Lee, 6/17/15]
JEFF SESSIONS CLAIMED THAT OBJECTIVE SCIENCE SHOWED CHILDREN DO BETTER IN
TRADITION TWO-PARENT FAMILIES
Office Of Senator Sessions: In 2004, Jeff Sessions Claimed That "Children [And Parents] Do So
Much BetterEvery Objective Scientific Test Shows ThatIf They Are In A Traditional Two-Parent
Family. There is no dispute that children do so much better every objective scientific test shows that if
they are in a traditional two-parent family. Indeed, the husband and wife do better. It is a healthy
relationship that the State, the Government -- without any doubt, it seems to me -- has every right to want
to affirm and nurture and encourage through legislation. [Press Release, Office of Senator Jeff Sessions,
7/9/04]
AND THAT GOVERNMENTS SHOULD THEREFORE ENCOURAGE THOSE FAMILIES THROUGH
LEGISLATION
Jeff Sessions On Traditional Two-Parent Families: " It Is A Healthy Relationship That The State,
The Government -- Without Any Doubt, It Seems To Me -- Has Every Right To Want To Affirm And
Nurture And Encourage Through Legislation. There is no dispute that children do so much better
every objective scientific test shows that if they are in a traditional two-parent family. Indeed, the husband
and wife do better. It is a healthy relationship that the State, the Government -- without any doubt, it
seems to me -- has every right to want to affirm and nurture and encourage through legislation. [Press
Release, Office of Senator Jeff Sessions, 7/9/04]
JEFF SESSIONS SAID IN 2010 THAT DONT ASK, DONT TELL, HAD BEEN PRETTY
EFFECTIVE
Jeff Sessions: I'm Inclined To The Personal View That 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Has Been Pretty
Effective. After a Pentagon survey of the troops and two days of congressional hearings, U.S. Sen. Jeff
Sessions remains opposed to repealing the law that prevents gays from serving openly in the military. I'm
inclined to the personal view that 'don't ask, don't tell' has been pretty effective, Sessions, R-Mobile, said
during a meeting of the Senate Armed Services Committee. And I'm dubious about the change, although
I fully recognize that good people could disagree on that subject. [Birmingham News, 12/4/10]
SAID MANY OF THE TROOPS DISCHARGED UNDER THE LAW HAD LEFT VOLUNTARILY
New York Magazine: Jeff Sessions Asserted Most Of The Gay Troops Discharged Under The
[Dont Ask, Dont Tell] Policy Had Chosen To Leave Voluntarily, By Telling The Truth About
Themselves. Just Like, Presumably, They Had Chosen To Be Gay In The First Place. The ghost

of Charlie Moskos, the late Northwestern sociologist who claimed to have coined the phrase don't ask,
don't tell, permeated the Senate hearing last week on whether to finally end the policy that forces gay
troops to lie in order to serveAnd last week, Moskos reemerged when Senator Jeff Sessions cited his
research in asserting that most of the gay troops discharged under the policy had chosen to leave
voluntarily, by telling the truth about themselves. Just like, presumably, they had chosen to be gay in the
first place. [New York Magazine, 2/15/10]
AND SAID THE LAW HAD NOT REQUIRED SOLDIERS TO LIE ABOUT THEIR SEXUALITY
Congressional Quarterly: Jeff Sessions Did Not Believe That Dont Ask, Dont Tell Required Gay
Soldiers To Lie About Their Sexuality. Admiral Mike Mullen, in a comment that sent a ripple throughout
the hearing room, said his opinion was that it was time to repeal the policy. He said he has served with
homosexuals since 1968, and the current policy forces young men and women to lie about who they are.
He said such lies undermine the integrity of the U.S. militaryNonetheless, Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., an
opponent of repealing don't ask, don't tell, said he did not believe that the policy requires homosexuals to
lie. Orrin G. Hatch, R-Utah, reflected the broad opinion of his caucus when he said he was loath to
change a system that is working. [Congressional Quarterly, 2/7/10]

BAD FOR VETERANS

SESSIONS WAS ONE OF ONLY THREE SENATORS TO VOTE AGAINST A BIPARTISAN MEASURE
TO FIX MAJOR ISSUES AT THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION
Reuters: Jeff Sessions Voted Against A Bipartisan Measure Aimed At Easing Healthcare Delays
For Veterans By Giving Them More Access To Private Care And Allowing The Department Of
Veterans Affairs To Open More Clinics And Hire More Medical Staff. The Senate on Wednesday
overwhelmingly passed a bipartisan measure aimed at easing healthcare delays for veterans by giving
them more access to private care and allowing the Department of Veterans Affairs to open more clinics
and hire more medical staffSessions and two other Republicans, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Bob
Corker of Tennessee, voted against the bill's passage. [Reuters, 6/11/14]
2014: A Bipartisan Veterans Healthcare Reform Bill Passed 93-3. [H.R.3230, Vote 187, 113th
Congress, 6/11/14]
SESSIONS CALLED THE VETERANS CHOICE PROGRAM A BLANK CHECK, AN UNLIMITED
ENTITLEMENT PROGRAM
Jeff Sessions: "I Feel Strongly We've Got To Do The Right Thing For Our Veterans. But I Don't
Think We Should Create A Blank Check, An Unlimited Entitlement Program. The Senate on
Wednesday overwhelmingly passed a bipartisan measure aimed at easing healthcare delays for veterans
by giving them more access to private care and allowing the Department of Veterans Affairs to open more
clinics and hire more medical staffBefore passing the bill, senators voted 75-19 to turn aside objections
to its cost raised by Republican Jeff Sessions of Alabama. "I feel strongly we've got to do the right thing
for our veterans. But I don't think we should create a blank check, an unlimited entitlement program, now,"
Sessions said. [Reuters, 6/11/14]
SESSIONS BELIEVED VETERANS WOULD WANT THE UNITED STATES TO PRIORITIZE DEBT
REDUCTION OVER SPENDING MORE ON VETERANS HEALTH CARE
Jeff Sessions: I Dont Think Our Veterans Want Their Programs To Be Enhanced If Every Penny
Of The Money To Enhance Those Programs Is Added To The Debt Of The United States Of
America. The real VHA story is ideological opposition by the rightand clinical excellence despite
chronic under-funding. The main opponents of the Veterans Health Administration are congressional
Republicans. This Republican opposition is odd, since Republicans go to great lengths to demonstrate

their support for Americans in uniform. But when vets return home and are hidden from view, the right
short-changes their care and then blames the VHA. During the Senate debate about the $24 billion
Department of Veterans Affairs allocation, for example, Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions echoed the
sentiments of his fellow Republicans, insisting, I dont think our veterans want their programs to be
enhanced if every penny of the money to enhance those programs is added to the debt of the United
States of America. Has he asked any vets about that? [American Prospect, 10/30/15]
THE VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS REBUKED SESSIONS FOR OPPOSING IMPROVED CARE
FOR VETERANS
Veterans Of Foreign Wars: Jeff SessionsPut Dollars And Cents Above The Interests Of The
Nations Veterans. As encouraging as the pending legislation is came [sic] three no votes from
Republican Sens. Bob Corker (Tenn.), Ron Johnson (Wis.) and Jeff Sessions (Ala.), because they put
dollars and cents above the interests of the nations veterans. There is a cost of going to war that
includes taking care of those who come home wounded, ill and injured, and if these three senators have
determined that we cant afford to properly care for our veterans, then they should seek employment
elsewhere! exclaimed VFW National Commander William A. Thien. [National Review, 6/13/14]
Veterans Of Foreign Wars National Commander: There Is A Cost Of Going To War That Includes
Taking Care Of Those Who Come Home Wounded, Ill And Injured, And If These Three Senators
Have Determined That We Cant Afford To Properly Care For Our Veterans, Then They Should
Seek Employment Elsewhere! As encouraging as the pending legislation is came [sic] three no votes
from Republican Sens. Bob Corker (Tenn.), Ron Johnson (Wis.) and Jeff Sessions (Ala.), because they
put dollars and cents above the interests of the nations veterans. There is a cost of going to war that
includes taking care of those who come home wounded, ill and injured, and if these three senators have
determined that we cant afford to properly care for our veterans, then they should seek employment
elsewhere! exclaimed VFW National Commander William A. Thien. [National Review, 6/13/14]
Veterans Of Foreign Wars National Commander: The Price Veterans Paid In Their Own Blood Far
Exceeds Any Price Tag Some Members Of Congress Want To Proclaim Is Too High. This is a
national crisis that must be fixed, period, he said. This is about saving lives, restoring faith, and honoring
a nations commitment to her veterans, and the VFW fully expects every member of Congress to support
the final bill, because I can guarantee you that the price veterans paid in their own blood far exceeds any
price tag some members of Congress want to proclaim is too high. [National Review, 6/13/14]
JEFF SESSIONS LED THE EFFORT TO KILL LEGISLATION TO HELP UNEMPLOYED VETERANS
FIND JOBS
Government Executive: Jeff Sessions Killed A Bill Aimed At Finding Jobs For Veterans By
Alleging Violations Of Senate Budget Rules. Senate Republicans effectively killed a measure to find
jobs for unemployed veterans on a procedural vote Wednesday, after several attempts by Democrats to
keep the bill on the table failed. Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., raised a point of order against the bill on
Wednesday, citing alleged violations of Senate budget rules. Since three-fifths of the chamber did not
vote to waive the rules, the legislation cannot move forward. [Government Executive, 9/19/12]

FOREIGN POLICY
Trade
SESSIONS DOESNT AGREE COMPLETELY WITH DONALD TRUMP ON TRADE
Jeff Sessions: I Dont Think I Would Share Everything He Says About Trade. Its sort of become
conventional wisdom that Republicans push for free trade agreements, although Republican voters are
more hostile in general to it than Democratic voters are according to polling. But we think we know better.

What our trading partnersparticularly our allies, but our aggressive pacific trading partnersthey have
aciduously [sic] worked to use to those rules to gain an advantage and to increase their exports to the
United States while decreasing our exports to their country. And weve done nothing about it. Weve not
responded in any effective way. Working people get itand theyre not happy. Thats part of the clarity of
Trumps position on all thisalthough I dont think I would share everything he says about trade, but
fundamentally the fact that were being taken advantage of is costing Americans jobs and weakening
America. [On that, Trump] is right on. I think people have instinctively felt that and thats been a source of
his support. [Breitbart, 1/25/16]
BUT MANY HAVE NOTICED THE SIMILARITIES BETWEEN THE POLICY PLATFORMS OF BOTH
Breitbart: Its Worth Noting That 2016 GOP Frontrunner Billionaire Donald Trump Has Made This
Type Of Trade Policy [Jeff] Sessions Is Talking About A Centerpiece Of His Presidential
Campaign. Its worth noting that 2016 GOP frontrunner billionaire Donald Trump has made this type of
trade policy Sessions is talking about a centerpiece of his presidential campaign. While Sessions isnt
endorsing anyone at this time officially, he has appeared with Trump at a Trump campaign rally in
Alabama earlier this election and also held a meeting with him at the U.S. Capitol during the campaign.
Sessions also helped Trump with his immigration reform plan. [Breitbart, 1/25/16]
SESSIONS WANTS TRUMP TO CONTINUE FOCUSING ON CURRENCY MANIPULATION BY U.S.
TRADING PARTNERS
Breitbart: Jeff Sessions Believes Its So Important That TrumpContinue To Discuss [Currency
Manipulation By U.S. Trading Partners] When They Face Off Against Whomever The Democrats
Nominate. Sessions noted that Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor and 2012 GOP
presidential nominee, fought for American workers on this issue in the 2012 GOP presidential primary but
abandoned it in the general election. Thats why he believes its so important that Trump should he or
anyone else whos tough against currency manipulation win the nominationcontinue to discuss the
matter when they face off against whomever the Democrats nominate, which is still expected to most
likely be former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. [Breitbart, 1/25/16]
Jeff Sessions On U.S. Trading Partners: They Can Manipulate Their Currency, They Can
Subsidize Their Businesses, They Can Target American Manufacturing And Our Government
Throws Out Free Market, Free Market, Free Market While Our Determined Mercantilist
Competitors Are Calculatedly Damaging America, American Workers Families And Their Ability To
Have A Job. So this is a very real matter and we fought and it was debated and it came up and the
currency language that would bar this currency manipulation was blocked and never passed. It passed,
but it passed on a bill that the president could veto. It never passed on this legislation. So we dont have
any currency protections of reality. The Portman amendment would have really been helpful against
currency manipulation but it was defeated. So in effect we have a unilateral disarmament. They can
manipulate their currency, they can subsidize their businesses, they can target American manufacturing
and our government throws out free market, free market, free market while our determined mercantilist
competitors are calculatedly damaging America, American workers families and their ability to have a
job. [Breitbart, 1/25/16]
SESSIONS OPPOSES THE TRANS-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP
Jeff Sessions: I Cant Tell You How Important The Vote On The Trans Pacific Partnership Is. It Is
Representing Monumental Erosion Of American Sovereignty And Further Commits Us To
International Institutions Over Which We Have Virtually No Control. Sessions told Breitbart News
that when it comes to this matter, the stakes could not be higher. I cant tell you how important the vote
on the Trans Pacific Partnership is. It is representing monumental erosion of American sovereignty and
further commits us to international institutions over which we have virtually no control, Sessions said.
[Breitbart, 1/25/16]

JEFF SESSIONS SAID THE TPP WOULD ENMESH THE U.S. IN A GLOBAL TRADE BUREAUCRACY
Jeff Sessions On The Text Of The Trans-Pacific Partnership: These 5,554 Pages Are Like The
Lilliputians Binding Down Gulliver. They Will Enmesh Our Great Country, And Economy, In A
Global Commission Where Bureaucrats From Brunei Have The Same Vote As The United States.
The TPP, Sessions charges, puts those who make the rules out of reach of those who live under them,
empowering unelected regulators who cannot be recalled or voted out of office. In turn, it diminishes the
power of the peoples bulwark: their constitutionally-formed Congress. These 5,554 pages are like the
Lilliputians binding down Gulliver, declared Sessions. They will enmesh our great country, and economy,
in a global commission where bureaucrats from Brunei have the same vote as the United States. At
bottom, this is not a mere trade agreement, Sessions warned. It bears the hallmarks of a nascent
European Union. Indeed it does, as The New American has been pointing out for years, even before the
final, official text was released. [The New American, 4/25/16]
SESSIONS SUGGESTED THAT TRADE DEALS, LIKE THE TRANS-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP, WOULD
LEAD TO INTERNATIONAL TRADE UNIONS, LIKE THE EUROPEAN UNION
Jeff Sessions Believed The Trans-Pacific Partnership Was The First Step Towards An International
Trade Union Like The European Union. BANNON: And you believe that this superstructure that's set
up on TPP could lead to the same thing, this Trans-Pacific Partnership? SESSIONS: Absolutely.
Because it creates this union. And they can change their rules, just each country can meet and alter the
rules. They call it a living agreement. So the whole thing can be strengthened and enhanced and it's hard
for the United States to be a no vote, and they beat us up, and our presidents don't want to be a problem.
And it just becomes a growing -- it strengthens itself and the nation-state, inevitably, is therefore reduced.
It is a danger, in my opinion. No doubt about it. [Breitbart, Breitbart News Daily, 3/24/16]
SESSIONS VOTED FOR THE BILL THAT EXTENDED PERMANENT NORMAL TRADE RELATIONS
WITH CHINA IN 2000
Jeff Sessions Voted With Three Fourths Of House Republicans To Extend Permanent Normal
Trade Relations To China In 2000. The Republican establishment began losing its party to Donald
Trump on May 24, 2000, at 5:41 p.m., on the floor of the House of Representatives. Urged on by their
presidential standard-bearer, Texas Gov. George W. Bush, and by nearly all of the business lobbyists who
represented the core of the party's donor class, three-quarters of House Republicans voted to extend the
status of permanent normal trade relations to China. [Tampa Bay Times, 3/24/16]
BUT LATER SAID HE REGRETTED IT
Jeff Sessions Later Expressed Regret For Casting Vote To Extend Permanent Normal Trade
Relations To China In 2000. I try not to regret things, said Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., a Trump
supporter who was one of 83 senators to vote for the China bill. That's one I regret. The Republican
electorate has gone along with their leaders, begrudgingly, for 20 or 30 years, Sessions said. I supported
all these trade agreements but it's becoming clear that the promises that were made weren't true.
[Tampa Bay Times, 3/24/16]

Iran
JEFF SESSIONS SIGNED A LETTER INTENDED TO UNDERMINE NUCLEAR NEGOTIATIONS
BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND IRAN
Jeff Sessions Signed Senator Tom Cottons Iran Letter, Which Told The Leaders Of Iran That
Any Agreement Reached By Iran With Barack Obama Was Immediately Reversible By Congress
And/Or The Next U.S. President. [Letter to Leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Office of Senator
Tom Cotton, 3/9/15]

Iraq War
JEFF SESSIONS SUPPORTED THE IRAQ WAR
Jeff Sessions Voted For Authorizing Use Of Military Force Against Iraq. [H.J.Res. 114, Vote 237,
107th Congress, 10/11/02]
AND CONTINUED TO SUPPORT IT INTO ITS 6TH YEAR
Jeff Sessions Voted No On Redeploying Troops Out Of Iraq By July 2007. [S.Amdt. 4442, Vote 181,
109th Congress, 6/22/06]
Jeff Sessions Voted No On Redeploying U.S. Troops Out Of Iraq By March 2008. [S.J.Res. 9, Vote
75, 110th Congress, 3/15/07]
JEFF SESSIONS ACTIVELY PARTICIPATED IN PRO-WAR RALLIES
2005: Jeff Sessions Spoke At A Pro-War Counter-Protest In Support Of Ongoing Military
Involvement In Iraq. Americans who criticize the protesters should read our Constitution. This includes
Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama), who told Sunday's small pro-war counter-protest, The group who
spoke here the other day did not represent the American ideals of freedom, liberty, and spreading that
around the world. I frankly don't know what they represent, other than to blame America first. [Brian J.
Foley, AntiWar.com, 10/1/05]
AND DISPARAGED PEOPLE WHO OPPOSED THE WAR
Jeff Sessions, Responding To Anti-Iraq War Protests: The Group Who Spoke Here The Other Day
Did Not Represent The American Ideals Of Freedom, Liberty, And Spreading That Around The
World. I Frankly Don't Know What They Represent, Other Than To Blame America First.
Americans who criticize the protesters should read our Constitution. This includes Senator Jeff Sessions
(R-Alabama), who told Sunday's small pro-war counter-protest, The group who spoke here the other day
did not represent the American ideals of freedom, liberty, and spreading that around the world. I frankly
don't know what they represent, other than to blame America first. [Brian J. Foley, AntiWar.com, 10/1/05]
AND VOTED NO ON A BILL THAT WOULD HAVE INVESTIGATED SUSPECT MILITARY
CONTRACTORS
Jeff Sessions Voted Against Investigating Contracts Awarded To Contractors For The Military
Action In Afghanistan And Iraq And To Fight The War On Terrorism. [S.Amdt.2476, Vote 316, 109th
Congress, 11/10/05]
2016: JEFF SESSIONS EXPRESSED REGRET FOR SUPPORTING THE IRAQ WAR
DC Examiners Byron York: Jeff Sessions, Who Came To The Senate In 1997, Supported The War
In Iraq All The Way. Reassessing It All Has Been Painful, He Told Me After The Trump Speech,
On 4/27/16. Sitting up front at the Mayflower was Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, whose early endorsement
of Trump was enormously helpful in lending Trump credibility, as well as serving as a source of staff and
advice. Sessions, who came to the Senate in 1997, supported the war in Iraq all the way. Reassessing it
all has been "painful," he told me after the Trump speech. [DC Examiner, 4/27/16]

Jeff Sessions On Reconsidering His Prior Support For The Iraq War: "It's A Painful Thing
For Me, Because I Was A Total Supporter Of It In Retrospect I Think It's Fair To Say It
Was A Risky Proposition From The Beginning. [DC Examiner, 4/27/16]

Jeff Sessions On The Iraq War: President Bush And Fabulous Work By The United States
Military, Courageous Work, Helped Create A Government In Iraq That Had A Chance To
Survive. [DC Examiner, 4/27/16]

HE ALSO CALLED PRESIDENT OBAMAS DECISION TO PULL OUT OF IRAQ PERHAPS HIS
WORST MISTAKE
Jeff Sessions On The Iraq War: I Do Believe President Obama, Perhaps His Worst Mistake Was
Pulling Out All The Troops, Creating Insecurity In Iraq, And It Got Away From Us. So Now We Have
A Very Bad Circumstance. [DC Examiner, 4/27/16]
AND BLAMES OBAMA FOR THE FAILURE OF IRAQS DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT
DC Examiners Byron York: The Latter Part Of Sessions' Answer Is Standard Republican
Doctrine. George Bush Started The War, There Were Problems, But It Was Won, And Then
President Obama Messed Everything Up. [DC Examiner, 4/27/16]

Jeff Sessions On The Iraq War: "Well, I Agree That We Went Into It With High Hopes For
Creating A Democratic Government, Not Fully Recognizing The Difficulty Of The Task.
[DC Examiner, 4/27/16]

Jeff Sessions On The Iraq War: It Failed Because Of Actions, I Think, In Theby [Sic]
President Obama, But There Are Any Number Of Other Ways It Could Have Failed. But It
Might Have Been Successful. [DC Examiner, 4/27/16]

Jeff Sessions On The Iraq War: The Extent Of Our Effort To [Democratize Iraq] Was
Extraordinary, And I Think One Lesson Learned From That Is We've Got To Be More
Careful In The Future. [DC Examiner, 4/27/16]

Right to Immigrate
IN 2015, THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE VOTED ON A MEASURE TO CODIFY THE RIGHT
OF MUSLIMS TO IMMIGRATE TO THE UNITED STATES
Breitbart: The Senate Judiciary Committee Declared On Thursday That Muslims Living In Foreign
Nations Have A Global Right To Immigrate To The United States. In response to Donald Trumps
call for a temporary pause on Muslim migration, the Senate Judiciary Committee declared on Thursday
that Muslims living in foreign nations have a global right to immigrate to the United States. [Breitbart,
12/10/15]
JEFF SESSIONS SAID THAT LEGISLATION REAFFIRMING THE RIGHT OF MUSLIMS TO
IMMIGRATE TO THE UNITED STATES EXTENDED NEW PROTECTIONS TO NON-CITIZENS
Breitbart: Sen. Jeff SessionsSays The Measure [To Reaffirm The Right Of Muslims To
Immigrate To The United States] Represents An Unprecedented Effort To Extend Americans
Constitutional Rights And Protections To Foreign Citizens Living In Foreign Countries. Sen. Jeff
Sessions, who fought against the amendments passage, says the measure represents an
unprecedented effort to extend Americans constitutional rights and protections to foreign citizens living in
foreign countries. [Breitbart, 12/10/15]
AND THAT EXTENDING A HUMAN RIGHT TO IMMIGRANTS UNDERMINED UNITED STATES
SOVEREIGNTY

Breitbart: Sessions Said A Bill To Reaffirm The Right Of Muslims To Immigrate To The United
States Would Constitute A Move Toward The Ratification Of The Idea That Global Migration Is
A Human Right, And A Civil Right. In response to Donald Trumps call for a temporary pause on
Muslim migration, the Senate Judiciary Committee declared on Thursday that Muslims living in foreign
nations have a global right to immigrate to the United States. Jeff Sessions, who fought against the
amendments passage, says the measure represents an unprecedented effort to extend Americans
constitutional rights and protections to foreign citizens living in foreign countries. Sessions said it would
constitute a transformation of our immigration system. In effect, it is a move toward the ratification of the
idea that global migration is a human right, and a civil right and that these so-called immigrants rights
must be supreme to the rights of sovereign nations to determine who can and cannot enter their borders.
[Breitbart, 12/10/15]
Breitbart: Sessions Said A Bill To Reaffirm The Right Of Muslims To Immigrate To The United
States Would Be A Move Toward The Ratification of The IdeaThat These So-Called
Immigrants Rights Must Be Supreme To The Rights Of Sovereign Nations To Determine Who Can
And Cannot Enter Their Borders. In response to Donald Trumps call for a temporary pause on
Muslim migration, the Senate Judiciary Committee declared on Thursday that Muslims living in foreign
nations have a global right to immigrate to the United States. Jeff Sessions, who fought against the
amendments passage, says the measure represents an unprecedented effort to extend Americans
constitutional rights and protections to foreign citizens living in foreign countries. Sessions said it would
constitute a transformation of our immigration system. In effect, it is a move toward the ratification of the
idea that global migration is a human right, and a civil right and that these so-called immigrants rights
must be supreme to the rights of sovereign nations to determine who can and cannot enter their borders.
[Breitbart, 12/10/15]
JEFF SESSIONS WARNED THAT REAFFIRMING THE RIGHT OF MUSLIMS TO IMMIGRATE TO THE
UNITED STATES WOULD LEAD TO ANOTHER TERRORIST ATTACK LIKE THE ONE IN SAN
BERNARDINO IN 2015
Breitbart: On A Bill To Reaffirm The Right Of Muslims To Immigrate To The United States:
Sessions Seemed To Imply That This Could Allow For More Attacks Such As What Occurred In
San Bernardino Last Week. Sessions seemed to imply that this could allow for more attacks such as
what occurred in San Bernardino last week, where a radicalized foreign citizen was able gain entry to the
United States on a fianc K-1 visa: If we say it is improper to consider religion it would mean that even
asking questions of a fianc seeking a visa about his or her views on any religious matter, say on the idea
of pluralism versus religious supremacy, would be improper because its improper to favor or disfavor a
religion. It is improper to favor or disfavor any interpretation of religion, even if it is a perversion of a
religionits still a religion to that person. [Breitbart, 12/10/15]
Jeff Sessions On A Bill To Reaffirm The Right Of Muslims To Immigrate To The United States:
This Amendment Would Mean, For Instance, That The United States Could Not Favor For Entry
The Moderate Muslim Cleric Over The Radical Muslim Cleric. This amendment would mean, for
instance, that the United States could not favor for entry the moderate Muslim cleric over the radical
Muslim cleric. We have huge unrest in the Middle East. An argument has been made by some that we
should prioritize resettling Muslim immigrants in the region and prioritizing the entry of persecuted
Christians; this measure would forbid such considerations. Keep in mind, current refugee law requires us
to consider persecution on account of an individuals religion; this would ask us to discard, or undermine,
that longstanding practice. [Breitbart, 12/10/15]
SESSIONS CLAIMED THAT THIS AMENDMENT AFFORDED ALL OF THE RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES
OF CITIZENSHIP TO NON-CITIZENS
Breitbart: Sessions Suggested That Under A Bill To Reaffirm The Right Of Muslims To Immigrate
To The United States, A Religious Muslim Who Espoused Undemocratic Beliefs Could Claim
Discrimination If Not Permitted To Enter The Country. A U.S.-born citizen who subscribes to

theocratic Islam has a freedom of speech that allows them to give a sermon denouncing the U.S.
constitution or demanding it be changed. But, under this amendment, a foreign religious leader living
overseas could demand a tourist visa to deliver that same sermon and claim religious discrimination if it is
not approved. I think it is a dangerous step. [Breitbart, 12/10/15]
AND CLAIMED THAT POOR IMMIGRATION SCREENING HAD LED TO THOUSANDS OF CRIMES
AGAINST AMERICANS
Jeff Sessions On Immigration Control: Poor Screening Has Resulted In Thousands Of Crimes
Against Americans. The rights that have been neglected by this Congress are the rights of the
American people. The rhetoric today would have you believe we have been operating some kind of
closed-door immigration policy. The opposite is true. No nation on earth has ever let in more people over
a shorter period of time. We have admitted 59 million immigrants since 1965. We have admitted 1.5
million immigrants from Muslim countries since 9/11Poor screening has resulted in thousands of crimes
against Americans. [Breitbart, 12/10/15]

JUDICIARY
Judicial Nominees
2005: SESSIONS SPOKE IN SUPPORT OF GIVING UP-OR-DOWN VOTES TO JUDICIAL NOMINEES
BY APPEALING TO CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION
Jeff Sessions: The Spirit Of The Constitution [Says] To Give Judges Up-Or-Down Votes. The
constitutional option [ circumventing a minority filibuster]ought to be used only in the most serious
circumstancesthe

most serious circumstances of the kind we have today when, after 200 years of
tradition, 200 years of following the spirit of the Constitution to give judges up-or-down votes, the Senate
is systematically altered as it was in the last Congress. [Jeff Sessions Senate Floor Speech, 5/24/05]
AND SENATE NORMS
Jeff Sessions: Since The Founding Of The Republic, We Have Understood That There Was A TwoThirds Supermajority For Ratification And Advice And Consent On Treaties And A Majority Vote
For Judges. [Jeff Sessions Senate Floor Speech, 5/23/05]
SESSIONS SPOKE IN SUPPORT OF NOMINATIONS MADE IN THE SECOND HALF OF THE LAST
YEAR OF A PRESIDENTIAL ADMINISTRATION
Jeff Sessions On The Senate Floor In 2008: There Is No Reason For Stopping The Confirmation
Of Judicial Nominees In The Second Half Of A Year In Which There Is A Presidential Election. I
would say there has been talk about invoking the so-called Thurmond Rule. The Thurmond Rule could
sort of be, if you want it to be, an excuse for slow-walking nominees and not approving the nominees who
ought to be approved just because there is a Presidential election on the horizon. Majority Leader Harry
Reid mentioned last night that the so-called rule would be invoked in June. Senator [Patrick] Leahy has
mentioned before he would invoke it in the second half of this year. Let me say this about the Thurmond
Rule. It is a myth. It does not exist. There is no reason for stopping the confirmation of judicial nominees
in the second half of a year in which there is a presidential election. [Washington Post, 2/23/16]
SESSIONS SPOKE POSITIVELY OF REPUBLICANS PAST DECISIONS TO NOT BLOCK ALL OF
PRESIDENT CLINTONS PICKS WHEN THEY CONTROLLED THE SENATE
Jeff Sessions: Republicans Voted To Give [Bill Clinton Judicial Nominees Marsha Berzon And
Richard Paez] An Up-Or-Down Vote, Even Though We Intensely Opposed Them. The Republican
majority leader of the Senate, Trent Lott, called [Bill Clinton Judicial Nominees Marsha Berzon and

Richard Paez] up and asked for an up-or-down vote by cloture motion. Those of us who opposed themI

certainly was one of themvoted

for cloture,voted to give them an up-or-down vote, even though we

intensely opposed them. They were given an up-or-down vote, and they were confirmed. [Jeff Sessions
Senate Floor Speech, 5/19/05]
SESSIONS ARGUED AGAINST THE USE OF THE FILIBUSTER TO BLOCK A CLOTURE VOTE
Jeff Sessions To Senate Republicans: Dont Filibuster. We Need To Give Them An Up-Or-Down
Vote. I was a new Member of the Senate, as the Senator from California said she was. He [Hatch]
stepped up and said: Dont filibuster. We need to give them and up-or-down vote. The then-majority
leader, Trent Lott, moved for cloture to give them an up-or-down vote. I voted to give [Marsha] Berzon And
[Richard] Paez an up-or-down vote, and we did that. [Jeff Sessions Senate Floor Speech, 5/23/05]
AND HE ASKED FOR THE SAME COURTESY TO BE RETURNED BY THE DEMOCRATIC
MINORITY FOR GEORGE W. BUSHS NOMINEES
Jeff Sessions On Two Judicial Nominees Put Forward By George W. Bush: They Deserve Fair
ConsiderationAn Up-Or-Down Vote, Not A Filibuster. [Priscilla Owen and Janice Rogers Brown]
are both immensely qualified to serve on the Federal bench. They deserve fair consideration by this
body. That should come in the form of an up-or-down vote, not a filibuster. [Jeff Sessions Senate Floor
Speech, 5/18/05]

Merrick Garland
JEFF SESSIONS SPOKE HIGHLY OF MERRICK GARLAND DURING HIS CONFIRMATION
HEARINGS FOR THE D.C. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS IN 1997
Jeff Sessions, On Voting No On Merrick Garlands D.C. Circuit Court Of Appeals Nomination In
1997: I Would Feel Comfortable Supporting Him For Another Judgeship. While Sessions was a
no vote on Garland, his dissent at the time was not based on Garland's qualifications but on Sessions's
belief that the circuit court had a small caseload and that the open seat on the court didn't need to be
filled. Back then, Sessions said Garland has a high position with the Department of Justice and, by all
accounts, does a good job there, according to Think Progress, which cited the Congressional Record.
There will be a number of judgeship vacancies in the D.C. trial judges. He has been a trial lawyer. He
would be a good person to fill one of those. I would feel comfortable supporting him for another
judgeship. [AL.com, 3/16/16]
Jeff Sessions, On Voting No On Merrick Garlands D.C. Circuit Court Of Appeals Nomination In
1997: Garland Has A High Position With The Department Of Justice And, By All Accounts, Does A
Good Job There. While Sessions was a no vote on Garland, his dissent at the time was not based on
Garland's qualifications but on Sessions's belief that the circuit court had a small caseload and that the
open seat on the court didn't need to be filled. Back then, Sessions said Garland has a high position with
the Department of Justice and, by all accounts, does a good job there, according to Think Progress,
which cited the Congressional Record. There will be a number of judgeship vacancies in the D.C. trial
judges. He has been a trial lawyer. He would be a good person to fill one of those. I would feel
comfortable supporting him for another judgeship. [AL.com, 3/16/16]
JEFF SESSIONS OPPOSED MERRICK GARLANDS INITIAL NOMINATION TO THE FEDERAL
BENCH IN 1997 ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE COURTS WORKLOAD DID NOT REQUIRE
ANOTHER JUSTICE
My Central Jersey.coms Ronald Goldfarb Said Jeff Sessions Voted Against Confirming Merrick
Garland To The Federal Bench In 1997 Because He Believed No Additional Justice Was Necessary

For That Court. When confirmed by the Senate in 1997 (there was a long delay after he was nominated
not related to his qualifications) the vote was 76-23, including a majority of the Republicans. All of the
opposition did come from Republicans, but it was based on their belief that there was no need for an
additional judge on the court. Among those voting for confirmation were current senators John McCain,
Orrin Hatch, Susan Collins and Jim Inhofe while Mitch McConnell, Chuck Grassley (currently chair of the
Judiciary Committee), and Jeff Sessions were among those who voted against the nominee believing that
no additional judge was needed. [My Central Jersey.com, 4/6/16]
2016: SESSIONS CLAIMED THAT THERE WAS A TRADITION AGAINST JUDICIAL
CONFIRMATIONS IN THE LAST YEAR OF A PRESIDENCY
Jeff Sessions In 2016: The Tradition Is Not To Confirm Someone In The Last Year. Were just not
going to move this nominee because its going to allow the next president to fill this seat. Weve lost a
great, conservative, brilliant justice. As a matter of fact, the tradition is not to confirm someone in the
last year and as [Senator] Pat Leahy, when he chaired the committee, has chaired the Judiciary
Committee for many years; he just refused time and again to move nominees. [Washington Post,
2/23/16]
AND THAT IT WAS THE WILL OF THE SENATE TO NOT CONFIRM A NOMINEE BEFORE THE
NEXT INAUGURATION
Office of Senator Sessions: The Senate Has Long-Since Resolved To Wait Before Considering
Any Nominee. The Senate has long-since resolved to wait before considering any nominee, Sessions
said through a spokesman. Despite the dog and pony show from the White House, no nominee will
receive a hearing, and Senator Sessions' focus is appropriately elsewhere at this time. The issue will be
revisited in January. [AL.com, 3/16/16]
Jeff Sessions On Merrick Garlands Nomination To The Supreme Court: I Dont Want To Hear Any
Crocodile Tears From Barack Obama, And Chuck Schumer And Patrick Leahy. This Is A Big Deal
With Me. And Were Not Moving This Nomination. And Its Going To Be Decided By The Next
Election. Sessions said that he didnt want crocodile tears from the president or other Senate
Democrats over Republican plans to block confirmation of Obamas nominee. I dont want to hear any
crocodile tears from Barack Obama, and Chuck Schumer and Patrick Leahy, he said. This is a big deal
with me. And were not moving this nomination. And its going to be decided by the next election.
[Buzzfeed, 2/18/16]