Skip to content
LPBN-Icon-v1
ImmigrationProf Blog
A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Commentary on U.S. Attorney Nominee and Postville

By immigrationprof

We reported earlier this week about the continuing controversy surrounding U.S. Attorney nominee Stephanie Rose in Iowa.  ImmigrationProf reader Roderick Guerrerro raises the following issues about the nomination in a couple of e-mails:

“It really concerns me that little attention is being directed at Rose’s AUSA record and in particular her role in the Postville prosecutions. [Senator] Harkin touts her as leader but completely fails to hold her accountable for any thing bad that has happened in the Northern District office during her tenure. Once Harkin nominated Rose, he decided he would support her and does not want to lose face. He is very practiced at spinning and working to make issues go away. If only Harkin and his staff had exercised a “ton of good work” on their USA selection process.

As far as Harkin is concerned, Postville was the Immaculate Prosecution. He has never once condemned the Postville Prosecutions–in fact, he has ignored the U.S. Attorney’s Office’s conduct entirely. According to Harkin “Rose’s assignment at Postville was to work with defense attorneys to resolve as many cases as possible without a trial.” Why oh why was it so important that these cases be resolved “without trials”? Is Harkin completely ignorant of the role the “fast track exploding plea bargains” had in the Postville prosecutions? Does he approve? Quite the profile in courage!

No one is asserting that Rose should be held solely accountable for the Postville prosecutions. However, there is no doubt that the Postville prosecutions were the most important cases to occur in the Northern District of Iowa since Rose has been employed in the office. The fact that the cases occurred while she was in a leadership position and “played a central role in the raid and prosecution” by negotiating some 300 plea agreements over 11 days is an important part of her record that requires careful examination. For example, if Rose went case-by-case making sure each case was handled properly once she got involved as asserted by Harkin, how come the prosecution was so bollixed up?

Two things should jump out at anyone who carefully reviews Rose’s “leadership” record.

1. At the time of the Postville prosecutions, Rose was Deputy Chief of Criminal Division. She was not a low ranking member of the office but was in a leadership position as third in charge in the office for criminal prosecutions behind only the United States Attorney and the Chief of Criminal Division.

Clearly the Congressional record shows that the Postville prosecutorial decisions were made in the Northern District USA office. It seems more than implausible that Stephanie Rose while operating in the position of Chief Deputy of the Criminal Division had no clue that the Postville prosecutions were being planned by her colleagues in the Iowa office until just before the ICE raid. It also seems implausible that she would have no prior knowledge of the ICE Postville investigation nor that criminal complaints and criminal arrest warrants for 697 Postville workers that were being prepared and sought by her office some 30 days before the ICE raid. Either Rose was involved in the Postville prosecutions to a greater extent than she has being willing to acknowledge or she was displaying that leadership trick of “putting her head in the sand.” Neither of these conclusions is what we would expect of a United States Attorney candidate.

2. The Postville Prosecutions is but the premier example of the reprehensible policies that have occurred on her watch as a leader in the Northern District office. Recently, Federal District Judge Mark Bennett spelled out the extreme practice of the Northern District in sentencing cases in his opinion in the Beiermann case (http://tinyurl.com/r7v96w). He details that in only two of the 1576 felony sentencing cases held in the District since late 2008 had the USA office agreed to a downward variance. (The 1576 number does not include the 304 Postville sentencing.) It has been reported that no other United States Attorney Office has a sentencing record even close to these low downward variance agreement numbers. With these facts in mind, Judge Bennett then openly questions whether the Northern District USA office is fulfilling it is obligation “to ensure the fair and impartial administration of justice.” (See Beiermann, pages 21-23). Presumably several of these cases were ones that Rose directly handled herself and all of these cases occurred during her tenure as Chief Deputy of the Criminal Division. Clearly, her record at best, even without the Postville Prosecution stain on her record, is mediocre. Her role in the Postville prosecutions is more than troubling but her unqualified support for the Postville Prosecutions and ICE raid tactics even with the benefit of hindsight makes her nomination a complete disgrace.

Big Question: Did Rose ever raise her voice in opposition to the Northern District’s use of coercive prosecutorial tactics against the Postville workers? Even Privately?

Why not clear up the issue of Stephanie Rose’s role and release all emails and memos that describe her role? Likewise, she should volunteer to answer questions under oath about her Postville role and her views on basic criminal justice issues.

Even if it is true that Stephanie Rose played no direct policy role in the Postville prosecutions, she was still acting according to her oath as an officer of the court and as a federal prosecutor. Ethically and morally, her hands were not tied once she was given her Postville prosecution assignment to negotiate the “exploding” seven-day plea agreements with attorneys representing the workers. Even if the “raid was initiated by Washington,” or the prosecution designed by other prosecutors in her own office, as Chief Deputy of the Criminal Division and as an Assistant United States Attorney, Rose still had ethical duties. It was her responsibility to carefully review and scrutinize each prosecution for any ethical or constitutional due process problems. The ethical and constitutional issues created by the prosecutions were numerous and should have been obvious to her. Stephanie Rose was not able to understand the numerous defects in the prosecutions, she chose to overlook the defects or she just plain failed to see any problems with the prosecutions as executed. Any one of these conclusions raises serious questions about her judgment and fitness to be a United States Attorney at this point in her career.”

****

“Yesterday, June 30, 2009, the community of Postville, Iowa sought to have a dialogue with Senator Harkin and Stephanie Rose, his nominee to be the next United States Attorney of the Northern District of Iowa about the Postville prosecutions and her role in the prosecutions. KWWL television (NBC station in Waterloo, Iowa) did cover the meeting. The report is disturbing on several fronts: See http://tinyurl.com/mq3my4

1.  Stephanie Rose failed to attend or even send a written statement to the community.

2.  Senator Harkin failed to attend.. The U.S. Senate is in recess this week where was Harkin?

3.  Harkin has been a no show in Postville since the May 2008 ICE raid and prosecutions. Further, Harkin has never condemned the ICE raid and prosecutions. Harkin has not joined in the wide-spread call for a U.S. Department of Justice investigation into the Postville prosecutions. ( See http://tinyurl.com/ktrulf and http://tinyurl.com/q3a27c)

4.  The Harkin representative (unnamed) who did attend the meeting claimed not be able to appear before the camera. What kind of baloney is that? Why wouldn’t the Harkin rep go on camera?

5.  The Harkin representative who attended repeated the same tired line about Stephanie Rose having no responsibility for the Postville prosecutions. Hogwash!

6.  Why doesn’t Senator Harkin and Stephanie Rose condemn the Postville Raid and Prosecutions?

7.  Why don’t Senator Harkin and Stephanie Rose support the wide-spread call for a DOJ Investigation of the Postville Prosecutions?

Clearly, Senator Harkin’s and Stephanie Rose’s response to the Postville community’s invitation was just another of their attempts to sweep the Postville prosecutions under the rug. This insult should not be allowed to stand. More sunshine is required on Stephanie Rose and her role in the Postville prosecutions.

The Postville Prosecutions are arguably the most egregious use of federal prosecutorial power this century. At the time of the Postville Prosecutions, Rose was not a low ranking member of the office but was in a leadership position as third in charge in the office for criminal prosecutions behind only United States Attorney Dummermuth and Chief Deputy Richard Murphy. Recently, Stephanie Rose was asked about her role at Postville. She defended the raid and prosecutions saying “executing the massive operation required amazing effort and a ton of good work.” The plea agreements negotiated by Stephanie Rose were calculated to take advantage of the workers worry about families they had been supporting with their wages. Almost all workers were represented by lawyers with little or no immigration expertise that were forced to represent on average 17 workers during a very short period of time. Clearly this was premeditated and calculated to force the workers to waive all rights and submit to the criminal charges and then deportation after serving five months in prison. Stephanie Rose is apparently blind to the fact that the Postville workers were begging to be released to go support their families in Guatemala. Her “ton of good work” really amounted to ramming these cases through before anyone could raise an effective defense. Her record at best, even without the Postville Prosecutions, was mediocre, her role in the prosecutions is more than troubling but her unqualified support for the Postville Prosecutions and ICE raid tactics even with the benefit of hindsight makes her nomination a complete disgrace.”