Vice President Mike Pence cast the tie-breaking vote Wednesday to advance President Donald Trump’s controversial judicial nominee Thomas Farr toward confirmation to be a district judge for the Eastern District of North Carolina.
But there was another twist Thursday as Republican Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC), the key swing vote, reversed his previous support of Farr to oppose him, all but dooming his confirmation.
Pence advances judicial nominee
Farr was facing a divided Senate going into a procedural vote on his appointment to the federal judiciary Wednesday, with four Republican senators coming into focus as swing votes, Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-AL), Susan Collins (R-ME), Marco Rubio (R-FL), and Scott. But when time to vote came Wednesday afternoon, all except Scott had announced their support of Farr.
Scott was evasive about which way he would vote before the Senate convened Wednesday. The vote lingered at 49-50 before Scott voted “yes” to end cloture, bringing the vote to a tie that was broken by Pence. As vice president, Pence is also president of the Senate and appointed tie-breaker of the chamber.
Pence would not have been able to break the tie without Scott’s “yes” vote because of Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), who has vowed to vote against any Trump judicial nominees until Congress passes legislation to protect Robert Mueller’s investigation into collusion from interference.
Scott was considered a swing vote because he had previously doomed another Trump judicial nominee, Ryan Bounds. Bounds’ path to the circuit court was foreclosed earlier this year after Scott initially voted to end debate, only to oppose his nomination over critical remarks Bounds had made about diversity.
Sen. Scott dooms nomination
A similar scenario played out for Farr’s nomination on Thursday, as Scott swiveled to oppose Farr’s nomination in response to a Justice Department memo dating from George H.W. Bush’s presidency that linked Farr with alleged voter suppression in North Carolina in a 1984 campaign.
“This week, a Department of Justice memo written under President George H.W. Bush was released that shed new light on Mr. Farr’s activities. This, in turn, created more concerns. Weighing these important factors, this afternoon I concluded that I could not support Mr. Farr’s nomination,” Scott, the only black Republican senator, said in a statement.
Farr has been accused of helping implement racist voter fraud tactics while working on North Carolina Republican Sen. Jesse Helms’ campaign in 1984, allegedly distributed 120,000 postcards to black voters discouraging them from voting. Farr also worked on Helms’ 1990 campaign.
Scott was praised by Democrats for the “no” vote but only after sustaining criticism for his previous “yes” vote, including from Washington Post blogger Jennifer Rubin who called him a “fraud on civil rights.”
Controversial nominee
Democrats came out full force in opposition to Farr, with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) calling Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-KY) nomination of Farr an “absolute disgrace.” The nominee is also a fierce advocate of voter ID laws, which are widely criticized as discriminatory by the left. Farr was grilled over the alleged 1984 voter suppression by Democrats including Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).
“I was not aware that the cards had been sent until they had been sent and the manager of the Helms Committee received a letter about the cards from the Voting Rights Section of the United States Department of Justice. The manager of the Helms Committee then called me for legal advice,” he said in written responses to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Schumer’s griping with McConnell shows that the Democrats are having a rough time adjusting to rules changes implemented by their own party, when former Democrat Majority Leader Harry Reid in 2013 lowered the number of votes needed to end a filibuster on lower court judicial appointees from 60 to a simple majority.
President Trump and McConnell have led a successful push to pack the courts with conservative judges since Trump became president, adding two Supreme Court justices and a bevy of federal judges. Republicans managed to hold on to the Senate in midterm elections, so the president’s party still has considerable sway over judicial appointments.
But in times of such divisive nominations, without all hands on deck, holding a majority may be good for nothing.
No comments: