Of all the sad examples of unqualified judicial nominees put forward by President Donald Trump, few were more confounding than the case of Thomas Farr.
Farr was a known protégé of one of North Carolina’s most notoriously racist politicians, the late Sen. Jesse Helms. Early in Farr’s nomination, damning evidence emerged that Farr not only defended, but also likely took part in, a Helms campaign scheme to scare African-American voters away from the polls. The plot involved threatening postcards mailed to citizens’ homes, with misleading warnings of possible arrest should they try to vote.
It was an egregious episode in our nation’s racist past, and it was not a secret. But a central player, Farr, seemed on track to cruise to confirmation as a federal judge in North Carolina’s Eastern District this year. Only at the 11th hour was his confirmation derailed by opposition from South Carolina’s Sen. Tim Scott, the Senate's only African-American Republican. Following Scott’s lead, other Republican senators, including Florida’s Marco Rubio, indicated that they too were uncomfortable voting for Farr.
Read more commentary:
Scott has been vocal about his opposition to Farr on the grounds of Farr’s history of voter suppression. In a letter to The Wall Street Journal, Scott wrote bluntly that “we should stop bringing candidates with questionable track records on race before the full Senate for a vote.” He went on to say that we must “embrace the power of unity,” and that if the Senate “votes on a candidate that doesn’t move us in that direction, I will not support him or her.”
He is right, and his outspokenness is sorely needed. That is why it would be incredibly heartening now to see other Republicans like Rubio, Sen. Susan Collins and others go public with a similar, uncompromising stand.
There is a yawning void in Republican principles
They are already in a strong position to do so. This is the second time Scott, with tacit support of at least one or two other Republicans, has effectively ended the candidacy of a judicial nominee whose record includes racist and bigoted writings or activities. The first of these nominees was Ryan Bounds, an Oregon attorney nominated for a seat on the 9th Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals.
Bounds had written scathingly about “feel-good ethnic hoedowns” at his alma mater, Stanford University. “The existence of ethnic organizations is no inevitable prerequisite to maintaining a diverse community,” he claimed, adding that “white students, after all, seem to be doing all right without an Aryan Student Union.”
Another judicial nominee, Brett Talley, was forced to withdraw a year ago for various reasons, including reports that he might have defended “the first KKK” in social media posts.
Senate GOP must draw a red line on racism
These missteps point to a breakdown in the screening and vetting process for judicial nominees, to be sure. But there is more going on here than a simple process failure. These nominations lived on for days, weeks and even months after disqualifying information emerged, because of the cravenness of Republican politicians afraid to buck the White House on any front. This indicates a yawning void where the principles of duly elected representatives ought to be.
So do recent reports that Farr and Bounds might be renominated by the White House. That would be an unconscionable slap in the face to the Senate’s only African-American member. Even worse than the disrespect shown to a single senator, however, is the harm that could be done to millions of people living within the jurisdictions of judges with records tainted by racism.
Senate Republicans should go on record now saying that they will honor the leadership shown by Tim Scott. They must state, publicly and unequivocally, that they will not support any judicial nominee with a record of racism or bigotry. It is a simple commitment to make, and one that would finally send a clear message to millions of Americans at risk of losing faith in our justice system: that there is a red line on racism that the Senate will not cross to confirm a judge.
Posts
Comments
Post a Comment