Richard J. Durbin

Mr. President, Claims · 132 wordstoday, the Senate will vote to confirm Jeffrey T.¹ Kuntz to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. While Judge Kuntz was under consideration to fill a judicial vacancy, he was also presiding over Alexander v. Trump, in which he authored the majority opinion upholding a lower court’s ruling that Trump’s defamation lawsuit against the Pulitzer Prize Board could continue.² Judge Kuntz declined to directly answer my question about whether he made the defendants in Alexander aware, while the case was pending, that he was being considered by the plaintiff for a lifetime appointment to the bench. Instead, Judge Kuntz argued that he was not under consideration for this nomination, claiming that he did not interview with the White House until 2 weeks after the case had been decided.³ Procedure · 10 wordsA closer look at the timeline suggests a different story.Procedure Claims · 82 wordsJudge Kuntz first discussed a possible judicial nomination with Senator Scott’s office in November 2024, 2 months before he was assigned to this case.⁴ Judge Kuntz issued the majority opinion in Alexander on February 12, 2025, ruling in favor of President Trump.⁵ Eight days later, he was contacted by the White House regarding a potential nomination.⁶ In fact, Judge Kuntz discussed this case when he interviewed with the White House on February 28, just about 2 weeks after he issued his opinion.⁷ Reasoning · 40 wordsIt’s hard to believe that it is simply a coincidence that just 8 days after Judge Kuntz issued a ruling favorable to President Trump, he was contacted by the White House about a nomination and interviewed about it shortly thereafter. Positioning · 24 wordsYet again, we have another nominee who has been rewarded for his loyalty to the President with a lifetime appointment to the Federal bench.PositioningUnearned certainty The ask · 8 wordsI urge my colleagues to oppose this nomination.