Nomination of Benjamin M. Flowers

The Senate debated the nomination of Benjamin M. Flowers to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. The Senate voted to confirm him. In floor remarks after the vote, Senator Durbin, a Democrat, said he had voted against the nomination, citing Flowers’s past work defending strict abortion bans, efforts to challenge mail-in ballots from the 2020 election, and arguments against birthright citizenship, which Durbin characterized as an extreme right-wing record.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text (opens in a new tab)

1 statement

Richard J. Durbin, IL

Democrat

Linked statement

“I voted against Benjamin Flowers for the federal appeals court. He has extreme right-wing views. He defended strict abortion bans, tried to throw out mail-in ballots from the 2020 election, and argued against birthright citizenship. He should not be a judge.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. President, yesterday, the Senate voted to confirm Benjamin Flowers to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Mr. Flowers’ record in both government service and private practice reflects his MAGA extremist agenda. He has given us no reason to think he will stop pursuing this agenda once he is on the Federal bench. During his time as Ohio solicitor general, Mr. Flowers defended Ohio’s severe restrictions on a woman’s right to choose. Kowtowing to corporate interests, he defended a cap on damages for a victim of child sex abuse. Mr. Flowers is an election denier. In November 2020, he authored a Supreme Court amicus brief asking the Court to reverse the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision that allowed for the counting of absentee ballots received after election day. Mr. Flowers is currently a partner at a rightwing law firm that he claims can ``grow up with the conservative legal movement’’ following President Trump’s election. He has argued against birthright citizenship, demeaned LGBTQ Americans, and claimed that efforts to lower the costs of prescription drugs are unconstitutional. Mr. Flowers’s public commentary reveals his lack of judicial temperament. He has been a frequent speaker for the Federalist Society, and his commentary has been extreme even for conservative legal circles. Mr. Flowers has questioned the need for the Trump administration to follow court orders in public remarks and in his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. He has even criticized the landmark bipartisan First Step Act, calling it ``terrible policy,’’ implausibly claiming it is unconstitutional, and arguing that Congress should repeal it. I opposed Mr. Flowers’ nomination. And I urged my colleagues to join me in doing so.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from issue 121

  1. House of Representatives Removing Barriers to Work for Disabled Americans Act 8 statements
  2. Senate Legislative Session 6 statements
  3. Senate Directing the Removal of United States Armed Forces from Hostilities Within or Against the Islamic Republic of Iran That Have Not Been Authorized by Congress--Motion to Discharge 6 statements
  4. Senate Vote on Pozos Nomination (Executive Calendar) 2 statements
  5. Senate Nomination of Benjamin M. Flowers 1 statement