ICYMI: Sheria Clarke and Katie Lane, Trump Nominees for Lifetime Judgeships in South Carolina and Montana, Dodge Truth About 2020 Election, Jan 6
WASHINGTON, D.C. — At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday morning, Sheria Clarke and Katie Lane, Trump’s nominees to lifetime judgeships on federal district courts in South Carolina and Montana respectively, refused to tell the truth when asked who won the 2020 election.
When asked who won the 2020 election, Clarke’s answer started not with the facts (that Joe Biden won the election in 2020), but with an evasion that has become all too familiar among Trump judicial nominees during his second term: “Under our Constitution, the mechanism for electing a President…”
Senators Blumenthal and Whitehouse called out Clarke, Lane and the other nominees for their dishonesty and evasion, with Senator Whitehouse calling their responses “preposterous canned answers.”
See below for news coverage of Clarke and Lane’s evasive answers, which should be disqualifying for any judgeship anywhere in the United States.
Watch here: NBC 6 Montana
NBC 6 Montana: Senate hearing puts Trump nominee Katie Lane under scrutiny over independence, experience
Katie Lane sat straight-backed at the witness table, as the question moved down the line of nominees: Who won the 2020 election?
Moments earlier, Lane, President Donald Trump’s nominee to the United States District Court for the District of Montana, had repeatedly responded to Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) with a narrow description of the Constitution’s Electoral College process, even when pressed on who won the popular vote in 2020. Blumenthal, visibly frustrated, accused Lane and three other Trump judicial nominees of delivering canned answers under oath that subvert the Constitution.
“They’re an insult to this committee, but they also fundamentally show a complete lack of independence and backbone and impartiality, which are the fundamental requirements of a United States district court judge or a judge on any panel,” Blumenthal said.
Blumenthal circled back and asked Lane one final time who won the 2020 election, she started answering: “In 2020, President Biden was — ” but by then, Blumenthal moved on. The exchange had already become the defining moment of a tense Senate Judiciary Committee hearing that raised fresh questions about the Trump administration’s influence over the federal bench and about Lane’s own readiness for a lifetime appointment.
[…]
Josh Orton, president of Demand Justice, an advocacy group that campaigns for what it calls fair courts, said in an interview with NBC Montana that Lane’s reluctance to directly say Joe Biden won and to describe the Capitol assault as an attack should worry Montanans who may one day appear in her courtroom.
“What we saw yesterday in the hearing I think is fairly unprecedented in American politics,” Orton said, citing nominees like Lane who were “asked direct factual questions by senators under oath” but “weren’t able to answer directly who won the 2020 election” or what happened on January 6. He argued that Lane appeared to be repeating what she had been “told to say by the White House,” because “Donald Trump doesn’t want to admit he lost the 2020 election,” and that is one of Trump’s “requirements” for judicial picks and that “they cannot tell the truth that he lost the 2020 election.”
“If you’re going to be in the position of ruling on people’s everyday rights, if you can’t answer basic questions of fact about whether one man tried to overturn a presidential election, how can we trust you to fairly apply the rule of law to any other issue?” Orton said.
Orton urged Montanans to press their senators to oppose nominees who seem more loyal to a president than to the Constitution, saying that lifetime appointments mean today’s choices will shape the federal bench “for the rest of their lives.”
“Every American citizen deserves a fair shake in federal court no matter who’s in power, no matter how much money they have, no matter what political party they’re affiliated with,” he said, adding that Lane “did not meet that test.”
The State: Trump’s SC judge nominee takes fire, praise in Senate hearing
A rough spot for Clark came under questioning by Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Connecticut, when he asked her, “Mrs. Clarke, who won the 2020 election?”
Clarke dodged the question and began to explain to Blumenthal how presidents are elected. “Senator, under our Constitution, the mechanism for electing a president—“
Blumenthal, who had just heard a similar answer from another Trump nominee, who declined to say who won the 2020 election, interrupted Clarke, saying “I am amazed. I am just amazed by the insult to this committee of witness after witness who seeks to be a federal judge subverting our Constitution and showing how you have no independence, which is essential to a federal judge.”
[…]
After Clarke and her fellow three nominees continued to use similar language to avoid saying who won the 2024 and 2020 presidential elections, Blumenthal said, “You know, the answers here, which obviously are canned, prerehearsed, they are Orwellian in their denial of reality, and they are a subversion of this process. They are an insult to this committee, but they also fundamentally show a complete lack of independence and backbone and impartiality — which are the fundamental requirements of a U.S. District Court judge or a judge on any panel.”
Another senator, Sheldon Whitehouse, D-RI, told Trump’s nominees, “I hope you realize how ridiculous the four of you look spouting these preposterous canned answers in a forum in which a), you are supposed to tell the truth, and b), you are supposed to demonstrate the judicial capacity to make independent factual decisions in hard cases.”
Greenville News: Greenville attorney questioned on stance on 2020 election, January 6th
Clarke and the three other nominees were later criticized by Democratic Senate committee members for giving vague answers about the integrity of the 2020 election and the 2021 Capitol insurrection.
[…]
Blumenthal called the answer “canned” and “ridiculous.” The Connecticut senator then asked Clarke the same question, who began to answer as Westercamp had, but was interrupted by Blumenthal.
“I am just amazed by the insult to this committee of witness after witness seeking to be a federal judge, subverting the Constitution, and showing how you have no independence,” Blumenthal said.
South Carolina Public Radio: Sheria Clarke faces Senate Judiciary Committee, seeks confirmation as U.S. District Attorney for SC
During the hearing, she was questioned on Jan. 6 and the 2020 election results by Democrats. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D) Conn. criticized Clarke’s responses to those questions.
“I am amazed by the insult of this committee,” said Sen. Blumenthal. “…seeking to be a federal judge subverting our constitution and showing how you have no independence, which is essential to a federal judge.”
