Sworn In or Sworn At? The Battles Over Nominees

January 20th, 2025

Ethan Foss

Throughout the past week, President Donald Trump’s Cabinet nominees faced tough questions about their qualifications, policy positions, and potential conflicts of interest as part of a series of rigorous Senate confirmation hearings, a vital exercise of the Senate’s “Advice and Consent” authority. This process enables Senators to evaluate and confirm presidential appointees to key federal positions, ensuring they are qualified to serve the American people.

Pete Hegseth, nominated for Secretary of Defense, appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee on January 14, 2025. A former Fox News host and combat veteran, Hegseth described himself as a “warrior” prepared to reform the Pentagon’s culture to prioritize warfighting and readiness, explicitly rejecting “woke” diversity policies.

Democratic senators scrutinized Hegseth’s lack of high-level management experience and questioned his past controversial remarks regarding women and Black troops. Allegations of excessive drinking and a 2017 sexual misconduct incident were also raised, which Hegseth denied, labeling them as smear campaigns.

Despite the intense questioning, Republican senators commended Hegseth’s military service and unconventional background.

Pam Bondi, nominated for Attorney General, faced the Senate Judiciary Committee on January 15, 2025. During her hearing, Bondi was questioned about her activities following the 2020 election, including her involvement in claims of election fraud. Senator Alex Padilla (D-CA) pressed Bondi on these issues, leading to heated exchanges. Bondi maintained her composure, asserting “I am not going to be bullied by you.”

Senator Adam Schiff (D-CA) inquired about Bondi’s independence and potential bias, questioning her readiness to investigate Trump associates or advise the President on pardons. Bondi reassured the committee of her commitment to impartiality, stating, “There will never be an enemies list within the Department of Justice.”

Despite the contentious nature of the hearings, moments of bipartisanship emerged. During Senator Marco Rubio’s confirmation hearing for Secretary of State, Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) recalled a supportive gesture from Mr. Rubio, highlighting a “moment of true bipartisanship”.

However, the hearings also underscored deep political divisions. Politico observed that after decades of intense Senate confirmation hearings, they have become “all but useless as a vetting exercise or a check on presidential power.” Democrats predictably challenged nominees, while Republicans staunchly defended them, driven by fear of the incoming president and the primary election challenges he might unleash on them.

As the Senate continues to fulfill its constitutional duty of “Advice and Consent”, these confirmation hearings serve as a platform for thorough examination of nominees’ qualifications and policy positions. While moments of bipartisanship offer hope for a collaborative government, deep-seated divisions are still all too common within the 119th Congress.