Schatz Puts Hold on Trump Nominees

A small step to reclaim Congress' rightful authority.

WSJ (“Democratic Senator Says He Will Stall Trump Nominees Until USAID Is Back“):

Sen. Brian Schatz (D., Hawaii) said he would place a “blanket hold” on all of President Trump’s State Department nominees until his administration’s attack on the leading foreign-assistance agency ends, a move that threatens to stall Trump’s ability to get his foreign-policy team in place.

Schatz’s threat came as Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency aims to close the U.S. Agency for International Development; the agency’s existence as an independent government organization is codified in federal law. Over the weekend, DOGE staffers forced their way into USAID’s headquarters in Washington, gaining access to classified information and closing the building to employees on Monday.

Schatz said he would block any of Trump’s diplomatic confirmations until USAID again is allowed to operate normally and the administration ceases its “authoritarian behavior.” Such a hold would halt the Senate’s ability to move bills quickly, and require Senate Majority Leader John Thune to use precious floor time to advance the president’s nominees through the confirmation process.

“I will oppose unanimous consent,” he told The Wall Street Journal. “I will vote no. I will do maximal delays until this is resolved.”

Given how much of the illegal takeover of our institutions is coming from Musk and other unaccountable figures—or on orders from Acting officials not subject to Senate confirmation—it’s unclear how much impact this will have. But it’s both a principled stand and a targeted use of the minority’s power well within the norms of our system.

FILED UNDER: Congress, US Politics, , , , , ,
James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is a Professor of Security Studies. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm veteran. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.

Comments

  1. Andy says:

    I’ve never been a fan of holds, especially from a single Senator, but given the circumstances, it’s really hard to argue against using this tool.

    We will all learn to love the strange and undemocratic powers of the Senate again.

    13
  2. Michael Reynolds says:

    @Andy:
    Until Trump orders Thune to eliminate those powers. At the first sign of effective Democratic opposition, down goes filibuster.

    11
  3. DK says:

    So Musk said USAID is being shuttered.
    Rubio now says, no, he’s acting head of USAID.

    Chaos and incompetence across the board. Should be great for US power and influence.

    22
  4. Jen says:

    @DK: In a battle of wills between Musk and Rubio, I think Rubio folds faster than a cheap lawn chair. The only thing that gives me pause is the fact that no one in government wants someone else to hack away at what they control.

    Also, Rubio is somewhere in Central America right now–does he know that his employees have been locked out of the building?

    What. A. Mess.

    9
  5. JKB says:

    Excellent. Time to strip the informal practice of these holds of cover and spread it out before the voters. Be interesting to see if the practice “holds”. We need disruption in Congress no matter which way it goes.

    1
  6. Matt Bernius says:

    Hey @JKB, it seems like you from a few years ago had a different principled opinion about this stuff.

    JKB says:
    Friday, 3 November 2023 at

    This is terrible. Imagine a senator holding firm that the legislative branch should do its constitutional duty to advise and confirm rather than rubber stamp the unelected career bureaucrats. Why it’s “unDemocratic”.

    All Tuberville is doing is holding the Senate to the Constitution instead of going along with abrogation by laziness. And let’s face it, Schumer could call a vote to remove the ability of a single senator to put a hold on the laziness of the rest. But the others want that power for when they’ve a partisan issue.

    To be fair, a bunch of people who objected to Tuberville’s actions at the time will embrace this strategy.

    I think most sane people will acknoweldge some pretty significant differences in the stakes between that protest and this one.

    22
  7. DK says:

    @Matt Bernius: Count me in as opposing this “hold,”* too. I don’t think Democrats should shield the American people from the consequences of voting Republican. Put me in the ‘let it burn’ and ‘get somebody else to do it’ camp.

    (It’s not at all clear what Schatz intends to do. He said a blanket hold, but he also said delay tactics like forcing votes instead of unanimous consent.)

    3
  8. Beth says:

    @Michael Reynolds:

    Good.

    @DK:

    Sure, but anything that gets us closer to eliminating the filibuster the better. The sooner it’s gone the harder it will be to bring back.

    2
  9. MarkedMan says:

    @Andy: We must fight the fascists with every legal means. That doesn’t make these rules and traditions good, but they are tools that exist in the moment.

    3
  10. Dutchgirl says:

    Hey, that’s my senator! This is action is in line with the messages flying at congress from Hawaii constituents. I’m not going to clutch my pearls and tut tut that it’s unseemly. When the hooligans are already past the gate, I’m not going to stand on propriety.

    10
  11. MarkedMan says:

    @Matt Bernius:

    To be fair, a bunch of people who objected to Tuberville’s actions at the time will embrace this strategy

    As I tried to state above, this is like fighting a fire – you don’t bring up arguments over better ways to organize the fire brigade when the building is on fire. This is the ridiculous “Norms” discussion all over again.

    13
  12. ptfe says:

    At a certain point you have to take on the Nazis. I get that DK thinks there’s still “let it burn” to do, and I wish only economic pain on the idiots and assholes who voted for Trump – they should hurt for this.

    But I also think this weekend was an inflection point, where either we have a democracy come March or we’re figuring out what America looks like under actual authoritarianism. At that point, “let it burn” probably means pain for everyone I love and a whole lot of people who have spent a whole lot of time trying to make the world better. They don’t deserve this.

    16
  13. Kurtz says:

    @ptfe:

    At that point, “let it burn” probably means pain for everyone I love and a whole lot of people who have spent a whole lot of time trying to make the world better. They don’t deserve this.

    This.

    @DK:

    I understand wanting to let it burn. And, well, I feel, to some degree, the same way. I’ve written about the difficulty I had during Trump Part I squaring having to defend a rotted system from a rotten, ignorant narcissist.

    Except, there is going to be a lot of collateral damage to the very people you claim to stand with. If you are prepared for that, fine. But I have little confidence that whatever comes from this will fix a goddamn thing. What’s the adage? When there is blood in the streets, buy land. And who will be able to do that but those who already have it?

    If it doesn’t give you any pause at all, I find that concerning.

    Feel free to correct me, but from what you have written, you grew up economically privileged. I recognize that is not the only kind of privilege. IIRC, you have said in the past, you will be fine no matter what. I am not in that position. Despite the fact that both my parents are still working in their mid-70s, and have both worked their asses off their whole lives. Certainly, I blame myself for my own position. But at the same time, there is a major difference between the two of us if we call for conflagration. One of us may not turn out okay.

    It opens the door to fairly question how different you are from DeSantis in Guantanamo or Maury Levy. Holding the briefcase while encouraging the one with the waterboard or shotgun to do their thing, well, I think you know where I am going.

    If this pisses you off, feel free to hurl insults like you do at JKB and the others–you know the differences between me and those people. Though I will say, you did misread one of my posts very recently, so I don’t know. But I think you know what I am saying is fair especially if you don’t know where I stand on things after all the interactions we have had.

    To be clear, this is not a condemnation, by any means. I just cannot tell if you have fully accepted all that what you are calling for entails. Sort of like all those people wearing ugly-ass hats supporting mass deportation who have not even considered what that would actually look like.

    I hope you’re not like them in that regard, even if I think your worldview is closer to mine.

    6
  14. Andy says:

    @DK:

    Count me in as opposing this “hold,”* too. I don’t think Democrats should shield the American people from the consequences of voting Republican.

    I go back and forth on this and I agree with your sentiment quite a bit, at least in principle.

    “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”

    It’s unfortunate Mencken isn’t alive today to see what he would say about the present situation.

    5
  15. Gustopher says:

    @Kurtz: it must be a really good time to be a left-wing accelerationist who believes that the current system must collapse to usher in a grand new age. They can even find common ground with the right-wing accelerationists! At least until the ushering in a new age starts.

    But, I’d be lying if I said I’m not a little disappointed that all the tariffs have been delayed. Actions need consequences, and if Canada stopped selling the US crude oil at below market rates, I’d be ok with that. Because otherwise everyone is just normalizing this behavior.

    At least they could put in tariffs on Jack Daniels. Get the EU involved (I hear Denmark is pretty pissed, maybe they can help) and just destroy one symbolic American company.

    The American voter wanted to touch the hot stove. If they don’t get burned, they will keep touching the hot stove. I don’t want to grab their metaphorical hand and hold it in the flame until the flesh falls off, but a decently painful first degree burn is needed.

    10
  16. gVOR10 says:

    @DK: OK, USAID is part of State, but the Sec of State gets to just appoint himself acting director?

    3
  17. Scott F. says:

    @Kurtz: @Andy:
    I believe there needs to be a mixture of both “good & hard” and “shielding” for the optimal impact on winning future elections. There need to be some actual bad outcomes that can be pointed to in order to say “Trump & his GOP did that.” That was the key learning from the 2024 elections. It’s not enough to warn voters of the bad things that might happen. They have to see the bad results in the real world and face at least some consequences themselves. So let the tariffs happen and let the Chamber of Commerce do some of the heavy lifting on pushing back on the Trump Administration.

    OTOH, USAID beneficiaries need some shielding. The national interest in international development is mostly in follow-on effects (world stability, good will, e.g.) so those negatively impacted aren’t in a position to push back. Plus, I would guess that the US constituency that wants a strong USAID doesn’t need to learn anything “good & hard” as they likely voted for Harris anyway.

    2