[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 115 (Wednesday, July 15, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Page S4097]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                     Nomination of Jeffrey T. Kuntz

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, today, the Senate will vote to confirm 
Jeffrey T. 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.
  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.
  A closer look at the timeline suggests a different story. Judge Kuntz 
first discussed a possible judicial nomination with Senator Scott's 
office in November 2024, 2 months before he was assigned to this case.
  Judge Kuntz issued the majority opinion in Alexander on February 12, 
2025, ruling in favor of President Trump. Eight days later, he was 
contacted by the White House regarding a potential nomination.
  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.
  It'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.
  Yet again, we have another nominee who has been rewarded for his 
loyalty to the President with a lifetime appointment to the Federal 
bench. I urge my colleagues to oppose this nomination.

                          ____________________