Staff Reports
Embry Kidd, a Biden-appointed judge for the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, is currently embroiled in controversy due to his purportedly forgetting to disclose his lenient decisions in two child sex-related cases. It has now come to light that these decisions were overturned because they were a bit too soft for anyone’s comfort.
Republicans, eyes sharp for such blunders, are understandably irate. Indeed, one can’t help but wonder how such significant cases could slip his mind. It’s one thing to forget where you parked your car, but failing to mention cases involving child predators, well, that’s a whole new level of “oops.” Kidd had initially kept these cases off his nominee questionnaire but decided to quietly update it this week, perhaps hoping no one would notice. Spoiler alert: they did.
Washington Examiner: Biden judicial nominee failed to disclose since-reversed child sex case rulings https://t.co/YZHyzu3nZJ
— Ian Hansen 🇺🇸🇺🇸 (@IanHansenFeed) June 20, 2024
Senator Lindsey Graham and Senator Rick Scott are not amused. Graham is particularly vocal about how difficult it is to perform “advice and consent” duties when nominees like Kidd conveniently “forget” to mention their most controversial rulings. Scott, echoing Graham’s concerns, slammed Biden’s ongoing judicial nominations as a relentless endeavor to weaponize the judiciary—something no one asked for but everyone is sadly witnessing.
This incident exposes an ongoing trend of Biden nominees landing themselves in hot water due to omitted or conveniently forgotten details. Not long ago, Adeel Mangi, another Biden nominee, stirred the pot with undisclosed affiliations to left-wing activists and a terrorist financier. Hidden skeletons in closets are becoming a hallmark of Biden’s picks, and it’s making the Senate confirmation process a veritable circus of gotchas and “but wait, there’s more!”
During Kidd’s confirmation hearing, Senator Dick Durbin’s questions raised the alarm for Republicans. When Democrats start dropping subtle hints about “controversial” past decisions, it’s generally an indicator of some serious dirt. Utilizing research tools like Westlaw and LexisNexis revealed nothing because, surprise, these were oral rulings. Discovering this oversight must’ve felt like striking political gold for the GOP.
The two cases in question are as troubling as they come. U.S. v. D’Haiti saw a cheerleading coach involved with child pornography and inappropriate behavior with a minor. Kidd’s gentle assessment of this man’s “high character” didn’t hold much water. Another judge had to step in and correct the mistake, sending the predator to a proper pre-trial detention. The second case, U.S. v. King, dealt with a convicted sex offender possessing child abuse material. Kidd’s meek restrictions were overturned by a district judge who recognized the “compulsion of pedophilia” and took appropriate action.
These gross omissions have led Republicans to press Kidd for explanations, and his response conveniently passes the buck to the Justice Department and White House Counsel’s office. This buck-passing is all too familiar in Biden’s administration, where accountability seems to be an alien concept. Meanwhile, Republicans have located other examples of nominees disclosing all relevant cases, which puts Kidd’s so-called misunderstanding in a rather dim light.
In the end, it appears that Biden’s judicial nomination process is less a vetting procedure and more a catalog of “what can we conveniently forget to mention?” As this saga unfolds, it continues to reflect the broader concerns many have with the current administration’s approach to law and order — or the conspicuous lack thereof.
