Blog

WASHINGTON — Antonio Pozos, a Philadelphia lawyer nominated by President Donald Trump to become a federal judge in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, told a Senate panel on Wednesday that former President Joe Biden won the most Electoral College votes in 2020 — though he declined to say whether Biden won the popular vote or if the Capitol was “attacked” two months later.

In a confirmation hearing alongside three other judicial nominees, Pozos said Biden was certified as the president in 2020 and that he’d seen videos from Jan. 6, 2021 in which it “appeared that there was violence and trespass.”

“It’s profoundly troubling and I abhor violence,” said Pozos, a partner at Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath and a lecturer at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School.

But in the back-and-forth with U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D., Conn.), Pozos said he would “hesitate to characterize what occurred at the Capitol” when the senator asked directly if the building was “attacked” during the certification of votes.

“You hesitate to tell the truth here,” Blumenthal responded before shifting to the next nominee.

The line of questioning has become many Democrats’ main litmus test for those nominated by Trump for lifetime judicial appointments.

For years, the president has insisted without evidence that widespread voter fraud led to his defeat in 2020, despite Biden winning the popular vote by more than 7 million votes that year on top of his Electoral College win.

Trump’s history of spreading misinformation about elections has fueled fears that he’ll do it again during November’s midterm elections — as he did after the California primary just last week — and that his judicial appointees will undermine a system of checks and balances.

When all of the nominees facing the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday echoed each other in only saying Biden won the Electoral College, Blumenthal accused them of having “a new script, a new pre-negotiated effort to thread the needle [and] avoid the question.”

“You are protecting the lie by failing to acknowledge the truth,” Blumenthal said. “If you’re unwilling to show us you’re independent of the president at this early stage of your service, you disqualify yourself as judicial nominees.”

At least one Democrat who has signaled he doesn’t believe Pozos should be disqualified is U.S. Sen. John Fetterman.

The Pennsylvania Democrat decided against blocking his nomination during a traditional process that gives senators the opportunity to approve or reject a federal judicial nominee in their state.

It was the first time any Democrat declined to use that courtesy — in a process known as a “blue slip” — since Trump’s second term began in January 2025.

Two other Democratic senators, Elissa Slotkin and Gary Peters, of Michigan, however, followed Fetterman in returning a blue slip for a separate nominee in their state before Wednesday’s hearing. They said their decision was in part because of the nominee’s assurances to them that Biden won in 2020, that there was an attack on the Capitol, and that Trump cannot run for a third term.

Pozos also acknowledged during the hearing that Trump could not constitutionally win another term, which is something the president himself has declined to say.

Fetterman, from the 2020 election through Trump’s second election in 2024, frequently and forcefully rejected Trump’s claims of election fraud in Pennsylvania. His office did not provide a comment in response to questions from The Inquirer about why he allowed Pozos’ nomination to advance. The senator has also not said whether he will vote to confirm Pozos when the Republican-controlled Senate decides on the appointment.

But Fetterman’s move so far in the process was the latest in a series of high-profile moments in which he sided with Trump and the Republican Party while infuriating parts of his own base.

Demand Justice, a Washington, D.C.-based organization that is critical of Trump’s nominees because of their statements on the 2020 election, joined in the criticism of Fetterman and promised to launch a six-figure ad campaign against him because of the blue slip.

“John Fetterman just cleared the path for a Trump lifetime judicial nominee,” one of the digital ads states alongside an image of Trump and Fetterman with hearts around them.

“Our message to Senate Democrats is clear: greenlight Trump’s puppet judges, and we will call you out. No exceptions,” it continued.

That threat elicited bipartisan criticism at the beginning of the hearing Wednesday.

U.S. Sen. Katie Britt, an Alabama Republican speaking on behalf of committee chair U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley, called Demand Justice a “progressive dark money group” that “sought to undermine the blue slip practice and sew further division in our country.”

U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the top Democrat on the committee, also said the group was wrong to target senators who work toward agreement across party lines.

“If we can get bipartisan cooperation for the appointment of lifetime judges, we should do it,” said Durbin, who has voted for Trump’s judicial nominees more than any other Democrat, according to Demand Justice.

Each of the committee leaders commended Fetterman, Slotkin, and Peters for their decision — with Durbin praising them for “working in good faith with the White House.”

U.S. Sen. Dave McCormick (R., Pa.) also thanked Fetterman and said Pozos was nominated because of a recommendation from a commission that the pair of Pennsylvania senators put together to vet judicial nominees.

“Tony’s a successful attorney, a strong Pennsylvanian, a decorated public servant, and he’s eminently qualified for this role,” McCormick said during the hearing.

Pozos, 44, is a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Michigan Law School who worked as federal prosecutor before becoming a partner at Faegre Drinker in 2018.

As a trial attorney in the Criminal Fraud Section of the Department of Justice, he focused on corporate and individual healthcare fraud cases. McCormick said he had a “formidable track record of rooting out fraud, prosecuting those who abuse taxpayer dollars, and protecting Americans from predatory healthcare systems.”

In a questionnaire published by the Senate Judiciary Committee, Pozos also listed active memberships in the Federalist Society — the legal organization that has sought to appoint conservative judges across the country — as well as the Union League of Philadelphia and the Merion Cricket Club.

In addition to the election-focused inquiries, Pozos also faced questions about applying the False Claims Act — which penalizes individuals and companies from defrauding the government — and the controversial Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act that protects online platforms from liability for what their users post.

U.S. Sen. John Kennedy (R. La.) grew frustrated when he believed Pozos was not fully answering his question about whether, under Section 230, Facebook should be protected and if it should have the ability to decide what users see. Pozos, like other judicial nominees who say they cannot weigh in specifically on the types of cases they may have to rule on, began answering when Kennedy said he had “no idea what you’re talking about.”

“You’re better off just answering the question, you really are,” Kennedy said.

Asked by the Democratic chair about the importance of diversity — which Trump has widely sought to diminish — Pozos said he has mentored young lawyers “from a wide range of backgrounds” and that it was important to “get all pockets of talent wherever they may be in our country and welcome them into the legal profession.”

Pressed by Durbin if diversity is important in filling positions in the legal system, Pozos said, “If we are true to seeking out excellence wherever it may be, that question will be moot.”

“I doubt it,” Durbin responded.