Reached out to @ThomTillis and @SenatorBurr on this, both stand by Farr. Tillis spox said Farr the victim of "baseless claim posted on a left-wing blog," provided letter from @carterwrenn saying Farr didn't see postcards before they went out. #ncga #ncpol https://t.co/zcIuVvAA8L— Travis Fain (@TravisFain) December 18, 2017
"Good," tweeted Gupta, president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. "Now the nominations of Thomas Farr and [fellow Trump nominee] Damien Schiff must be withdrawn as well." BREAKING: @civilrightsorg is calling on @realDonaldTrump to withdraw the nominations of Matthew Petersen, Thomas Farr, and Damien Schiff. The American people deserve better than these nominees, who are all unfit to serve on our federal courts. Statement: https://t.co/P1acDrXI38 pic.twitter.com/R4Bbl2hW8u
Farr's nomination passed the Senate Judiciary Committee on a party-line vote. As of Monday, no vote by the full Senate had been announced. Farr has not responded to repeated efforts by the INDY to reach him for comment.
The INDY first reported apparent discrepancies in Farr's testimony on November 15. The Post editorialized against Farr on November 26 and again Sunday. The latest editorial urges the Judiciary Committee to reexamine several of Trump's federal appeals and district court nominees.
BREAKING: @civilrightsorg is calling on @realDonaldTrump to withdraw the nominations of Matthew Petersen, Thomas Farr, and Damien Schiff. The American people deserve better than these nominees, who are all unfit to serve on our federal courts. Statement: https://t.co/P1acDrXI38 pic.twitter.com/R4Bbl2hW8u— Vanita Gupta (@vanitaguptaCR) December 18, 2017
"The committee can start by calling back Thomas Farr, the nominee for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, to explain discrepancies regarding his knowledge of a voter-suppression effort by then-Sen. Jesse Helms’s 1990 campaign," the editorial board members wrote.