Jay Clayton's nomination to become the next Director of National Intelligence cleared a party-line Senate procedural vote Monday night, setting up a final confirmation vote this week despite unified Democratic opposition.
The Senate voted 51, 43 to end debate on Clayton's nomination, with every Democrat voting against advancing the former SEC chairman and federal prosecutor. Senate Majority Leader John Thune filed the motion to force the vote last Wednesday, after the nomination had already passed through the Senate Intelligence Committee. A final confirmation vote is expected by the end of the week.
If confirmed, Clayton will take over the Office of the Director of National Intelligence from acting DNI Bill Pulte, a former federal housing regulator whose appointment drew sharp criticism from both parties. The permanent vacancy opened four weeks ago when Tulsi Gabbard stepped down as intelligence chief, citing the need to care for her husband, who is battling an extremely rare form of bone cancer.
Thune used the Senate floor ahead of the vote to press Democrats on what he called a contradiction: publicly demanding a permanent DNI while refusing to confirm one. He pointed to Clayton's résumé, former chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission and former top prosecutor in the Southern District of New York, and argued the nominee's record should command bipartisan respect.
"Amid a heightened threat environment, having a proven leader in this role is especially important, and Jay Clayton fits this mold. Democrats have previously recognized his abilities."
Thune went further, accusing Democrats of playing "the same partisan games with this qualified nominee as they have for so many of President Trump's picks." He noted that Democrats had openly expressed frustration with Pulte's tenure as acting director, yet showed "no apparent rush to confirm a permanent director of national intelligence."
The majority leader also tied the standoff to a broader failure. Democrats, he said, "were so worked up over the president's temporary choice for this position, they allowed our nation's most important counterterrorism tool to go dark for the first time ever." That episode, the first-ever lapse in a key surveillance authority, became a flashpoint earlier this year when a House revolt over the intelligence pick blocked renewal of the FISA surveillance law.
Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chairman Mark Warner, the panel's top Democrat, had said he was "anxious to get a permanent DNI" to replace Pulte, whom he called one of the least qualified people to hold the job. Yet Warner did not vote to advance Clayton on Monday night. No Democrat did.
The disconnect is hard to miss. Democrats spent weeks criticizing Pulte's lack of intelligence credentials. Some went so far as to urge federal employees to withhold sensitive information from the acting director, a position championed publicly by Hillary Clinton. Now, with a Senate-confirmable nominee on the floor, every Democrat voted no.
Clayton's confirmation hearing last week drew heat from Democrats over his remarks on election fraud and the 2020 presidential race. Clayton pushed back directly during the hearing.
"I'm not an election denier. Joe Biden was certified as the president of the United States."
That evidently was not enough for the minority. The party-line vote suggests Democrats were less interested in Clayton's actual answers than in denying the administration a confirmation win.
Clayton's path to the vote was not clean. During President Trump's July visit to Turkey for a NATO summit, the Trump administration, through Clayton, issued subpoenas to several New York Times journalists. The subpoenas demanded phone records and grand jury testimony "in regard to an alleged violation of federal criminal law," the Times reported. The move followed Times reporting on an Air Force One, related story.
Norm Eisen, an attorney and executive director of the Democracy Defenders Fund, called the subpoenas "menacing."
"If the government were to prevail here, no reporter in America would be safe in having a source on the functioning of the federal government."
The Justice Department withdrew the subpoenas last week, before Clayton's confirmation hearing. The withdrawal removed a live legal controversy from the proceedings but did not erase the political damage. Democrats used the episode to question Clayton's judgment, even as the underlying legal matter was resolved.
President Trump first nominated Clayton on June 11, praising him in a Truth Social post.
"Few people anywhere in the Legal Community are respected at the level of Jay. I encourage the United States Senate to confirm Jay as soon as possible."
But the path from nomination to vote was anything but fast. Trump told Clayton not to show up to his original hearing, delaying the process for weeks. The reason, tied to the president's push for separate legislative priorities and the search for a new U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, left Clayton's nomination in limbo during a period when the intelligence community was operating without a confirmed leader. When Clayton drew initial praise from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, the bipartisan goodwill did not survive the delay or the hearing.
Meanwhile, Pulte continued to reshape the intelligence office. On Sunday, the acting DNI announced on his X account that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence had completed its fourth round of what he called "thoughtful, measured layoffs." The ongoing restructuring underscored the urgency of installing a permanent director, and the cost of every week the Senate spends without one.
Clayton's résumé, SEC chairman, top federal prosecutor in Manhattan, is not a traditional intelligence background. Democrats have seized on that gap. But the same critics spent months demanding anyone other than Pulte, and Clayton is the nominee who cleared committee and passed the procedural threshold. The Senate advanced Clayton on a straight party-line vote, and the final confirmation ballot is expected within days.
The intelligence community has been without a Senate-confirmed director for a month. Democrats say they want a permanent leader. They just keep voting against the only one on offer.
