A Democratic senator pressed a Trump-nominated judge who refused to answer questions during his confirmation hearing for an appeals court vacancy on Wednesday.Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) had a sharp response to North Dakota U.S. District Court Judge Daniel Mack Traynor."When it comes to asking you basic questions about January 6, you won't answer those questions," Schiff said."The difference, senator, is that there are cases or controversies that I have before me as a district judge relating to individuals that have been charged for conduct that occurred on that date in this Capitol," Traynor said.Schiff mentioned how Traynor and 12 other conservative judges signed a letter urging a boycott on hiring law clerks from Columbia University amid the institution's handling of pro-Palestinian student demonstrations on the school's campus in response to Israel's war in Gaza, according to Reuters. In 2024, Traynor refused to recuse himself from a case involving university law school faculty regarding protests over the Dakota Access oil pipeline.Schiff asked if Traynor would recuse himself from other litigation involving Columbia.Traynor argued he held no particular bias against the university. Schiff pushed back."Your letter demonstrates a very clear bias, I'm not saying it's an unreasonable bias, but it is a bias," Schiff said. Traynor then again refused — for the second time in the hearing — to say who won the 2020 presidential election."I'm asking you the question," Schiff said."This is completely inconsistent with your involvement in the whole Columbia controversy," Schiff said. "Because you involved yourself in that controversy. You went out of your way. Nobody asked you to write that letter. You took this upon yourself to do, to insert yourself into that. But you're saying here you can't answer a simple question about who won the 2020 election because it would somehow implicate you in controversy. I'm sorry, there's no way to square those two things." SCHIFF: Who won the 2020 election?TRAYNOR: It is not appropriate for a judicial nominee to engage in discussion involving a matter of political controversySCHIFF: See, this is completely inconsistent with your involvement in the whole Colombia controversy. You went out of… pic.twitter.com/mzwggJo2XO— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) June 10, 2026