What specific Trump appointee or bill received a 100-0 Senate vote?

1. Marco Rubio’s 99–0 confirmation — the headline unanimous vote

Marco Rubio’s confirmation as a Cabinet-level appointee registered as a rare near-unanimous outcome in a deeply polarized Senate: multiple tracking sources record the Senate vote as 99–0 in Rubio’s favor ^[1]. Both Ballotpedia’s compilation of votes and narrative coverage identify Rubio as the first Trump cabinet appointee in 2025 to win unanimous senatorial support, making his confirmation the clearest answer to the question of a “100–0” or unanimous roll call in this set of records ^{[2] [3]}.

2. Why some reporting refers to unanimity while numbers show 99–0

Several trackers and timeline pages show Rubio’s vote as 99–0 rather than 100–0; modern Senate practice often yields unanimous or near-unanimous tallies that stop short of 100 due to vacancies, abstentions, or senators not voting that day (available sources do not mention the specific reason for the single missing vote in Rubio’s case). Ballotpedia’s and GovTrack-style listings explicitly record a 99–0 result, and The Guardian’s reporting frames Rubio as the “first cabinet appointee to win confirmation in a unanimous vote in his favor,” an editorial shorthand that aligns with the 99–0 roll call in the sources ^{[1] [3]}.

3. Other unanimous or near-unanimous committee actions, but not 100–0 final votes

Committee votes advancing nominees sometimes recorded unanimous committee approvals — for example, several committee votes to advance nominees such as Brooke Rollins and Sean Duffy were unanimous at the committee level (23–0 and 28–0 respectively) — but those are committee tallies, not full-Senate confirmation roll calls ^{[2] [1]}. The distinction matters: committee unanimity does not equate to a 100–0 confirmation by the full Senate ^[2].

4. Contrasting confirmations that were narrow or party-line

By contrast, many Trump nominees faced narrow margins: Pete Hegseth’s defense confirmation required a 51–50 tie-break by the vice president in committee or the full Senate (sources differ on exact posture) and other high-profile picks such as Tulsi Gabbard, RFK Jr., and others won by single-digit margins ^{[4] [3]}. The mix of near-unanimous and razor-thin votes underscores an explicit partisan split in the Senate’s treatment of Trump’s slate ^{[4] [3]}.

5. Why the user’s phrasing “100–0” matters — precision versus rhetoric

Asking for a “100–0” vote invites scrutiny of precise roll-call numbers. The sources supplied record Rubio as 99–0; some outlets describe his confirmation as “unanimous” in prose, which can be interpreted as rhetorical shorthand rather than an exact count of senators present ^{[1] [3]}. Reporters, campaigns, and supporters sometimes convert a 99–0 into “unanimous” language for emphasis; the underlying roll call in the public records remains the authoritative figure ^[1].

6. Limitations, sourcing and what’s not in the record

Available sources in this package do not show any full-Senate confirmation recorded as 100–0 for Trump appointees in 2025; the strongest documented unanimous outcome is Rubio’s 99–0 ^[1]. The sources also do not explain why one senator did not vote in Rubio’s roll call (available sources do not mention that reason). My assessment follows explicit roll-call tallies and committee reports in Ballotpedia and related trackers ^{[2] [1]}.

7. Bottom line for readers looking for a single-name answer

If the question seeks the appointee who received unanimous Senate support in 2025 coverage of Trump’s Cabinet, cite Marco Rubio — the roll call shows 99–0 and multiple trackers and editorial accounts treat his confirmation as the notable unanimous outcome among Trump nominees ^{[1] [3]}. If you require a strict 100–0 number, current reporting in the provided sources does not record any Trump appointee with a 100–0 full-Senate confirmation (available sources do not mention a 100–0 vote).