Is there a way to throttle serial editors who insert minor corrections, unnecessary links and make other similar trivial edits to posts with the sole purpose of farming reputation by editing?
Additional info: the situation is clearly getting worse with a limited number of users proposing 10s of time daily edits as trivial as changing all in-line equations to block equations and adding capitalization to meet the minimum character requirement.
Users cannot gain more than 2k reputation from edits, cf. the "Can I earn reputation?" section here, so there is a natural and rather low limit to such "farming". Note that once users have more than 2k reputation their edits are no longer suggested but directly applied to a post, so they do not confer reputation after that anyway.
Minor corrections are not unnecessary ones, and the rejection reason of "too minor" for suggested edits was abolished SE-wide a while ago with the argument that any improvement is still an improvement, so I would caution against throwing minor corrections that are nevertheless still corrections in the same bin as truly unnecessary edits. Again, users can earn at most 2k reputation from such edits, so if you are concerned about users gaining major privileges that way, don't be (remember that close and reopen voting comes only at 3k reputation).
Users who repeatedly suggest edits that are rejected in review will be eventually banned from suggesting further edits, just like users providing low-quality answers or questions are banned from making further posts, cf. this meta post.
If you still see users repeatedly suggesting (or making) pointless or even harmful edits, consider pointing this out to them in a comment - you can ping editors of a post via @-mentions in comments. If you don't want to engage personally in comments or if they have ignored your previous comments, you can always raise a custom moderator flag explaining the issue. Pointless or even harmful edits are just as detrimental to quality as any other low-quality contributions and the moderator team will deal with them in that fashion.
I think you're being unkind when you assume the purpose is to farm reputation.
I suspect I know the user you mean since I've been seeing a lot of suggested edits that consisted mostly of adding links that didn't seem essential to me. But I have seen no reason to suspect the edits weren't suggested in good faith, and most of them I have approved.
You only get two points for an accepted edit and some of the edits showed a significant amount of effort. Perhaps I am being over generous, but my reaction was that at worst the user is guilty of an excess of enthusiasm.