In several cases, a president named someone to the court temporarily via a recess appointment, and subsequently formally nominated them for a permanent position. When calculating the time between nomination and confirmation, we opted to follow the Senate’s practice of dating nominations from the date of the president’s official nominating letter to the Senate, and confirmations from the date of the final Senate vote on the nominations. ![]() ![]() We also consulted CQ Press, the Supreme Court Historical Society, and the court itself to supplement and cross-check the information on the Senate page. Senate’s webpage on Supreme Court nominations. The primary source for this Pew Research Center analysis was the U.S. (“All opposed say ‘Nay.’ The Ayes appear to have it!”) All told, White served on the court for more than 27 years, with nary a peep of opposition.Īfter Justice Stephen Breyer announced that he would retire at the end of the Supreme Court’s current term, we decided to extend some of our previous work on the history of nominations to the high court, this time focusing on how long it took to get nominees confirmed and how close the votes were. 12, 1910, President William Howard Taft tapped White to be the new chief justice again he was confirmed that same day, and again on a voice vote. The Senate confirmed White later that day on a voice vote (“All those in favor say ‘Aye!’”). 19, 1894, President Grover Cleveland nominated White, then a senator from Louisiana, as an associate justice after the Senate had rejected his first two picks. (Patrick Semansky/Getty Images)Īs Democrats and Republicans gear up for what seems an inevitable fight over President Joe Biden’s forthcoming pick to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, it’s worth remembering that vacancies on the high court didn’t always devolve into partisan slugfests.Ĭonsider, for example, the case of Edward Douglass White, who may have had the easiest ride in the court’s 233-year history. 14, 2020, during her Supreme Court confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill. "Justice Breyer said it was in a recent speech at Harvard Law School and he warned Democrats not to pack the courts because he said that maintaining nonpartisan legitimacy of the courts is necessary to preserving the rule of law.Justice Amy Coney Barrett testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Oct. ![]() "We know that court reform is on the justices' minds," said Rosen. "The three liberal justices are attempting to buy time, but they are far outnumbered by hyper-conservative justices, including those in stolen seats and time is running out," he said.īelkin is part of a constellation of liberal groups lobbying Congress and Biden to add seats to the Supreme Court and appoint more liberal members as a counterbalance to the conservative majority. "We have progressive justices being forced to compromise with bigots just to avoid an even worse, more broad ruling allowing government-sanctioned discrimination," said Aaron Belkin, director of Take Back the Court, a left-wing advocacy group. Progressive legal activists and some Democratic lawmakers claim that the conservative justices are lying in wait, and that decisions like the unanimous Philadelphia foster care decision should ring "alarm bells."
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |