About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

96 Judicature 296 (2012-2013)
Federal Judicial Selection in History and Scholarship

handle is hein.journals/judica96 and id is 296 raw text is: FEDERAL JUDICIAL SELECTION IN HISTORY AND SCHOLARSHIP a The American Judicature Society was a relative latecomer to the federal judicial selection process, focusing on state judicial selection issues for much of the twentieth century. In recent decades, however AJS has taken on a leadership role in the efforts toward merit-based selection of federal judges, diversifying the federal bench, and tracking the influence of external interests on the federal judiciary by LAUREN C. BELL The process for appointing federal judges is prescribed in the Consti- tution, and for most of American history federal judicial selection has proceeded straightforwardly. Presi- dents made nominations quickly; the Senate rejected very few judicial nominees. Confirmation was once so certain, in fact, that in the late 1970s, the public interest organiza- tion Common Cause referred deri- sively to the U.S. Senate as a rubber stamp machine for Presidents' nominees. Even in the contempo- rary era, relatively few judicial nomi- nees have been rejected, although the amount of time nominees wait between nomination and confirma- tion has increased significantly in recent history. The Congressional Research Service reports that just 19 of more than 2,500 nominations to the U.S. district court and courts of appeals were rejected between 1939 and 2009, and even fewer lower court nominees were rejected or withdrawn during the nineteenth century.' Nominations to the U.S. Supreme Court have always been somewhat more controversial, but nearly 80 percent of Supreme Court nominations have been confirmed since 1789.3 The process's general efficiency and the rarity of judicial misconduct (there have been only seven removals of federal judges through impeach- ment and Senate trial in U.S. history) meant that the federal judicial selec- tion process was largely excluded from the judicial reform movements that swept legal circles during both the nineteenth and twentieth cen- turies. Similarly, the federal judicial selection process was not generally a subject of significant concern to legal 1. common Cause. The Senate Rubber Stamp Machine (1977). 2. However, several judicial nominees in recent years have withdrawn themselves rather than continue to wait for years to be confirmed. See: Denis Steven Rutkus and Susan Navarro Smelcer, US Circuit and District Court Nomina- tions: Senate Rejections and Committee Votes Other Than to Report Favorably 1939-2009, CRS Report for Congress. Available online at: http:// www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40470.pdf. Last accessed April 28, 2013. 3. Henry H. Hogue, Supreme Court Nominations Not Confirmed, 1989-2007 CRS Report for Con- gress. Available online at: http://www.fas.org/ sgp/crs/misc/RL31.171,pdf. Last accessed April 26, 2013. (20081 296 JUDICATURE * MAY / JUNE 2013 * VOL 96 NO 6

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most