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

57 Alb. L. Rev. 993 (1993-1994)
The Supreme Court Appointment Process: A Search for a Synthesis

handle is hein.journals/albany57 and id is 1007 raw text is: THE SUPREME COURT APPOINTMENT PROCESS: A SEARCH FOR A SYNTHESIS William G. Ross* I. INTRODUCTION .......................................... 993 II. SUBJECTS OF POTENTIAL REFORM ....................... 999 A. The Senate's Role in the Nomination Process ....... 999 B. The Questioning of Nominees at Confirmation H earings ........................................... 1004 C. Closed Judiciary Committee Sessions .............. 1014 D. Adoption of More Specific Criteria for Confirmation ...................................... 1019 E. The Role of Special Interest Groups ................ 1021 F. Private Meetings Between Senators and Nominees. 1026 G. Background Investigations ......................... 1029 H. Political Balance on the Judiciary Committee ...... 1035 L Philosophical Balance on the Court .............. 1035 J. Leaks of Senate Information ....................... 1037 K A Two-Thirds Rule for Senate Confirmation ....... 1038 III. CONCLUSION ........................................... 1040 I. INTRODUCTION The perennial controversy over the Supreme Court appointment process reached a new pitch of intensity during the Reagan-Bush era. This so-called confirmation mess,' which generated widespread proposals for procedural reforms, was the inevitable result of the Democratic Senate's dismay over attempts by Republican Presidents to appoint jurists who would tilt the Court in a more conservative direction.2 The frustration of Democratic senators was particularly * Professor of Law, Cumberland School of Law of Samford University; A.B., Stanford, 1976; J.D., Harvard, 1979. This Article is based upon a paper that the author presented at a seminar sponsored by the Congressional Research Service in 1993. 1 See Stephen Carter, The Confirmation Mess, 101 HARv. L. REv. 1185 (1988). 2 See 137 CONG. REC. S14,322-23 (daily ed. Oct. 3, 1991) (statement of Sen. Hatfield); Marilyn J. Ireland, The Best Person for the Job: Tomorrow's Standard for Selecting Supreme Court Justices, 7 ST. JOHN's J. LEGAL COMMENT. 127, 133, 138 (1991); Henry P. Monaghan, The Confirmation Process: Law or Politics?, 101 HAIv. L. REV. 1202, 1209 (1988); Theodore B. Olson, The Thomas Hearings, Confirmations and Congressional Ethics, 7 ST. JOHN's J. LEGAL COMMENT. 245 (1991); Glenn H. Reynolds, Taking Advice Seriously: An Immodest Proposal for Reforming the Confirmation Process, 65 S. CAL. L. REv. 1577 (1992); Martin Shapiro, Interest Groups and Supreme Court Appointments, 84 Nw. U. L. REV. 935, 954-55, 957, 961 (1990);

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