Democrats continue their “60 vote standard for SCOTUS nominees” myth

Spread the love

Loading

Jazz Shaw:

We are apparently going to keep hearing the same prattle from the Democrats about how “everyone has to get 60 votes in order to be confirmed for the Supreme Court” for the next four years. The latest person to invoke this popular Beltway urban legend was Senator Tammy Baldwin. In a recent interview she described it as, the same standard which every other Supreme Court nominee has had to meet. In an unusual display of bipartisan accountability, the Washington Post fact checker actually decided to take her to task and remind the public that this is not only inaccurate, but nearly as far off base as one could get.

As we have noted before, there is no Senate “standard” that a nominee must have 60 votes for confirmation. But, under current Senate rules, it takes 60 votes (three-fifths of the Senate) to end debate on most legislation. Until Democrats changed the rules in 2013, it also took 60 votes to end debate on executive branch and most judicial nominations.

The Democratic rule change did not include Supreme Court nominations. But that would be a rare maneuver.

(A filibuster generally refers to extended debate that delays a vote on a pending matter, while cloture is a device to end debate. Filibusters are used by opponents of a nominee or legislation, while cloture is filed by supporters to end debate.)

Not only is this not a standard which “everyone had to meet,” the Senate has rarely even needed to invoke cloture for a vote to take place. In fact, as the linked article reminds us, it’s only happened four times. One was for Samuel Alito and two of the others were for William Rehnquist. All three of those efforts eventually failed. The only time it actually worked was during the tenure of Lyndon Johnson when he was attempting to advance Abe Fortas from associate justice to Chief Justice. Other than that, this so-called standard which everyone had to meet is complete fiction.

What’s not fictional is the fact that the attempt by the Democrats to filibuster Alito set something of an actual standard. It introduced the idea of obstruction of an indubitably qualified candidate from the opposition party as some sort of noble ideal and a badge of honor.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

3 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Let the demacatic donkey wander into a desert in africa croak from the heat and the vultures and hyenas can have afeast

More and more, we see that liberalism cannot survive in a constitutional republic. In that form of government, only what benefits the people is accepted and enacted. Liberals cannot abide by this as their programs, which benefit only those who want to be supported by the people who work and achieve, are routinely REJECTED by free people. So, they manipulate the rules to shove their agenda down the throats of the citizens.

They only need 60 votes to end debate(cloture) and take it to the full senate for a vote.

Confirmation requires only a simple majority. Remember th invocation of rule 19 on fauxahontas?

It could be revisited during debate which would forego the necessary 60 vote cloture threshold.