Judicial Nominee Filibusters

Republican obstructionists are quick to point out the filibusters used by Democrats to hold up some White House judicial nominees during the 108th and 109th Congress. But the comparison is unfair.

First, Republicans now filibuster far more than Democrats ever did. The Republicans in the current Congress are on pace to filibuster more than twice the historical high.

Second, Republicans have filibustered the entire Democratic agenda, while the Democrats’ filibusters were only on judicial nominees.

Third, the Democrats’ filibusters of judicial nominations were uncommon. Most nominees passed without controversy. Only a handful of extreme partisan judicial nominees received opposition. The filibuster was the resistance of last resort against a president who refused to compromise and ignored the constitutional mandate that judges be nominated with the “advice and consent” of the Senate.¹

• The vast majority of Bush’s judicial nominees passed (290 of 338). Democrats only filibustered extremists.²
• The Democrats passed a higher percentage of Bush’s judicial nominees than the Republicans passed of President Bill Clinton’s nominees (85 percent v. 72 percent).³

1. U.S. Constitution, Article II, section 2.

2. Campaign for America’s Future analysis
http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/judicialnominations107.htm;
http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/judicialnominations108.htm;
http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/judicialnominations109.htm;
http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/judicialnominations.htm

3. Campaign for America’s Future analysis
http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/judicialnominations107.htm;
http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/judicialnominations108.htm;
http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/judicialnominations109.htm;
http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/judicialnominations.htm