Outsider Participation and Influence in Judicial Confirmation Hearings, 1979-2004

Authors

  • Lisa M. Holmes

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2374-7781.2007.28.0.205-227

Abstract

In this paper outsider participation in confirmation hearings for U.S. Court of Appeals nominees from 1979 to 2004 is examined. Findings indicate that outsider testimony has been absent since 1995, and that the factors that determined whether or not outsiders testified prior to 1995 do not account for the elimination of outsider testimony in recent years. Outsiders continue to be involved in the confirmation process through the low-cost activity of submitting materials to the Senate Judiciary Committee for the hearing record. When such materials are submitted—whether in support of or in opposition to confirmation—the nominee is less likely to be confirmed. Even with the recent elimination of hearing testimony as an avenue for outsider involvement in the confirmation process, interested outsiders continue to influence confirmation prospects through the use of a low-cost, formal lobbying activity.

References

Allison, Garland W. 1996. Delay in the Senate Confirmation of Federal Court Nominees. Judicature 80:8-15.

Banks, Christopher P. 1999. Judicial Politics in the D.C. Circuit Court. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Bell, Lauren Cohen. 2002a. Senatorial Discourtesy: The Senate's Use of Delay to Shape the Federal Judiciary. Political Research Quarterly 55:589-608 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3088032 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/106591290205500305

Bell, Lauren Cohen. 2002b. Warring Factions: Interest Groups, Money, and the New Politics of Senate Confirmation. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Press.

Binder, Sarah A. 1999. The Dynamics of Legislative Gridlock, 1947-1996. American Political Science Review 93:519-533. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2585572

Binder, Sarah A., and Forrest Maltzman. 2002. Senatorial Delay in Confirming Federal Judges, 1947-1998. American Journal of Political Science 46:190-199. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3088422

Caldeira, Gregory, Marie Hojnacki, and John R. Wright. 2000. The Lobbying Activities of Organized Interests in Federal Judicial Nominations. The Journal of Politics 62:51-69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0022-3816.00003

Caldeira, Gregory A., and John R. Wright. 1998. Lobbying for Justice: Organized Interests, Supreme Court Nominations, and the United States Senate. American Journal of Political Science 42:499-523. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2991768

Cohen, Lauren M. 1998. Missing in Action: Interest Groups and Federal Judicial Appointments. Judicature 82:119-123.

Early, Stephen T., Jr. 1977. Constitutional Courts of the United States: The Formal and Informal Relationships between the District Courts, the Courts of Appeals, and the Supreme Court of the U.S. Totowa, NJ: Littlefield, Adams & Co.

Flemming, Roy B., Michael C. MacLeod, and Jeffrey Talbert. 1998. Witnesses at the Confirmations? The Appearance of Organized Interests at Senate Hearings of Federal Judicial Appointments, 1945-1992. Political Research Quarterly 51:617-631. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/106591299805100303 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3088041

Goldman, Sheldon. 1997. Picking Federal Judges: Lower Court Selection from Roosevelt through Reagan. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Goldman, Sheldon. 2003. Assessing the Senate Judicial Confirmation Process: The Index of Obstruction and Delay. Judicature 86:251-257.

Goldman, Sheldon, Elliot Slotnick, Gerard Gryski, and Sara Schiavoni. 2005. W. Bush's Judiciary: The First Term Record. Judicature 88:244-275.

Hartley, Roger E. 2001. Senate Delay of Minority Judicial Nominees: A Look at Race, Gender, and Experience. Judicature 84:190-197.

Hartley, Roger E., and Lisa M. Holmes. 2002. An Invigoration of 'Consent?' The Increasing Senate Scrutiny of Lower Federal Court Nominees. Political Science Quarterly 117:259-278. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/798183

Hojnacki, Marie, and David C. Kimball. 1998. Organized Interests and the Decision of Whom to Lobby in Congress. American Political Science Review 92:775-790. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2586303

Holmes, Lisa, and Elisha Savchak. 2003. Judicial Appointment Politics in the 107th Congress. Judicature 86:232-239.

Johnson, Timothy R., and Jason M. Roberts. 2004. Presidential Capital and the Supreme Court Confirmation Process. The Journal of Politics 66:663-683. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2004.00271.x

Mackenzie, G. Calvin. 1981. The Politics of Presidential Appointments. New York: The Free Press.

Maltese, John Anthony. 1995. The Selling of Supreme Court Nominees. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Martinek, Wendy L., Mark Kemper, and Steven R. Van Winkle. 2002. To Advise and Consent: The Senate and Lower Federal Court Nominations, 1977-1998. The Journal of Politics 64:337-361. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2508.00129

Massie, Tajuana D., Thomas G. Hansford, and Donald R. Songer. 2004. The Timing of Presidential Nominations to the Lower Federal Courts. Political Research Quarterly 57:145-154. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3219841 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/106591290405700112

McCarty, Nolan, and Rose Razaghian. 1999. Advice and Consent: Senate Responses to Executive Branch Nominations, 1885-1996. American Journal of Political Science 43:1122-1143. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2991820

Moraski, Bryon J., and Charles R. Shipan. 1999. The Politics of Supreme Court Nominations: A Theory of Institutional Constraint and Choices. American Journal of Political Science 43:1069-1095. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2991818

Nixon, David C., and David L. Goss. 2001. Confirmation Delay for Vacancies on the Circuit Court of Appeals. American Politics Research 29:246-274. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1532673X01293002

Poole, Keith, and Howard Rosenthal. 1997. Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll Call Voting. New York: Oxford University Press.

Scherer, Nancy. 2005. Scoring Points: Politicians, Activists, and the Lower Federal Court Appointment Process. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Scherer, Nancy, Brandon L. Bartels, and Amy Steigerwalt. 2007. Sounding the Fire Alarm: The Role of Interest Groups in the Lower Federal Court Confirmation Process. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southern Political Science Association, New Orleans.

Segal, Jeffrey, Charles M. Cameron, and Albert D. Cover. 1992. A Spacial Model of Roll Call Voting: Senators, Constituents, Presidents, and Interest Groups in Supreme Court Confirmations. American Journal of Politics 36:96-121. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111426

Segal, Jeffrey A., and Harold J. Spaeth. 1993. The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Slotnick, Elliot E. 1983. The ABA Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary: A Contemporary Analysis. Judicature 71:317-324.

Solowiej, Lisa A., Wendy L. Martinek, and Thomas L. Brunnell. 2005. Partisan Politics: The Impact of Party in the Confirmation of Minority and Female Federal Court Nominees. Party Politics 11:557-577. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1354068805054980

Songer, Donald R. 1991. The Circuit Courts of Appeals. In The American Courts: A Critical Assessment, ed. John B. Gates and Charles A. Johnson. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

Songer, Donald R., Reginald S. Sheehan, and Susan B. Haire. 2000. Continuity and Change on the United States Courts of Appeals. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/mpub.16510

Wright, John R. 1996. Interest Groups and Congress: Lobbying, Contributions, and Influence. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Downloads

Published

2007-11-01

Issue

Vol. 28: Fall 2007

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with American Review of Politics agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.

  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.

  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:

    1. Attribution: other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;

    2. Non-Commercial: the materials may not be used for commercial purposes;

    3. Share Alike: If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.

with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.

  1. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

  2. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.

  3. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.

  1. The Author represents and warrants that:

    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;

    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;

    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;

    4. the Work has not previously been published;

    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and

    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.

  2. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.