Why do Republican leaders still play along with an informal Senate rule that prevents up-or-down votes on even those judges who have strong Republican support?
Meet William Kayatta, another one of America's earnest, capable judges-in-waiting. Widely respected in his home state of Maine, nominated by President Obama in January to fill a vacancy on the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, eagerly endorsed by both of Maine's Republican senators, passed for confirmation to the Senate floor by an easy voice vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee, Kayatta's nomination instead has become yet another victim of the Senate GOP's suicidal tendencies.
The litigants of the 1st Circuit need Kayatta. There are no serious
arguments against him. Yet the Republican leadership in the
Senate has blocked a vote on the merits of his nomination in obedience
to the so-called "Thurmond Rule," an informal practice as self-destructive
as was its namesake. The Thurmond Rule is typically invoked by the opposition party in a presidential election year to preclude substantive votes on federal judicial appointments within six months of Election Day. It is the Senate's version of a sit-down strike.
In April, just after the Judiciary Committee favorably passed along Kayatta's nomination to the Senate floor for confirmation, Maine's junior senator, Susan Collins, had wonderful things to say about the nominee:
Bill is an attorney of exceptional intelligence, extensive experience, and demonstrated integrity, who is very highly respected in the Maine legal community. Bill's impressive background makes him eminently qualified for a seat on the First Circuit. His thirty-plus years of real world litigation experience would bring a much-needed perspective to the court. Maine has a long proud history of supplying superb jurists to the federal bench. I know that, if confirmed, Mr. Kayatta will continue in that tradition. I urge the full Senate to approve his nomination as soon as possible.
And how did her fellow Republicans respond to her request? They blew her off. There has been no vote on Kayatta's nomination and none is scheduled. Instead, last month, Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Senate Minority Leader, invoked the "Thurmond rule" to block floor consideration of Kayatta's appointment-- as well as up-or-down votes on the rest of President Obama's federal appellate nominees (This, in turn, initially prompted Sen. Collins to blame the Obama Administration for going too slow in nominating Kayatta in the first place.)
In theory, the Thurmond Rule is something official Washington defends as the price of divided government. In reality, it's another outrageous example of how the Senate has re-written the Constitution by filibuster. In practice, in the Kayatta case and many more, the Thurmond rule is the antithesis of good governance. Your Senate today perpetuates a frivolous rule which, for the most cynical political reasons, blocks qualified people from serving their nation. It's not misfeasance. It's malfeasance.
Just because Strom Thurmond was willing to jump the Senate off the bridge doesn't mean that today's Senate Republican leaders had to do likewise.
In a more prudent and practical era in Senate history, nominees like Kayatta would have been confirmed in days. Fifty years ago, for example, when another bright Democratic appointee with strong Republican support came to the Senate seeking a judgeship, the Judiciary Committee took all of 11 minutes before it endorsed him. Byron "Whizzer" White then served the next 31 years as an associate justice of the United States Supreme Court. That's wholly unthinkable today -- even with lower federal court nominees.