The Tortuous, Protracted Wait to Confirm Judges—From Abe to Obama

The Senate confirmed Robert Bacharach as a U.S. circuit judge Monday after 399 days in limbo. In Lincoln's day, it often took less than 10 days.

boyntonbacharach.jpg
In 1863, it took senators 15 days to confirm 25-year-old Thomas Boynton (left), a Lincoln appointee. Robert Bacharach (right) had to wait nearly 400 days.

There is a fight brewing over Obama nominees to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The court is often called the second most important federal court, because it receives many high-visibility cases and has sent an unusually large number of its judges to the Supreme Court. It now has four vacancies, one dating from 2005, one from 2008, one from 2011, and one that occurred in 2013. The administration has to date submitted nominees for only the two oldest vacancies. Four of its active judges were appointed by George W. Bush or his father, three by Bill Clinton. Five senior judges, all appointed by Reagan or the senior Bush, continue to hear cases.

On February 14, the Senate Judiciary Committee on a party-line vote sent Caitlin Halligan's nomination to the full Senate. Halligan is a New York state prosecutor with a "unanimously well-qualified rating" from the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary. Obama first nominated her in 2010, and then renominated her several times, most recently on January 4 -- even though Senate Republicans in 2011 filibustered one of her earlier nominations, citing her role in a New York case about gun manufacturers and her membership on a New York Bar Association panel that criticized Bush Administration detainee policies. It's unlikely she'll have easier sledding this time around.

Obama's other nominee to the court is Srikanth Srinivasan. Currently principal deputy solicitor general, he also served in the Bush Justice Department and, like Halligan, has a unanimously well-qualified ABA rating. Obama first nominated him last year, but Srinivasan hasn't had Judiciary Committee hearings because Senate Republicans say they want to see some documents from a case in which he had an apparently minor role. It's not clear that there's any serious Republican objection to Srinivasan, but that hasn't necessarily ensured confirmation of other nominees.

The ups and downs of nominations to this court have a long history. Halligan would take the seat vacated by John Roberts when he became chief justice -- eight years ago. President Bush nominated Roberts to the court in 2001 to take the seat vacated by James Buckley in 1996; the Senate confirmed him on renomination in 2003. One reason the seat was vacant in 2001 is because the Senate failed to confirm President Clinton's 1999 nomination of Elena Kagan to that seat. And in 1992, George H.W. Bush nominated Roberts to the vacancy created by Clarence Thomas's elevation, but Democrats wanted to save the seat for Clinton to fill, which he did.

The tortuous nomination and confirmation saga on this particular court -- the above is just a sample -- is of a piece with the broken judicial nomination process playing out over the last several decades.

The Senate confirmed 19 of Lincoln's nominees within 10 days. Obama's 32 court of appeals appointees have waited an average of 250 days for confirmation, his 141 district appointees 223 days.

To understand just how dysfunctional the process has become, consider how much easier Abraham Lincoln had it. Lincoln appointed more than three times as many district judges as his predecessor James Buchanan, in part because he replaced judges who had resigned from district courts in border or southern regions under Union control (there were not yet courts of appeals at the time). Southern Florida's federal district court, for example, was a hotbed of litigation stemming from the Union blockade of Confederate ports. When its judge resigned, Lincoln was desperate to get a new judge in place.

Presented by

Russell Wheeler is president of the Governance Institute and a visiting fellow in the Brookings Institution’s Governance Studies Program.

Would You Live in a Treehouse?

A treehouse can be an ideal office space, vacation rental, and way of reconnecting with your youth.

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Video

Would You Live in a Treehouse?

A treehouse can be an ideal office space, vacation rental, and way of reconnecting with your youth.

Video

Pittsburgh: 'Better Than You Thought'

How Steel City became a bikeable, walkable paradise

Video

A Four-Dimensional Tour of Boston

In this groundbreaking video, time moves at multiple speeds within a single frame.

Video

Who Made Pop Music So Repetitive? You Did.

If pop music is too homogenous, that's because listeners want it that way.

More in Politics

Just In