Politicizing Impartiality: Redefining the Role of the Senate in Federal Judicial Selection

Authors

Adam Harness, Charleston School of Law
Melissa Harness, University of Tennessee

First & Last Page

1-25

Abstract

The judicial selection process is heavily backlogged, resulting in excessive vacant judgeships, many in geographical areas with extremely high caseloads. Thus, the federal courts are falling further behind every year in settling disputes. The Senate’s action with President Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia has only escalated the dysfunction of the judicial selection process. Coupled with the fallout surrounding the death of Justice Ginsburg and Senator McConnell’s complete refusal to honor the precedent set by him in 2016, it has become glaringly apparent that the confirmation process conducted by the Senate needs to be standardized and streamlined. In this article, we perform a Constitutional analysis of the actual textual role of the Senate in the Confirmation process and apply the historical interpretations of the Senate’s role by the drafters of the Constitution, explaining how the judicial selection process can be updated and standardized regarding both the Supreme Court and the lower federal courts without requiring a Constitutional amendment to expedite the selection and approval of nominees and improve the efficiency of the process.

Recommended Citation

Adam Harness & Melissa Harness, Politicizing Impartiality: Redefining the Role of the Senate in Federal Judicial Selection, 9 Lincoln Mem’l U. L. Rev. (2021).
Available at: https://digitalcommons.lmunet.edu/lmulrev/vol9/iss1/2