Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T17:26:48.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Supreme Court Appointment Process: Lessons from Filling the Rehnquist and O'Connor Vacancies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2008

Michael Comiskey
Michael Comiskey
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The 11 years from 1994 to 2005 comprised the second-longest period without an appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court (Epstein et al. 2003, 353). The nominations of John Roberts in 2005 and Samuel Alito in 2006 were met with enthusiasm by conservatives, foreboding by liberals, and great interest by political scientists concerned with the Court's future and with changes in the appointment process since Stephen Breyer's appointment in 1994.

Type
FEATURES
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 41 , Issue 2 , April 2008 , pp. 355 - 358
Copyright
© 2008 The American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abraham, Henry J. 1999. Justices, Presidents, and Senators: A History of the U.S. Supreme Court Appointments from Washington to Clinton. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Babington, Charles, and Susan Schmidt. 2005. “Filibuster Deal Puts Democrats in a Bind; Pact May Hinder Efforts To Block High Court Nominee.” Washington Post, July 4, A-1.Google Scholar
Brennan Center for Justice. 2006. “Three Nominations Reveal Contrasting Influence of Interest Groups in High Court Nomination Process.” January 31. www.justiceatstake.org/contentViewer.asp?breadcrumb=7.Google Scholar
Cameron, Charles M., Albert D. Cover, and Jeffrey A. Segal. 1990. “Senate Voting on Supreme Court Nominees: A Neoinstitutional Model.” American Political Science Review 84 (2): 525–34.Google Scholar
CNN.com. 2006. “Poll: Alito Should Sit on High Court.” January 23. www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/23/alito/index.html.Google Scholar
Comiskey, Michael. 1993. “Can the Senate Examine the Constitutional Philosophies of Supreme Court Nominees?” PS: Political Science and Politics 26 (3): 495–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comiskey, Michael. 2004. Seeking Justices: The Judging of Supreme Court Nominees. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
Crowley, Michael. 2005. “A Liberal Spoils for a Fight.” New Republic Online, August 1. www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050801&s=crowley080105.Google Scholar
Epstein, Lee, Jeffrey A. Segal, Harold J. Spaeth, and Thomas G. Walker. 2003. The Supreme Court Compendium: Data, Decisions & Developments. 3rd ed. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Gibson, James L. 2006. “The Legitimacy of the United States Supreme Court in a Polarized Polity.” Social Science Research Network. http://ssrn.com/abstract=909162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L., and Gregory Caldeira. 2007. “Supreme Court Nominations, Legitimacy Theory, and the American Public: A Dynamic Test of the Theory of Positivity Bias.” Social Science Research Network, July 4. http://ssrn.com/abstract=998283.Google Scholar
Goldman, Sheldon. 2003. “Assessing the Senate Judicial Confirmation Process: The Index of Obstruction and Delay.” Judicature 86 (5): 251–7.Google Scholar
Johnson, Timothy R., and Jason M. Roberts. 2004. “Presidential Capital and the Supreme Court Confirmation Process.” Journal of Politics 66 (3): 663–83.Google Scholar
Johnson, Timothy R., and Jason M. Roberts. 2005. “Pivotal Politics, Presidential Capital, and Supreme Court Nominations.” Congress & the Presidency 32 (1): 31–49.Google Scholar
Justice, Glen, and Aron Pilhofer. 2005. “Set for Alito Battle, with Ad Dollars at the Ready.” New York Times, November 14, A-1.Google Scholar
Kirkpatrick, David D. 2005. “Nominee's Fans and Foes Localize the Debate.” New York Times, November 21, A-4.Google Scholar
Liptak, Adam. 2006. “700 Answers, Few Glimmers.” New York Times, January 13, A-1.Google Scholar
Liptak, Adam, and Robin Toner. 2005. “Roberts Parries Queries on Roe and End of Life.” New York Times, September 15, A-1.Google Scholar
Maltese, John Anthony. 1995. The Selling of Supreme Court Nominees. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Moraski, Bryon J., and Charles R. Shipan. 1999. “The Politics of Supreme Court Nominations: A Theory of Institutional Constraints and Choices.” American Journal of Political Science 43 (4): 1,069–95.Google Scholar
Nagourney, Adam. 2006. “Glum Democrats Can't See Halting Bush on Courts.” New York Times, January 15, sec. 1, 1.Google Scholar
Pew Research Center for the People, and the Press. 2005. “Four-in-Ten Question Rebuilding New Orleans in Present Location; Roberts Gains Support, But Remains a Mystery to Many.” September 12. http://people-press.org/dataarchive.Google Scholar
San Diego Union-Tribune. 2005. “Up to the Job?” October 25, B-6.Google Scholar
Savage, David. 2007. “High Court Has Entered a New Era; The Chief Justice, with Help from Fellow Bush Appointee Alito, Carries Big Rulings to the Right.” Los Angeles Times, July 1, A1.Google Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A., Albert D. Cover, and Charles M. Cameron. 1989. “The Role of Ideology in Senate Confirmation of Supreme Court Justices.” Kentucky Law Journal 77 (spring): 485–507.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Mark. 1994. Judicious Choices: The New Politics of Supreme Court Confirmations. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Watson, George L., and John A. Stookey. 1995. Shaping America: The Politics of Supreme Court Appointments. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar