Skip Navigation
Judging the Environment judicial nominations photo
 

A project tracking federal judicial nominations and courts.


Senator Statements

 

Issue
Nominee
Senator
Senator's Party
Senator's State
 
Items 31 - 33 of 33  Previous12

Sen. Sessions Floor Statement on Judicial Nominations
(Republican - Alabama) 05/23/05
"When has 60 votes been the cut? The vote , historically, since the founding of this Republic, is a majority vote . Lets look at that. The Constitution says that the Congress shall advise and consent on treaties , provided two-thirds agree, and shall advise and consent on judges and other nominees. Since the founding of the Republic, we have understood that there was a two-thirds supermajority for ratification and advice and consent on treaties and a majority vote for judges . That is what we have done. That is what we have always done. ... I think, the constitutional intent. I think the Constitution is clear that a majority is what we were looking for "

Sen. Sessions Floor Statement: HISTORY OF JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS
(Republican - Alabama) 07/25/03
"Of the many reasons why we shouldn't have a filibuster, an important one is the Article I of the Constitution. It says the Senate shall advise and consent on treaties by a two-thirds vote , and simply ``shall advise and consent'' on nominations. Historically, we have understood that provision to mean--and I think there is no doubt the Founders understood that to mean--that a treaty confirmation requires a two-thirds vote , but confirmation of a judicial nomination requires only a simple majority vote . That is why we have never had a filibuster. People on both sides of the aisle have understood it to be wrong. They have understood it to be in violation of the Constitution. ... these nominees are entitled to an up-and-down vote . If a Member does not like them, he or she can vote against them. ... That is what the Constitution and Senate tradition demand of us."