{ "id": "R44236", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "R", "number": "R44236", "active": true, "source": "CRSReports.Congress.gov, EveryCRSReport.com", "versions": [ { "source_dir": "crsreports.congress.gov", "title": "Supreme Court Appointment Process: Consideration by the Senate Judiciary Committee", "retrieved": "2021-03-12T04:03:17.486787", "id": "R44236_14_2021-02-22", "formats": [ { "filename": "files/2021-02-22_R44236_e6f20d9cb3004a83ee26db918a8027cb3285ad77.pdf", "format": "PDF", "url": "https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44236/14", "sha1": "e6f20d9cb3004a83ee26db918a8027cb3285ad77" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/2021-02-22_R44236_e6f20d9cb3004a83ee26db918a8027cb3285ad77.html" } ], "date": "2021-02-22", "summary": null, "source": "CRSReports.Congress.gov", "typeId": "R", "active": true, "sourceLink": "https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/details?prodcode=R44236", "type": "CRS Report" }, { "source_dir": "crsreports.congress.gov", "title": "Supreme Court Appointment Process: Consideration by the Senate Judiciary Committee", "retrieved": "2021-03-12T04:03:13.983091", "id": "R44236_10_2020-09-22", "formats": [ { "filename": "files/2020-09-22_R44236_d7caaf5577c1079d7ec29d576a67286b4049b069.pdf", "format": "PDF", "url": "https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44236/10", "sha1": "d7caaf5577c1079d7ec29d576a67286b4049b069" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/2020-09-22_R44236_d7caaf5577c1079d7ec29d576a67286b4049b069.html" } ], "date": "2020-09-22", "summary": null, "source": "CRSReports.Congress.gov", "typeId": "R", "active": true, "sourceLink": "https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/details?prodcode=R44236", "type": "CRS Report" }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 583840, "date": "2018-08-14", "retrieved": "2018-08-16T17:02:05.470559", "title": "Supreme Court Appointment Process: Consideration by the Senate Judiciary Committee", "summary": "The appointment of a Supreme Court Justice is an event of major significance in American politics. Each appointment is of consequence because of the enormous judicial power the Supreme Court exercises as the highest appellate court in the federal judiciary. To receive appointment to the Court, a candidate must first be nominated by the President and then confirmed by the Senate. Although not mentioned in the Constitution, an important role is played midway in the process (after the President selects, but before the Senate considers) by the Senate Judiciary Committee. Specifically, the Judiciary Committee, rather than the Senate as a whole, assumes the principal responsibility for investigating the background and qualifications of each Supreme Court nominee, and typically the committee conducts a close, intensive investigation of each nominee.\nSince the late 1960s, the Judiciary Committee\u2019s consideration of a Supreme Court nominee almost always has consisted of three distinct stages\u2014(1) a pre-hearing investigative stage, followed by (2) public hearings, and concluding with (3) a committee decision on what recommendation to make to the full Senate.\nDuring the pre-hearing investigative stage, the nominee responds to a detailed Judiciary Committee questionnaire, providing biographical, professional, and financial disclosure information to the committee. In addition to the committee\u2019s own investigation of the nominee, the FBI also investigates the nominee and provides the committee with confidential reports related to its investigation. During this time, the American Bar Association also evaluates the professional qualifications of the nominee, rating the nominee as \u201cwell qualified,\u201d \u201cqualified,\u201d or \u201cnot qualified.\u201d Additionally, prior to hearings starting, the nominee pays courtesy calls on individual Senators in their offices, including Senators who do not serve on the Judiciary Committee.\nOnce the Judiciary Committee completes its investigation of the nominee, he or she testifies in hearings before the committee. On average, for Supreme Court nominees who have received hearings from 1975 to the present, the nominee\u2019s first hearing occurred 40 days after his or her nomination was formally submitted to the Senate by the President. \nQuestioning of a nominee by Senators has involved, as a matter of course, the nominee\u2019s legal qualifications, biographical background, and any earlier actions as public figures. Other questions have focused on social and political issues, the Constitution, particular court rulings, current constitutional controversies, and judicial philosophy. For the most recent nominees to the Court, hearings have lasted for four or five days (although the Senate may decide to hold more hearings if a nomination is perceived as controversial\u2014as was the case with Robert Bork\u2019s nomination in 1987, who had 11 days of hearings).\nUsually within a week upon completion of the hearings, the Judiciary Committee meets in open session to determine what recommendation to \u201creport\u201d to the full Senate. The committee\u2019s usual practice has been to report even those Supreme Court nominations opposed by a committee majority, allowing the full Senate to make the final decision on whether the nomination should be approved. Consequently, the committee may report the nomination favorably, report it unfavorably, or report it without making any recommendation at all. Of the 15 most recent Supreme Court nominations reported by the Judiciary Committee, 13 were reported favorably, 1 was reported unfavorably, and 1 was reported without recommendation.\nAdditional CRS reports provide information and analysis related to other stages of the confirmation process for nominations to the Supreme Court. For a report related to the selection of a nominee by the President, see CRS Report R44235, Supreme Court Appointment Process: President\u2019s Selection of a Nominee, by Barry J. McMillion. For a report related to Senate floor debate and consideration of nominations, see CRS Report R44234, Supreme Court Appointment Process: Senate Debate and Confirmation Vote, by Barry J. McMillion.\nThis report will be updated as action proceeds on the July 10, 2018, nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to fill the vacancy created by the retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy. As of this writing, committee hearings are scheduled to begin on Judge Kavanaugh\u2019s nomination on September 4, 2018.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44236", "sha1": "c1cb3851389ce54d3b82efc8e52fab66371b36f0", "filename": "files/20180814_R44236_c1cb3851389ce54d3b82efc8e52fab66371b36f0.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44236_files&id=/1.png": "files/20180814_R44236_images_0532f5ce79f35bcb1221ec04f61f3da7e0874f5a.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44236_files&id=/0.png": "files/20180814_R44236_images_ca241b19840e5a05f729d5b2d7d78fa11c0a6f84.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44236", "sha1": "85337a271aff72f2ea1b11976d98255e887abdbc", "filename": "files/20180814_R44236_85337a271aff72f2ea1b11976d98255e887abdbc.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4755, "name": "Judicial Branch" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4782, "name": "Executive & Judicial Branch Appointments" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 459769, "date": "2017-03-17", "retrieved": "2017-03-22T18:25:57.930194", "title": "Supreme Court Appointment Process: Consideration by the Senate Judiciary Committee", "summary": "The appointment of a Supreme Court Justice is an event of major significance in American politics. Each appointment is of consequence because of the enormous judicial power the Supreme Court exercises as the highest appellate court in the federal judiciary. To receive appointment to the Court, a candidate must first be nominated by the President and then confirmed by the Senate. Although not mentioned in the Constitution, an important role is played midway in the process (after the President selects, but before the Senate considers) by the Senate Judiciary Committee. Specifically, the Judiciary Committee, rather than the Senate as a whole, assumes the principal responsibility for investigating the background and qualifications of each Supreme Court nominee, and typically the committee conducts a close, intensive investigation of each nominee.\nSince the late 1960s, the Judiciary Committee\u2019s consideration of a Supreme Court nominee almost always has consisted of three distinct stages\u2014(1) a pre-hearing investigative stage, followed by (2) public hearings, and concluding with (3) a committee decision on what recommendation to make to the full Senate.\nDuring the pre-hearing investigative stage, the nominee responds to a detailed Judiciary Committee questionnaire, providing biographical, professional, and financial disclosure information to the committee. In addition to the committee\u2019s own investigation of the nominee, the FBI also investigates the nominee and provides the committee with confidential reports related to its investigation. During this time, the American Bar Association also evaluates the professional qualifications of the nominee, rating the nominee as \u201cwell qualified,\u201d \u201cqualified,\u201d or \u201cnot qualified.\u201d Additionally, prior to hearings starting, the nominee pays courtesy calls on individual Senators in their offices, including Senators who do not serve on the Judiciary Committee.\nOnce the Judiciary Committee completes its investigation of the nominee, he or she testifies in hearings before the committee. On average, for Supreme Court nominees who have received hearings from 1975 to the present, the nominee\u2019s first hearing occurred 39 days after his or her nomination was formally submitted to the Senate by the President. Questioning of a nominee by Senators has involved, as a matter of course, the nominee\u2019s legal qualifications, biographical background, and any earlier actions as public figures. Other questions have focused on social and political issues, the Constitution, particular court rulings, current constitutional controversies, and judicial philosophy. For the most recent nominees to the Court, hearings have lasted for four or five days (although the Senate may decide to hold more hearings if a nomination is perceived as controversial\u2014as was the case with Robert Bork\u2019s nomination in 1987, who had 11 days of hearings).\nUsually within a week upon completion of the hearings, the Judiciary Committee meets in open session to determine what recommendation to \u201creport\u201d to the full Senate. The committee\u2019s usual practice has been to report even those Supreme Court nominations opposed by a committee majority, allowing the full Senate to make the final decision on whether the nomination should be approved. Consequently, the committee may report the nomination favorably, report it unfavorably, or report it without making any recommendation at all. Of the 15 most recent Supreme Court nominations reported by the Judiciary Committee, 13 were reported favorably, 1 was reported unfavorably, and 1 was reported without recommendation.\nAdditional CRS reports provide information and analysis related to other stages of the confirmation process for nominations to the Supreme Court. For a report related to the selection of a nominee by the President, see CRS Report R44235, Supreme Court Appointment Process: President\u2019s Selection of a Nominee, by Barry J. McMillion. For a report related to Senate floor debate and consideration of nominations, see CRS Report R44234, Supreme Court Appointment Process: Senate Debate and Confirmation Vote, by Barry J. McMillion.\nThis report will be updated upon completion of committee action on the pending nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to fill the vacancy created by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. Committee hearings for Judge Gorsuch are scheduled to begin on March 20, 2017.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44236", "sha1": "e300bb435677e5e73b87af56a015f166e79ead27", "filename": "files/20170317_R44236_e300bb435677e5e73b87af56a015f166e79ead27.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44236", "sha1": "d47c2491a5d92a1780e38f2f65ffd926d11b210f", "filename": "files/20170317_R44236_d47c2491a5d92a1780e38f2f65ffd926d11b210f.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4755, "name": "Judicial Branch" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4782, "name": "Executive & Judicial Branch Appointments" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 446504, "date": "2015-10-19", "retrieved": "2016-04-06T18:10:17.466566", "title": "Supreme Court Appointment Process: Consideration by the Senate Judiciary Committee", "summary": "The appointment of a Supreme Court Justice is an event of major significance in American politics. Each appointment is of consequence because of the enormous judicial power the Supreme Court exercises as the highest appellate court in the federal judiciary. To receive appointment to the Court, a candidate must first be nominated by the President and then confirmed by the Senate. Although not mentioned in the Constitution, an important role is played midway in the process (after the President selects, but before the Senate considers) by the Senate Judiciary Committee. Specifically, the Judiciary Committee, rather than the Senate as a whole, invariably assumes the principal responsibility for investigating the background and qualifications of each Supreme Court nominee, and typically the committee conducts a close, intensive investigation of each nominee.\nSince the late 1960s, the Judiciary Committee\u2019s consideration of a Supreme Court nominee almost always has consisted of three distinct stages\u2014(1) a pre-hearing investigative stage, followed by (2) public hearings, and concluding with (3) a committee decision on what recommendation to make to the full Senate.\nDuring the pre-hearing investigative stage, the nominee responds to a detailed Judiciary Committee questionnaire, providing biographical, professional, and financial disclosure information to the committee. In addition to the committee\u2019s own investigation of the nominee, the FBI also investigates the nominee and provides the committee with confidential reports related to its investigation. During this time, the American Bar Association also evaluates the professional qualifications of the nominee, rating the nominee as \u201cwell qualified,\u201d \u201cqualified,\u201d or \u201cnot qualified.\u201d Finally, prior to hearings starting, the nominee pays courtesy calls on individual Senators in their offices, including Senators who do not serve on the Judiciary Committee.\nOnce the Judiciary Committee completes its investigation of the nominee, he or she testifies in hearings before the committee. On average, for Supreme Court nominees who have received hearings from 1975 to the present, the nominee\u2019s first hearing occurred 39 days after his or her nomination was formally submitted to the Senate by the President. Questioning of a nominee by Senators has involved, as a matter of course, the nominee\u2019s legal qualifications, biographical background, and any earlier actions as public figures. Other questions have focused on social and political issues, the Constitution, particular court rulings, current constitutional controversies, and judicial philosophy. For the most recent nominees to the Court, hearings have lasted for four or five days (although the Senate may decide to hold more hearings if a nomination is perceived as controversial\u2014as was the case with Robert Bork\u2019s nomination in 1987, who had 11 days of hearings).\nUsually within a week upon completion of the hearings, the Judiciary Committee meets in open session to determine what recommendation to \u201creport\u201d to the full Senate. The committee\u2019s usual practice has been to report even those Supreme Court nominations opposed by a committee majority, allowing the full Senate to make the final decision on whether the nomination should be approved. Consequently, the committee may report the nomination favorably, report it unfavorably, or report it without making any recommendation at all. Of the 15 most recent Supreme Court nominations reported by the Judiciary Committee, 13 were reported favorably, 1 was reported unfavorably, and 1 was reported without recommendation.\nAdditional CRS reports provide information and analysis related to other stages of the confirmation process for nominations to the Supreme Court. For a report related to the selection of a nominee by the President, see CRS Report R44235, Supreme Court Appointment Process: President\u2019s Selection of a Nominee, by Barry J. McMillion. For a report related to Senate floor debate and consideration of nominations, see CRS Report R44234, Supreme Court Appointment Process: Senate Debate and Confirmation Vote, by Barry J. McMillion.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44236", "sha1": "99658d76aa45634aef8ab02a9840ce4c37a390e9", "filename": "files/20151019_R44236_99658d76aa45634aef8ab02a9840ce4c37a390e9.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44236", "sha1": "c3c770c624bc28019564e6d4b597e2f488642670", "filename": "files/20151019_R44236_c3c770c624bc28019564e6d4b597e2f488642670.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 2155, "name": "Judicial Branch Appointments" } ] } ], "topics": [ "American Law" ] }