Author:
Boyd Christina L.,Lynch Michael S.,Madonna Anthony J.
Abstract
AbstractOn November 21, 2013, U.S. Senate Democrats utilized the long threatened “nuclear option,” thereby allowing a simple-majority of the chamber to end debate on lower federal court judicial nominations. Formal theory predicts that this change should permit the president to nominate more ideologically extreme nominees. By comparing President Obama’s nominees before and after the Senate’s change to the confirmation process, we are able to provide the first comprehensive examination of how the nuclear option is likely to impact the ideological makeup of the lower federal courts. We additionally examine the impact of the nuclear option on time to confirmation and nominee success. Our results indicate, while post-nuclear option nominees are not significantly more liberal, they are being confirmed more often and more quickly, allowing Obama and Senate Democrats to more efficiently fill the federal judiciary with Democratic-leaning judges.
Subject
General Social Sciences,Sociology and Political Science
Reference116 articles.
1. The System of Shared The President Congress the of;Snyder;American Journal Law Economics Organization,2000
2. Senate Makes Unprecedented Rules Change Amid Late - Night Debate over Jobs Procedure Washington Post;Sonmez;October,2011
3. Madonna Going Nuclear Senate Perspectives on;Binder;Style Politics,2007
4. Legislative Obstructionism;Wawro;Annual Review of Political Science,2010
5. From to Why Some Presidential Nominations Fail in the Senate;Krutz;American Political Science Review,1998
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献