Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010:
Actions by the Senate, the Judiciary
Committee, and the President
Denis Steven Rutkus
Specialist on the Federal Judiciary
Maureen Bearden
Information Research Specialist
August 25, 200923, 2010
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RL33225
CRS Report for Congress
Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Summary
The process of appointing Supreme Court Justices has undergone changes over two centuries, but
its most basic feature, the sharing of power between the President and Senate, has remained
unchanged. To receive a lifetime appointment to the Court, a candidate must first be nominated
by the President and then confirmed by the Senate. A key role also has come to be played midway
in the process by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Table 1 of this report lists and describes actions taken by the Senate, the Senate Judiciary
Committee, and the President on all Supreme Court nominations, from 1789 to the present. The
table provides the name of each person nominated to the Court and the name of the President
making the nomination. It also tracks the dates of formal actions taken, and time elapsing
between these actions, by the Senate or Senate Judiciary Committee on each nomination, starting
with the date that the Senate received the nomination from the President.
Of the 43 Presidents in the history of the United States, 40 made nominations to the Supreme
Court. They made a total of 159160 nominations, of which 123124 (more than three-quarters) received
Senate confirmation. Also, on 12 occasions in the nation’s history, Presidents have made
temporary recess appointments to the Court, without submitting nominations to the Senate. Of the
36 unsuccessful Supreme Court nominations, 11 were rejected in Senate roll-call votes, 11 were
withdrawn by the President, and 14 lapsed at the end of a session of Congress. Six individuals
whose initial nominations were not confirmed were later re-nominated and confirmed to positions
on the Court.
A total of 116117 of the 159160 nominations were referred to a Senate committee, with 115116 of them to
the Judiciary Committee (including almost all nominations since 1868). Prior to 1916, the
Judiciary Committee considered these nominations behind closed doors. Since 1946, however,
almost all nominees have received public confirmation hearings. Most recent hearings have lasted
four or more days.
In recent decades, from the late 1960s to the present, the Judiciary Committee has tended to take
more time before starting hearings and casting final votes on Supreme Court nominations than it
did previously. The median time taken for the full Senate to take final action on Supreme Court
nominations also has increased in recent decades, dwarfing the median time taken on earlier
nominations.
For another perspective on Supreme Court nominations, which reviews, among other things,
when Presidents announced their intentions to nominate someone (as distinct from when they
formally transmitted Supreme Court nominations to the Senate), see CRS Report RL33118, Speed
of Presidential and Senate Actions on Supreme Court Nominations, 1900-20092010, by R. Sam
Garrett and Denis Steven Rutkus. For an examination of floor procedures used by the full Senate
in considering Supreme Court nominations, see CRS Report RL33247, Supreme Court
Nominations: Senate Floor Procedure and Practice, 1789-20092010, by Richard S. Beth and Betsy
Palmer.
This report will be updated upon the occasion of the next Supreme Court nomination.
Congressional Research Service
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................1
Description of Report’s Contents.................................................................................................1
Findings from the Nominations Table..........................................................................................3
Number of Nominations and Nominees .................................................................................3
Presidents Who Made the Nominations .................................................................................3
Date That Nominations Were Received in Senate ..................................................................5
Referral of Nominations to Senate Judiciary Committee........................................................5
Nominations That Received Public Confirmation Hearings ...................................................6
Advent of Public Hearings ..............................................................................................6
Length of Hearings in Days.............................................................................................86
Nominations Reported Out of Committee to Full Senate........................................................8
Reporting........................................................................................................................8
Reporting with a Favorable Recommendation .................................................................9
Reporting Without Recommendation...............................................................................9
Reporting with an Unfavorable Recommendation............................................................98
Nominations Not Reported Out of Committee ..................................................................... 10
Final Action by the Senate or the President.......................................................................... 10
Days from Date of Senate Receipt of Nomination to First Hearing ...................................... 12
Days from Senate Receipt to Final Committee Vote............................................................. 13
Days from Senate Receipt to Final Senate or Presidential Action ......................................... 14
Recess Appointments to the Supreme Court ........................................................................ 16
Concluding Observations .......................................................................................................... 16
Tables
Table 1. Nominations to the Supreme Court of the United States, 1789-2009....August 5, 2010 ......................... 18
Table 2. Senate Votes on Whether to Confirm Supreme Court Nominations: Number
Made by Voice Vote/Unanimous Consent (UC) or by Roll-Call Vote ...................................... 42
Contacts
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 42
Congressional Research Service
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Introduction
The procedure for appointing a Justice to the Supreme Court of the United States is provided for
by the Constitution in only a few words. The “Appointments Clause” (Article II, Section 2, clause
2) states that the President “shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the
Senate, shall appoint ... Judges of the supreme Court.” The process of appointing Justices has
undergone changes over two centuries, but its most basic feature—the sharing of power between
the President and Senate—has remained unchanged. To receive a lifetime appointment to the
Court, a candidate must first be nominated by the President and then confirmed by the Senate. An
important role also has come to be played midway in the process (after the President selects, but
before the Senate considers) by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
On rare occasions, Presidents also have made Supreme Court appointments without the Senate’s
consent, when the Senate was in recess. Such “recess appointments,” however, were temporary,
with their terms expiring at the end of the Senate’s next session. The last recess appointments to
the Court were made in the 1950s.
The need for a Supreme Court nomination arises when a vacancy occurs or is scheduled to occur on
the Court. The most recent Court vacancy was created when Associate Justice David H. SouterJohn Paul Stevens
retired on June 29, 200928, 2010. Justice SouterStevens had given President Barack Obama advance notice, on May
1April
9, of his intention to step down from the Court. In response, President Obama on June 1 nominated
Sonia Sotomayor, a U.S. court of appeals judgeMay 10 nominated Elena Kagan,
Solicitor General of the United States, to replace Justice SouterStevens. It was the 159th160th time a
President of
the United States has nominated someone to be a Supreme Court Justice. On July 28,
20, following four
days of confirmation hearings, the Senate Judiciary Committee, by a vote of 13-6,
favorably reported the Sotomayor
the Kagan nomination to the Senate. Following three days of floor debate, the
Senate, on August 6, confirmed Judge Sotomayor5,
confirmed Ms.Kagan to the Court by a vote of 68-3163-37.
In the past, most, but not all, Supreme Court nominations have received Senate confirmation. From
the first appointments in 1789, the Senate has confirmed 123124 out of 159160 Court nominations. Of the 36
unsuccessful nominations, 11 were rejected in Senate roll-call votes, while most of the rest, in the
face of committee or Senate opposition to the nominee or the President, were withdrawn by the
President, or were postponed, tabled, or never voted on by the Senate. The 36 unconfirmed
nominations, however, included those of six individuals who were later re-nominated and confirmed.
Description of Report’s Contents
This report lists and describes actions taken by the Senate, the Senate Judiciary Committee, and
the President on all Supreme Court nominations, from 1789 to the present. The listing appears in
a Supreme Court nominations table, Table 1, later in this report. Preceding the table is summary
text, which highlights certain nominations statistics derived from the table. The text also provides
historical background information on the Supreme Court appointment process and uses
nominations statistics from the table to shed light on ways in which the appointment process has
evolved over time. Many of the statistical findings discussed, for example, provide historical
perspective on the emergence, and then increased involvement, of the Senate Judiciary
Committee in the appointment process.
Congressional Research Service
1
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010
Specifically, the table lists, for each Supreme Court nomination, the following:
•
name of the person nominated (the nominee);
Congressional Research Service
1
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2009
•
name of the President who made the nomination;
•
date the nomination was made by the President and received in the Senate;1
•
date(s) of any committee hearings held on the nomination that were open to the
public;
•
type and date of final committee action; and
•
type and date of final action by the Senate or, in rarer instances, by the President
(when the final action taken on a nomination was its withdrawal by the
President).
Table 1 also shows the speed with which action was taken on each nomination, specifically
presenting the number of days that elapsed from the date the nomination was formally received in
the Senate until the following:
•
the first day of public confirmation hearings (if any);
•
the date of final committee action (if any); and
•
the date of final Senate action or presidential withdrawal of the nomination.
The table also lists all recess appointments to the Supreme Court, as well as the later nomination
of each recess appointee.
Table 1, it should be emphasized, tracks the dates of formal actions taken by the President, the
Senate, and the Senate Judiciary Committee on each Supreme Court nomination. The table, for
example, records the dates that nominations were actually made and transmitted by the President
to the Senate. The table, however, does not track the dates on which Presidents announced the
intention to nominate someone to be a Justice or on which the Senate informally first became
aware of each President’s nominee selections. A learned of
prospective Court vacancies or announced their intention to nominate someone to be a Justice. A
discussion focusing more closely on such
informal steps in the Supreme Court appointment
process can be found in CRS Report RL33118,
Speed of Presidential and Senate Actions on
Supreme Court Nominations, 1900-20092010, by R. Sam
Garrett and Denis Steven Rutkus.
Actions by the full Senate tracked systematically in Table 1 are those on which the Senate took
final action (ordinarily in the form of confirmation, and less often in the form of rejecting,
tabling, or postponing action on a nomination). For certain Supreme Court nominations, Table 1
also provides dates of procedural actions taken on the Senate floor, prior to or after final Senate
action, in order to put the final action in fuller context. The table, however, does not account for
all Senate procedural actions on, or for all dates of Senate floor consideration of, Supreme Court
nominations. For more comprehensive information on procedural actions taken by the full Senate
on past Supreme Court nominations, see CRS Report RL33247, Supreme Court Nominations:
Senate Floor Procedure and Practice, 1789-2006.
2010, by Richard S. Beth and Betsy Palmer.
1
Usually the date on which the President formally makes a nomination, by signing a nomination message, is the same
as the date on which the nomination is received in the Senate. In Table 1, these two dates are the same for any given
nomination when only one date is shown in the “Date received in Senate” column. However, for the occasional
nomination made by a President on a date prior to the nomination’s receipt by the Senate, the earlier presidential
nomination date is distinguished, in parentheses, from the date when the nomination was received by the Senate.
Congressional Research Service
2
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
In listing all persons ever nominated to the Supreme Court, Table 1 includes the names of those
who were not confirmed as well as those who were confirmed but did not assume their appointive
office.2 A list solely of the 110111 individuals who assumed office and served on the Court (with
judicial oath dates and service termination dates for each Justice) is available on the Court’s
website.3
Findings from the Nominations Table
Number of Nominations and Nominees
Table 1 lists all 159160 Supreme Court nominations since 1789. Each of the 159160 nominations
entailed a President signing a nomination message, which was then transmitted to, and received
by, the Senate. A lesser number of separate individuals, 140141, were actually nominated to the
Court, with some of them nominated more than once. 4
Of the 159160 total nominations to the Court, 22 were to the position of Chief Justice and the other
137138 to a position as Associate Justice. The 22 Chief Justice nominations involved 20 persons
nominated once, and one person nominated twice.5 The 137138 Associate Justice nominations
involved 120121 persons nominated once, 7 persons nominated twice, and 1 person nominated three
times.
Presidents Who Made the Nominations
Of the 43 Presidents in the history of the United States, 40 have made nominations to the
Supreme Court.6 These 40 are listed in the second column of Table 1. All but one of the 40
2
Table 1 identifies eight Supreme Court nominees who subsequent to Senate confirmation did not assume the office to
which they had been appointed: Seven declined the office, and one died before assuming it. It should be noted,
however, that one of the seven who declined the office, William Cushing—confirmed to be Chief Justice in 1796—was
at the time serving on the Court as an Associate Justice, and continued to serve in that capacity until 1810. Another of
the seven, John Jay—confirmed to be Chief Justice in 1800—had served earlier on the Court, as the Court’s first Chief
Justice, from 1789 to 1795.
3
The list, available at http://www.supremecourtussupremecourt.gov/about/members.pdfmembers_text.aspx, presents first the names of 17 persons who
who have served as Chief Justice, followed by the 99100 persons who have served as Associate Justices. The listing of 116
117 names in all (17 + 99100) includes those of five Chief Justices who earlier had served as Associate Justices, hence reducing
to 111
reducing to 112 the total number of persons who have served as members of the Court.
4
Specifically, eight persons were nominated twice to the same Court position (seven to be Associate Justice, one to be
Chief Justice); one person was nominated three times to be Associate Justice; and nine persons were nominated first to
be Associate Justice and later to be Chief Justice. The sum of 19 (the number of Court nominations that were not a
person’s first nomination to the Court) and 140 (the number of persons nominated to the Court at least once) is 159
(total Supreme Court nominations).
5
The nation’s first Chief Justice, John Jay, was nominated to that position twice. Jay was first nominated, and
confirmed, in September 1789. He resigned as Chief Justice in 1795 to serve as governor of New York. In December
1800, Jay was nominated and confirmed a second time as Chief Justice, but declined the appointment. For analysis of
the process by which a Chief Justice is appointed, accompanied by a list of all Chief Justice nominations from 1789 to
the present (including the nomination, confirmation, judicial oath, and end-of-service dates of Chief Justice nominees,
as well as their ages at time of appointment and upon termination of service), see CRS Report RL32821, The Chief
Justice of the United States: Responsibilities of the Office and Process for Appointment, by Denis Steven Rutkus and
Lorraine H. Tong.
6
The three Presidents not to have made any Supreme Court nominations were William Henry Harrison, Zachary
Taylor, and Jimmy Carter, with no Court vacancies having occurred while they were in office. See “Table 3. Supreme
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
3
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Presidents succeeded in having at least one Supreme Court nomination receive Senate
confirmation. The one exception was President Andrew Johnson, whose only Court nomination,
of Henry Stanbery in 1866, was thwarted when the Senate enacted legislation eliminating the
Associate Justice position to which Stanbery had been nominated. 7
As Table 1 shows, the number of nominations made to the Supreme Court has varied greatly
from President to President. For any given President, the number of nominations will be affected
by various factors, including the length of time the President was in office, the number of
vacancies occurring on the Court during that presidency, and whether more than one nomination
was required to fill a Court vacancy due to a previous nomination’s failure to be confirmed.
Examination of the nominations to the Court for each President reveals that one less than half of
the Presidents (21 of 43) made four or more nominations, and one more than half (22 of 43) made
three or fewer. One less than half of the Presidents (21 of 43) saw three or more of their Court
nominations confirmed, and one more than half (22 of 43) saw two or fewer confirmed.
The President with the most Supreme Court nominations and confirmations was George
Washington with 14 nominations, 12 of which were confirmed. 8 The two Presidents with the
second-largest number of Court nominations were John Tyler and Franklin D. Roosevelt, with
nine each. Only one of Tyler’s nine nominations, however, received Senate confirmation, while
all nine of FDR’s were confirmed. The President with the largest number of Supreme Court
confirmations in one term (apart from the first eight of George Washington’s nominations—all in
his first term, and all confirmed) was William Howard Taft, who, during his four years in office,
made six Court nominations, all of which were confirmed. SevenSix Presidents made only one
Supreme Supreme
Court nomination each, with the nominations of sixfive of these Presidents receiving
confirmation.9
And, as noted above, three of the nation’s 43 Presidents were unable to make a
(...continued) single nomination
to the Court, because no vacancies occurred on the Court during their presidencies.
(...continued)
Taylor, and Jimmy Carter, with no Court vacancies having occurred while they were in office. See “Table 3. Supreme
Court Nominations, by President, 1789 to 2008,” in CRS Report RL31171, Supreme Court Nominations Not
Confirmed, 1789-2008August 2010, by Henry B. Hogue, which lists the number of vacancies on the Court that existed
during each
presidency, from George Washington to George W. Bush. While it is unremarkable that no vacancies
occurred during
the short-lived presidencies of Harrison (Mar. 4 to Apr. 4, 1841) and Taylor (Mar. 5, 1849 to July 9,
1850), Jimmy
Carter’s presidency (Jan. 20, 1977 to Jan. 20, 1981) is remarkable as the only one lasting a full term
during which no
Supreme Court vacancies occurred.
7
See Myron Jacobstein and Roy M. Mersky, The Rejected (Milpitas, CA: Toucan Valley Publications, 1993), pp. 6974. (Hereafter cited as Jacobstein and Mersky, The Rejected.)
8
President Washington, early in his first term of office, was presented with the opportunity to make six Supreme Court
nominations, as the Judiciary Act of 1789 (1 Stat. 73 (1789)) set the number of Justice positions on the newly
established Court at six. On September 24, 1789, the President nominated six persons to the Court, and two days later
the Senate voted for their confirmation. However, one of the confirmed nominees, Robert Harrison of Maryland,
declined the appointment, resulting in President Washington, in 1790, making a seventh nomination, of James Iredell of
North Carolina, whose confirmation by the Senate put the six-member Court at full strength. Subsequently during the
Washington presidency, four vacancies occurred on the Court, which resulted in the President making seven more
nominations. Four of these seven nominations were confirmed by the Senate, with the nominees accepting their
appointments to the Court. The other three nominations involved the first of two nominations of William Paterson of
New Jersey in 1793 (who, after his first nomination was withdrawn, was re-nominated by President Washington and
confirmed), John Rutledge of South Carolina (whose nomination in 1795 to be Chief Justice was rejected by the
Senate), and William Cushing of Massachusetts (whose nomination in 1796 to be Chief Justice was confirmed by the
Senate, but who declined the appointment).
9
The sixfive Presidents whose single Supreme Court nominations received Senate confirmation were Franklin Pierce,
James A. Garfield, William McKinley, Calvin Coolidge, Gerald R. Ford, and Barack Obama. (However, as the current
White House occupant, President Obama could have the opportunity to make additional nominations to the Court,
provided more Court vacancies occur during his presidency.) and Gerald R. Ford. As mentioned above, the one President
whose single
Supreme Court nomination did not receive confirmation was Andrew Johnson.
Congressional Research Service
4
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2009
single nomination to the Court, because no vacancies occurred on the Court during their
presidencies.2010
Date That Nominations Were Received in Senate
The Supreme Court appointment process officially begins when the President signs a message to
the Senate nominating someone for appointment to the Court. Usually on the date of the signing,
the message is delivered to the Senate and recorded in the Senate Executive Journal as having
been received that day.10 However, in 30 instances (all but two prior to the 20th century), Supreme
Court messages were recorded in the Senate Executive Journal as received in the Senate on a day
after they were signed by the President—usually the next day. In Table 1, in the “Date received in
Senate” column, a second date is provided in parentheses (as the “Nom. date”), whenever a
President made a nomination on a day prior to its receipt by the Senate.
Referral of Nominations to Senate Judiciary Committee
Although referral of Supreme Court nominations to the Senate Judiciary Committee is now
standard practice, such referrals were not always the case. Table 1 shows that 116 of 159117 of 160
Supreme Court nominations have been referred to a Senate committee, 115116 of them to the
Judiciary Committee.
The first standing legislative committees of the Senate, including the Judiciary Committee, were
created in 1816. Only once previously was a Supreme Court nomination referred to committee,
when, in 1811, the Senate referred the nomination of Alexander Wolcott to a select committee of
three Members. For roughly half a century after the Judiciary Committee’s creation, nominations,
rather than being automatically referred to the committee, were referred by motion only. From
1816 to 1868, more than two-thirds of the nominations (26 out of 38 nominations), were referred
to the committee. During this period, the confirmation success rate was roughly the same for
nominations referred, 15 of 26, as it was for those not referred, seven out of 12.
In 1868, Senate rules were changed to provide that all nominations be referred to appropriate
standing committees, unless otherwise ordered by the Senate.11 Subsequently, from 1868 to the
present day, 8890 of 9596 Supreme Court nominations have been referred to the Judiciary Committee.
The seven nominations not referred to committee were of persons who, at the time of their
nomination, were a former President, a Senator, a former Senator, an Attorney General and
10
former U.S. Representative, a former Secretary of War, or a sitting Associate Justice, 12 and all
10
A President may announce the selection of a nominee well before transmitting a nomination message to the Senate.
For instance, President George W. Bush announced his selection of Samuel A. Alito Jr. to be a Supreme Court nominee
on Oct. 31, 2005, but formally signed and transmitted the nomination of Alito to the Senate on Nov. 10, 2005. For a
complete list, from 1900 to 2009, of the dates on which Presidents announced their Supreme Court nominees (as
distinguished from when they signed and transmitted nomination documents to the Senate), see CRS Report RL33118,
Speed of Presidential and Senate Actions on Supreme Court Nominations, 1900-20092010, by R. Sam Garrett and Denis
Steven Rutkus.
11
See U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on the Judiciary, History of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States
Senate, 1816-1981. Sen. Doc. No. 97-18, 97th Cong., 1st sess. (Washington: GPO, 1982), p. iv; also, U.S. Senate,
History of the Committee on Rules and Administration—United States Senate, prepared by Floyd M. Riddick,
Parliamentarian Emeritus of the Senate, 96th Cong., 1st sess., S. Doc. No. 96-27 (Washington: GPO, 1980). Riddick
provides, on pp. 21-28, the full text of the general revision of the Senate rules, adopted in 1868, including, on p. 26, the
following rule: “When nominations shall be made by the President of the United States to the Senate, they shall, unless
otherwise ordered by the Senate, be referred to appropriate committees.... ”
Congressional Research Service
5
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2009
former U.S. Representative, a former Secretary of War, or a sitting Associate Justice, 12 and all
12
The nominations from 1868 to the present not referred to the Judiciary Committee were those of: Edwin M. Stanton
in 1869 (at time of nomination, former Secretary of War); Edward D. White in 1894 (Senator); Edward D. White again,
in 1910, this time to be Chief Justice (Associate Justice at time of nomination, and former Senator); William Howard
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
5
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010
were easily confirmed. The last Supreme Court nomination not referred to the Judiciary
Committee was that of Senator James F. Byrnes in 1941. The Senate by unanimous consent
considered and confirmed the Byrnes nomination, without referral to committee, on the day it
received the nomination from the President.
Nominations That Received Public Confirmation Hearings
Table 1, in the “Public hearing date(s)” column, lists dates on which the full Judiciary
Committee, or a Judiciary subcommittee, held public confirmation hearings on Supreme Court
nominations. Included in this listing are public sessions of the committee at which either Supreme
Court nominees testified on their own behalf and/or outside witnesses testified for or against the
nominees.
Advent of Public Hearings
Before 1916, the Judiciary Committee considered Supreme Court nominations behind closed
doors. Thus, until that year, there are no entries in the “Public hearing date(s)” column. Rather,
committee sessions on Court nominations typically were limited to committee members
discussing and voting on a nominee in executive session, without hearing testimony from outside
witnesses.13 In 1916, for the first time, the committee held open confirmation hearings on a
Supreme Court nomination—that of Louis D. Brandeis to be an Associate Justice—at which
outside witnesses (but not the nominee) testified. More days of public hearings (19) were held on
the Brandeis nomination than on any Supreme Court nomination since. The Brandeis hearings,
however, did not set immediately into place a new policy of open confirmation hearings for
Supreme Court nominations, since each of the next six nominations (during the years 1916 to
1923) was either considered directly by the Senate, without referral to the Judiciary Committee,
or was acted on by the committee without the holding of confirmation hearings.
From 1925 to 1946, public confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominations became the
more common, if not invariable, practice of the Judiciary Committee. In 1925, Harlan F. Stone
became the first Supreme Court nominee to appear in person and testify at his confirmation
hearings. 14 During the next two decades, the Stone nomination was one of 11 Court nominations
12
The nominations from 1868 to the present not referred to the Judiciary Committee were those of: Edwin M. Stanton
in 1869 (at time of nomination, former Secretary of War); Edward D. White in 1894 (Senator); Joseph M. McKenna in
1897 (Attorney General, and former U.S. Representative); Edward D. White again, in 1910, this time to be Chief
Justice (Associate Justice at time of nomination, and former Senator); William Howard (...continued)
Taft in 1921 (former President);
George Sutherland in 1922 (former Senator); and James F. Byrnes in 1941 (Senator).
13
At least once in the 19th century, however, in 1873, the Judiciary Committee did hear witnesses testify concerning a
Supreme Court nomination—that of George H. Williams to be Chief Justice—but these two days of hearings, on Dec.
16 and 17, 1873, were held in closed session. The closed-door sessions were held to examine documents and hear
testimony from witnesses relevant to a controversy that arose over the Williams nomination only after the committee
had reported the nomination to the Senate. The controversy prompted the Senate to recommit the nomination to the
Judiciary Committee and to authorize the committee “to send for persons and papers.” U.S. Congress, Senate, Journal
of the Executive Proceedings of the Senate of the United States of America, vol. 19 (Washington: GPO, 1901), p. 189.
After holding the two closed-door sessions on Dec. 16 and 17, the committee did not re-report the nomination to the
Senate. Amid press reports of significant opposition to the nomination both in the Judiciary Committee and the Senate
as a whole, the nomination, at Williams’s request, was withdrawn by President Ulysses S. Grant on Jan. 8, 1874. See
Jacobstein and Mersky, The Rejected, pp. 82-87.
14
For a discussion of the advent of Supreme Court nominee appearances before the Senate Judiciary Committee,
(continued...)starting with Harlan F. Stone in 1925 (and carrying through the nominations of Abe Fortas and Homer Thornberry in
1968), see, James A. Thorpe, “The Appearance of Supreme Court Nominees Before the Senate Judiciary Committee,”
Journal of Public Law, vol. 18, 1969, pp. 371-402.
Congressional Research Service
6
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
that received public confirmation hearings before either the full Judiciary Committee or a
Judiciary subcommittee, 15 while five other nominations did not receive public hearings. One of
the five nominees not receiving a public confirmation hearing was Senator James F. Byrnes,
whose nomination in 1941, as noted earlier, was considered directly by the Senate without
referral to the Judiciary Committee. 16
Not indicated in the “Public hearing date(s)”column is the precise length (in minutes or hours) of
each public hearing session. The hearing sessions for a few Supreme Court nominations during
the 1925 to 1946 period lasted for hours, extending over several days;17 others, however, were
brief and perfunctory in nature, held only long enough to accommodate the small number of
witnesses who wished to testify against a nominee. 18
From Tom C. Clark’s appointment in 1949 through the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor in 2009,
all Elena Kagan in 2010, all
but three of 3536 Supreme Court nominations have received public confirmation hearings before
the the
Senate Judiciary Committee or a Judiciary subcommittee. 19 The first of the three exceptions
involved the 1954 nomination of John M. Harlan II, made less than a month before the final
adjournment of a Congress. At the beginning of the next Congress, however, Harlan was renominated, and hearings were held on that nomination.20 The second and third exceptions
(...continued)
starting with Harlan F. Stone in 1925 (and carrying through the nominations of Abe Fortas and Homer Thornberry in
1968), see, James A. Thorpe, “The Appearance of Supreme Court Nominees Before the Senate Judiciary Committee,”
Journal of Public Law, vol. 18, 1969, pp. 371-402.
15
15
A scholar examining the procedures followed by the committee in its consideration of 15 Supreme Court
nominations referred to it between 1923 and 1946 found that, with two exceptions—the nominations of Charles Evans
Hughes in 1930 and Harold H. Burton to be Associate Justices in 1945—all of the nominations were first “processed by
a subcommittee prior to consideration by the full committee membership.” David Gregg Farrelly, “Operational Aspects
of the Senate Judiciary Committee,” (Ph.D. diss., Princeton University: 1949), pp. 184-185. (Hereafter cited as Farrelly,
“Operational Aspects.”)
16
The four other nominations not receiving public confirmation hearings even though referred to the Judiciary
Committee were of former New York governor and former Supreme Court Associate Justice Charles Evans Hughes in
1930, former federal prosecutor Owen J. Roberts in 1930, Senator Hugo L. Black in 1937, and Senator Harold H.
Burton in 1945.
Farrelly, in “Operational Aspects,” also lists the Supreme Court nomination of former Michigan governor Frank
Murphy in 1940 as one not receiving a confirmation hearing. Farrelly notes, at pp. 191-192, that the Senate Judiciary
subcommittee which first processed the nomination “voted against public hearings.” That vote notwithstanding, the
nominee voluntarily appeared before the subcommittee on Jan. 11, 1940, in a public session at which four Senators “all
questioned Mr. Murphy about his views of the Constitution and the duties of a Supreme Court Justice.” “Senate Body
Backs Murphy for Court,” New York Times, Jan. 12, 1940, p. 1. Based on this and other similar newspaper accounts of
the subcommittee session, Jan. 11, 1940 is listed below, in Table 1, as a public hearing date for the Murphy
nomination.
17
See, in Table 1, the multiple hearing days for the nominations of Felix Frankfurter in 1939 and Robert H. Jackson in
1941.
18
For example, a Judiciary subcommittee hearing on the 1932 nomination of Benjamin N. Cardozo lasted only five
minutes, during which one witness testified in opposition. Likewise, when the Judiciary Committee extended open
invitations for witnesses to testify in opposition at the confirmation hearings for Stanley F. Reed in 1938, William O.
Douglas in 1939, Harlan F. Stone (for Chief Justice) in 1941, Wiley B. Rutledge in 1943, and Fred M.Vinson (for Chief
Justice) in 1946, no witnesses appeared to protest against Douglas or Stone, and “only one or two persons filed protests
in each case against Reed, Vinson and Rutledge.” Farrelly, “Operational Aspects,” pp. 194-195.
19
The last Supreme Court nomination on which a Senate Judiciary subcommittee held hearings was the 1954
nomination of Earl Warren to be Chief Justice. The subcommittee held public hearings on the nomination on Feb. 2 and
19, 1954, after which the full committee, on Feb. 24, 1954, voted to report the nomination favorably. All subsequent
hearings on Supreme Court nominations were held by the full Judiciary Committee.
20
The Judiciary Committee held two days of confirmation hearings on the second Harlan nomination, on Feb. 24 and
25, 1955. The Feb. 24 session, held in closed session, heard the testimony of nine witnesses (seven in favor of
confirmation, and two opposed). Luther A. Huston, “Harlan Hearing Held by Senators,” New York Times, Feb. 25,
1955, p. 8. The committee also began the Feb. 25 hearing in closed session, to hear the testimony of additional
witnesses. However, for Judge Harlan, who was the last scheduled witness, the committee “voted to open the hearing to
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
7
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
involved the Associate Justice nominations of John G. Roberts Jr. and Harriet E. Miers in 2005,
both of which were withdrawn by the President before the scheduled start of confirmation
hearings.
Length of Hearings in Days
The number of days given to public confirmation hearings has varied greatly from one Supreme
Court nomination to another, particularly in recent decades. Following the 19 days of hearings
held on the Brandeis nomination in 1916, Court nominations through the Associate Justice
nomination of Abe Fortas in 1965 typically received either one or two days of hearings. However,
from 1967 through August 2009, 162010, 17 of the 2223 Court nominations which advanced through the
hearings stage received four or more days of open confirmation hearings. Four of the 1617
nominations received 11 or more days of hearings,21 while another received eight days of
hearings. 22 By contrast, only three of the 2223 nominations received two or fewer days of
hearings. 23
Nominations Reported Out of Committee to Full Senate
Supreme Court nominations referred to the Judiciary Committee have almost always been
reported to the Senate. If a majority of its members oppose confirmation, the Judiciary Committee
technically may decide not to report a Supreme Court nomination. (This tactic would prevent the
full Senate from considering the nominee, unless the Senate were able to undertake successfully
the discharge of the committee.) Table 1, however, shows that instances of the committee not
reporting have been rare. Of the 115116 Supreme Court nominations referred to the Judiciary
Committee, 107108 were reported to the Senate. 24 The committee has reported these nominations in
the following four ways.
Reporting
For most of the first five decades in which the Judiciary Committee considered Supreme Court
nominations (1828 to 1863), its usual practice was simply to report these nominations to the
Senate, without any official indication of the committee members’ opinions regarding them.
(...continued)
25, 1955. The Feb. 24 session, held in closed session, heard the testimony of nine witnesses (seven in favor of
confirmation, and two opposed). Luther A. Huston, “Harlan Hearing Held by Senators,” New York Times, Feb. 25,
1955, p. 8. The committee also began the Feb. 25 hearing in closed session, to hear the testimony of additional
witnesses. However, for Judge Harlan, who was the last scheduled witness, the committee “voted to open the hearing toTwenty-three nominations were reported to the Senate in this way, and 15 of them were
confirmed.
(...continued)
newspaper reporters for his testimony.” Luther A. Huston, “Harlan Disavows ‘One World’ Aims in Senate Inquiry,”
New York Times, Feb. 26, 1955, p. 1.
21
These were the nominations of Robert H. Bork in 1987 (12 hearing days), Clarence Thomas in 1991 (11 days), and
Abe Fortas and Homer Thornberry in 1968 (11 days for their joint hearings).
22
In 1969, eight days of confirmation hearings were held on the nomination of Clement F. Haynsworth.
23
One day of hearings each was held on the nominations of Warren E. Burger (to be Chief Justice) in 1969 and Harry
A. Blackmun in 1970, while two days of hearings were held on the nomination of Antonin Scalia in 1986.
24
As noted earlier, only once prior to the establishment of the Judiciary Committee in 1816 was a Supreme Court
nomination referred to committee, and that nomination was reported to the Senate as well. See, in Table 1 the1the
nomination in 1811 of Alexander Wolcott, which was considered by a select committee and then reported to the Senate,
where it was rejected by a 9-24 vote.
Congressional Research Service
8
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2009
Twenty-three nominations were reported to the Senate in this way, and 15 of them were
confirmed.2010
Reporting with a Favorable Recommendation
In 1870, the Judiciary Committee initiated the practice of reporting to the Senate an explicit
recommendation in favor of confirmation whenever a majority of members supported a Supreme
Court nominee. Over the course of almost a century and a half, the committee has favorably
reported 7374 Supreme Court nominations, with 6768 receiving Senate confirmation. 25
Reporting Without Recommendation
On four occasions—three times in the late 19th century and once in the late 20th century—the
Judiciary Committee has voted to report a Supreme Court nomination while explicitly stating it
was not making a recommendation to the Senate. On each occasion, the committee reported a
nomination without urging the Senate either to confirm or to reject.26 The Senate confirmed three
of the nominations that were reported in this way, while rejecting the fourth.27
Reporting with an Unfavorable Recommendation
On seven occasions—five times in the 19th century and twice in the 20th century—the Judiciary
Committee voted to report a Supreme Court nomination with a recommendation to the Senate that
it reject the nomination. Only two of the seven nominations received Senate confirmation (and
each only by a close roll call vote);28 the Senate rejected four of the others29 and postponed taking
action on the fifth. 30
25
The six favorably reported nominations which failed to receive Senate confirmation involved these nominees:
George H. Williams, for Chief Justice, in 1873 (nomination withdrawn); Caleb Cushing, in 1874 (nomination
withdrawn); Pierce Butler in 1922 (no action taken by Senate); Abe Fortas, for Chief Justice, in 1968 (nomination
withdrawn); Clement F. Haynsworth Jr. in 1969 (rejected by Senate); and G. Harrold Carswell in 1970 (rejected by
Senate). Butler, it should be noted, was re-nominated and confirmed.
26
A report that states it is not accompanied by a recommendation can be a way to alert the Senate that a substantial
number of committee members have some reservations about the nominee which, however, do not rise, at that point, to
the level of opposition; it might also be a way to bridge or downplay differences between committee members who
favor confirmation and other members who oppose it. The latter, for example, was said to be the purpose for the
Judiciary Committee in 1888 reporting the Chief Justice nomination of Melville W. Fuller without recommendation;
the action was described in a news account as a “compromise between the Democratic minority who desired a report to
the Senate in favor of confirmation, and the Republican majority, who desired to defeat the nomination .... ” “Mr.
Fuller’s Nomination,” Washington Post, July 3, 1888, p. 1.
27
The three nominees confirmed by the Senate after the Judiciary Committee explicitly reported their nominations
without recommendation were: Melville W. Fuller, for Chief Justice, in 1888; George Shiras Jr. in 1892; and Clarence
Thomas in 1991. A fourth nomination reported without recommendation, Wheeler H. Peckham, in 1894, was rejected
by the Senate.
28
See, in Table 1, the second nomination of Stanley Matthews in 1881 (confirmed 24-23) and the nomination of Lucius
Lucius Q. C. Lamar in 1888 (confirmed 32-28).
29
The nominations reported unfavorably and then rejected by the Senate involved these nominees: Ebenezer R. Hoar in
1869 (rejected 24-33); William B. Hornblower in 1894 (rejected 24-30); John J. Parker in 1930 (rejected 39-41); and
Robert H. Bork in 1987 (rejected 42-58).
30
The Senate in 1829 postponed taking action on the nomination of John Crittenden after receiving an adverse report
on the nomination from the Judiciary Committee.
Congressional Research Service
9
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Nominations Not Reported Out of Committee
Of the 115116 Supreme Court nominations referred to the Judiciary Committee since its
establishment, eight were not reported by the committee to the Senate. Although five of the
nominees were never confirmed to the Court,31 the other three ultimately were, after being renominated. 32
Final Action by the Senate or the President
From the first Supreme Court appointments in 1789 to the present day, Presidents have made 159160
nominations to the Court. Table 1 shows, in the “Final action by Senate or President” column,
that the Senate confirmed 123124 of these nominations, or roughly three-fourths.33 Of the 36
nominations that were not confirmed, 11 were rejected by the Senate (all in roll-call votes), 34 11
were withdrawn by the President,35 and 14 lapsed at the end of a session of Congress without a
31
The final outcome for these five nominees, however, was determined not by the failure of their nominations to be
reported out of committee, but by action, or lack of action, taken outside the committee—by the Senate, Congress as a
whole, or the President. In 1853, the nomination of William C. Micou was referred to the Judiciary Committee and on
the same day ordered discharged by the Senate, where no action was taken. In 1866, the nomination of Henry Stanbery
was referred to the Judiciary Committee, but shortly afterwards, while the nomination was pending in the Senate, the
Associate Justice position to which Stanbery had been nominated was eliminated by statute. In 1893, the nomination of
William B. Hornblower was referred to the Judiciary Committee, but not reported; later that year, in a new session of
Congress, Hornblower was re-nominated, reported unfavorably by the Judiciary Committee (in early 1894), and
rejected by the Senate, 24-30. In 1968, the Judiciary Committee declined to report the nomination of Homer
Thornberry to succeed Associate Justice Abe Fortas until the final outcome of the nomination of Fortas to be Chief
Justice was determined. The Thornberry and Fortas nominations were both withdrawn by the President after a motion
to close debate on the Fortas nomination failed to pass in the Senate. (The failure of Fortas’s Chief Justice nomination
eliminated the prospective Associate Justice vacancy that Thornberry had been nominated to fill.) In 2005, the
nomination of Harriet E. Miers was withdrawn by the President before the Judiciary Committee held hearings on the
nomination.
32
In February 1881, just before the final adjournment of the 46th Congress, the Judiciary Committee voted to postpone
taking action on the Supreme Court nomination of Stanley Matthews; shortly afterwards, however, in a special session
of the 47th Congress, Matthews was re-nominated, and, although his second nomination was reported unfavorably by
the Judiciary Committee, it was confirmed by the Senate, 24-23. In Nov. 1954, late in the 83rd Congress, the
nomination of John M. Harlan II was referred to the Judiciary Committee, where no action was taken; in 1955, Harlan
was re-nominated, considered and reported favorably by the Judiciary Committee, and confirmed by the Senate. In
Sept. 2005, before the scheduled start of confirmation hearings, the nomination of John G. Roberts Jr. to be Associate
Justice was withdrawn and, on the same day of the withdrawal, Roberts was re-nominated for Chief Justice; the second
Roberts nomination was reported favorably by the Judiciary Committee and confirmed by the Senate.
33
The exact confirmation percentage is 77.45%, reached by dividing 123124 confirmations by 159160 nominations.
34
The earliest Senate rejection of a Supreme Court nomination occurred in 1795, when President George Washington’s
nomination of John Rutledge to be Chief Justice failed on a 10-14 vote. The latest instance was the Senate’s rejection
of Robert H. Bork in 1987, by a 42-58 vote. Between Rutledge and Bork, the following nominations were also rejected:
Alexander Wolcott in 1811, John C. Spencer in 1844, George W. Woodward in 1846, Ebenezer R. Hoar in 1870,
William B. Hornblower in 1894, Wheeler H. Peckham in 1894, John J. Parker in 1930, Clement F. Haynsworth Jr. in
1969, and G. Harrold Carswell in 1970.
35
The following Supreme Court nominations were withdrawn, in the years indicated, with the Presidents who withdrew
them shown in parentheses: The first nomination of William Paterson, in 1793 (George Washington); the first
nomination of Reuben H. Walworth, in 1844 (John Tyler); the second nomination of John C. Spencer, in 1844 (John
Tyler); the third nomination of Reuben H. Walworth, in 1845 (John Tyler); the second nomination of Edward King, in
1845 (John Tyler); George H. Williams and Caleb Cushing, both in 1874 (Ulysses S. Grant); Abe Fortas and Homer
Thornberry, both in 1968 (Lyndon B. Johnson); John G. Roberts Jr. and Harrier E. Miers, both in 2005 (George W.
Bush). Less than a week after his first nomination was withdrawn, Paterson was re-nominated by President Washington
and confirmed by the Senate on the same day. On the same day that President Bush withdrew the Roberts nomination
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
10
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Senate vote cast on whether to confirm. 36 The 36 nominations not confirmed by the Senate
represented 31 individuals, some of whom were nominated more than once. 37 Six individuals
whose initial nominations were not confirmed were later re-nominated and confirmed for
positions on the Court.38
While the invariable practice of the Senate in recent decades has been to vote on Supreme Court
nominations by roll call, this historically was usually not the case. Table 2, at the end of this
report, shows that of the 134135 Senate votes on whether to confirm (resulting in 123124 confirmations
and 11 rejections), 6162 decisions were reached by roll-call votes, and the other 73 by voice vote or
unanimous consent.
Initially, for some 40 years, the Senate rarely used roll-call votes to decide Supreme Court
nominations. Starting in the 1830s, however, and continuing through the 1880s, the Senate used
roll-call votes on Supreme Court nominations somewhat more often than unrecorded votes. The
trend reversed between 1890 and 1965, when fewer than one-third of Senate decisions on
confirming Court nominations were by roll-call vote. Since 1967, though, every Senate vote on
whether to confirm a Supreme Court nomination has been by roll call. Table 2 shows these trends
within the four historical periods just noted, by breaking down the number of Senate decisions on
confirmation within each period according to whether made by voice vote or unanimous consent
(UC) on the one hand, or by roll-call vote, on the other. As already mentioned, all 11 Senate
rejections of Supreme Court nominations were accomplished by roll-call votes.
Historically, recorded vote margins on Supreme Court nominations have varied considerably.
Some roll-call votes, either confirming or rejecting a nomination, have been close.39 Most votes,
(...continued)
to be Associate Justice, he re-nominated Roberts to be Chief Justice, and the latter nomination was confirmed.
36
The 14 nominations that lapsed at the end of a session of Congress, without a Senate confirmation or rejection vote
or a withdrawal by the President having occurred, can be broken into the following groups according to Senate actions,
or lack of Senate actions, taken: On three nominations (John Crittenden in 1829, the first nomination of Roger Taney in
1835, and George E. Badger in 1853), the Senate voted to postpone taking action; the Senate tabled two nominations
(the first nomination of Edward King in 1844 and Edward A. Bradford in 1852); on one nomination, the Senate
rejected a motion to proceed (Jeremiah S. Black in 1861, by a 25-26 vote); and on eight nominations, there was no
record of any vote taken (the second nomination of Reuben H. Walworth in 1844, John M. Read in 1845, William C.
Micou in 1853, Henry Stanbery in 1866, the first nomination of Stanley Matthews in 1881, the first nomination of
William B. Hornblower in 1893, the first nomination of Pierce Butler in 1922, and the first nomination of John M.
Harlan II in 1954). However, four of the 14 persons whose nominations lapsed in one session of Congress were renominated in the next congressional session and confirmed (Taney in 1835, Matthews in 1881, Butler in 1922, and
Harlan in 1955).
37
For a list consisting solely of the 36 unconfirmed Supreme Court nominations (including dates that they were
received in the Senate and received confirmation hearings, committee votes, and Senate debate), see Table 4 in CRS
Report RL31171, Supreme Court Nominations Not Confirmed, 1789-2008August 2010, by Henry B. Hogue.
38
The six individuals who were not confirmed only to be later re-nominated and confirmed were, in the following years
of confirmation shown in parentheses, William Paterson (1793), Roger B. Taneuy (1836), Stanley Matthews (1881),
Pierce Butler (1922), John M. Harlan II (1955), and John G. Roberts Jr. (2005).
39
The closest roll calls ever cast on Supreme Court nominations were the 24-23 vote in 1881 confirming Stanley
Matthews, the 25-26 vote in 1861 rejecting a motion to proceed to consider the nomination of Jeremiah S. Black, and
the 26-25 Senate vote in 1853 to postpone consideration of the nomination of George E. Badger. Since the 1960s, the
closest roll calls on Supreme Court nominations were the 52-48 vote in 1991 confirming Clarence Thomas, the 45-51
vote in 1970 rejecting G. Harrold Carswell, the 45-55 vote in 1969 rejecting Clement Haynsworth Jr., the 58-42 vote in
2006 confirming Samuel A. Alito Jr., the 42-58 vote in 1987 rejecting Robert H. Bork, the 63-37 vote in 2010
confirming Elena Kagan, and the 65-33 vote confirming
William H. Rehnquist to be Chief Justice in 1986. Also
noteworthy was the 45-43 vote in 1968 rejecting a motion to
close debate on the nomination of Abe Fortas to be Chief Justice; however, the roll call was not as close as the numbers
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
11
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
however, have been overwhelmingly in favor of confirmation. 40 On other occasions, as occurred
with the twothree most recent nominations to the Court, a solid majority of the Senate has voted in
favor of confirmation, but with a minority of more than 30% of the Senate’s Members voting
against confirmation.41
Days from Date of Senate Receipt of Nomination to First Hearing
For Supreme Court nominations, the amount of time elapsing between Senate receipt and start of
confirmation hearings has varied greatly. Table 1 shows that, for all 4445 Court nominations
receiving public confirmation hearings (starting with the Brandeis nomination in 1916), the
shortest time that elapsed between Senate receipt and start of hearings was four days, for the
nominations of both Benjamin N. Cardozo in 1932 and William O. Douglas in 1939; the second
shortest time interval of this sort was five days, for the nominations of both Stanley F. Reed in
1938 and Felix Frankfurter in 1939. The longest time elapsing between Senate receipt and first
day of confirmation hearings was 82 days, for the nomination of Potter Stewart in 1959; the nextlongest time interval of this sort was 70 days, for nominee Robert H. Bork in 1987.
In recent decades, from the late 1960s to the present, the Judiciary Committee has tended to take
more time in starting hearings on Supreme Court nominations than it did previously. Table 1
reveals that prior to 1967, a median of 10 days elapsed between Senate receipt of Supreme Court
nominations and the first day of confirmation hearings. From the Supreme Court nomination of
Thurgood Marshall in 1967 through the nomination of Sonia SotomayorElena Kagan to be Associate Justice in
20092010,42 a median of 2426 days elapsed between Senate receipt and first day of confirmation
hearings. 43
Starting in the 1990s, the inclination of the Judiciary Committee has been to allow at least four
weeks to pass between Senate receipt of Supreme Court nominations and the start of confirmation
hearings. This block of time is intended to be used by the committee members and staff for
thorough study and review of background information about nominees and issues relevant to their
(...continued)
(...continued)
Justice; however, the roll call was not as close as the numbers by themselves suggested, since passage of the motion
required a two-thirds vote of the Members present and voting.
40
The most lopsided of these votes were the unanimous roll calls confirming Morrison R. Waite to be Chief Justice in
1874 (63-0), Harry A. Blackmun in 1970 (94-0), John Paul Stevens in 1975 (98-0), Sandra Day O’Connor in 1981 (990), Antonin Scalia in 1986 (98-0), and Anthony M. Kennedy in 1988 (97-0); and the near-unanimous votes confirming
Noah H. Swayne in 1862 (38-1),Warren E. Burger in 1969 to be Chief Justice (74-3), Lewis F. Powell Jr. in 1971 (891), and Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 1993 (96-3).
41
In the case of the twothree most recent Supreme Court nominees, the Senate in 2006 confirmed Samuel A. Alito Jr. by a
58-42 vote and, in 2009 confirmed Sonia Sotomayor by a 68-31 vote. , and in 2010 confirmed Elena Kagan by a 63-37 vote.
In the much more distant past, the Senate
confimed two of President Andrew Jackson’s nominees to the Court (Roger
B. Taney to be Chief Justice in 1836 and
John Catron in 1837) by comfortable vote margins, although on both
occasions more than one-third of the votes cast
were against confirmation, with the Senate confirming Taney 29-15 and
Catron 28-15.
42
In calculating the median elapsed time for the contemporary period, the Marshall nomination in 1967 was selected as
the starting point for the following reason. The Marshall nomination, it could be argued, marked the start of an era in
which the confirmation hearings of most, if not all, Supreme Court nominees were highly charged events, covered
closely by the news media, with nominees interrogated rigorously and extensively (and for more than a day) about their
judicial philosophy as well as their views on constitutional issues and the proper role of the Supreme Court in the U.S.
government. For the Marshall nomination, the elapsed time between Senate receipt and start of confirmation hearings
was 30 days.
43
See bottom rows of Table 1 for median number of days that elapsed from the date Supreme Court nominations were
received in the Senate to first hearing dates, for three different time spans.
Congressional Research Service
12
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2009
2010
hearings. This block of time is intended to be used by the committee members and staff for
thorough study and review of background information about nominees and issues relevant to their
nominations, in preparation for the hearings. In the case of sixseven of the seveneight most recent Court
nominations to receive confirmation hearings (starting with the David H. Souter nomination in
1990), the shortest elapsed time between Senate receipt and first day of hearings was 28 days.44
While the elapsed time for the seventheighth nomination, of John G. Roberts Jr. to be Chief Justice in
2005, was only six days, another, longer time interval is more meaningful. Table 1 shows that
Roberts’s earlier nomination to be Associate Justice—later withdrawn, in order to have Roberts
be re-nominated for Chief Justice—was received by the Senate 45 days prior to the start of
hearings on his Chief Justice nomination.
Days from Senate Receipt to Final Committee Vote
The time elapsing between Senate receipt of Supreme Court nominations from the President and
final committee votes has also varied greatly. Table 1 shows that, for the 109110 Court nominations
that received final committee votes,45 the nomination receiving the most prompt committee vote
was of Caleb Cushing in 1874, which was reported by the Judiciary Committee on the same day
that the Senate received it from the President.46 The committee votes on 14 other nominations to
the court occurred three days or less after the dates of Senate receipt.47 At the other extreme was
the 1916 nomination of Louis D. Brandeis, on which the Judiciary Committee voted 117 days
after Senate receipt and referral to the committee. Five other nominations as well, one in the 19th
century and four in the 20th, received committee votes more than 80 days after Senate receipt
from the President.48
In recent decades, the Judiciary Committee has taken much more time in casting a final vote on
Supreme Court nominations than it did previously. Table 1 shows that prior to 1967, a median of
nine days elapsed between Senate receipt of Supreme Court nominations and the committee’s
final vote on reporting them to the full Senate. 49 From the Supreme Court nomination of
Thurgood Marshall in 1967 through the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor in 2009, a median of 51
days elapsed between Senate receipt and final committee vote.50
44
44
For the sixseven nominations, the elapsed time between Senate receipt of nomination and the first day of confirmation
hearings was 50 days for David Souter in 1990, 64 days for Clarence Thomas in 1991, 28 days for Ruth Bader
Ginsburg in 1993, 56 days for Stephen G. Breyer in 1994, 60 days for Samuel A. Alito Jr. in 2005-2006, and 42 days
for for
Sonia Sotomayor in 2009, and 49 days for Elena Kagan in 2010.
45
As already mentioned, the first such nomination, of Alexander Wolcott in 1811, was reported by a select committee;
all subsequently reported nominations were reported by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
46
Ironically, five days after the committee’s favorable, and extremely prompt, recommendation of Cushing, President
Ulysses S. Grant withdrew the nomination.
47
Five nominations were voted on by the Judiciary Committee one day after their receipt by the Senate: Robert C.
Grier in 1846; John A. Campbell in 1853; Morrison R. Waite, to be Chief Justice, in 1874; Horace Gray in 1881; and
Harold H. Burton in 1945. Six nominations were voted on by the committee two days after Senate receipt: James M.
Wayne in 1835; Samuel Nelson in 1845; Noah H. Swayne in 1862; David Davis in 1862; Stephen J. Field in 1963; and
Oliver Wendell Holmes in 1902. Three nominations were voted on by the committee three days after Senate receipt:
Horace H. Lurton in 1909; Willis Van Devanter in 1910; and Joseph R. Lamar in 1910.
48
The first of Reuben H. Walworth’s three nominations to the Court in 1844 was voted on by the Judiciary Committee
93 days after Senate receipt and committee referral. During the 20th century, the Judiciary Committee, in addition to its
1916 vote on the Brandeis nomination, voted on the following nominations more than 80 days after Senate receipt:
Potter Stewart in 1959 (93 days); Robert H. Bork in 1987 (91 days), Abe Fortas, to be Chief Justice, in 1968 (83 days);
and Clarence Thomas in 1991 (81 days).
49
All of the 15 aforementioned nominations on which the Judiciary Committee voted three days or less after Senate
receipt were made prior to 1946, and 14 of the 15 were made prior to 1911.
50
See bottom rows of Table 1 for median number of days that elapsed from the date Supreme Court nominations were
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
13
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2009
Congressional Research Service
13
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010
Thurgood Marshall in 1967 through the nomination of Elena Kagan in 2010, a median of 51 days
elapsed between Senate receipt and final committee vote. 50
Somewhat earlier, during the presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower (1953 to 1961), two of five
Supreme Court nominations were pending, prior to Judiciary Committee vote, in excess of the
1967-to-20092010 median of 51 days for that time interval (while two other nominations were pending
44 and 49 days respectively before receiving committee action);51 however, the corresponding
time intervals for the next three Court nominations (two by President John F. Kennedy and one by
President Lyndon B. Johnson) were all well below the 51-day median.52
Days from Senate Receipt to Final Senate or Presidential Action
The Supreme Court confirmation process now typically extends over a much longer period of
time than it once did. Table 1 shows that from the appointment of the first Justices in 1789,
continuing into the early 20th century, most Senate confirmations of Supreme Court nominees
occurred within a week of the nominations being made by the President. In recent decades, by
contrast, it has become the norm for the Court appointment process—from Senate receipt of
nominations from the President to Senate confirmation or other final action (such as Senate
rejection, or withdrawal by the President)—to take more than two months.
The last column of Table 1 shows the number of days that elapsed from the dates Supreme Court
nominations were received in the Senate until the dates of final Senate or presidential action. The
number of elapsed days is shown for 151152 of the 159160 nominations listed in the table, with no
elapsed time shown for eight nominations on which there was no record of any kind of official or
effective final action by the Senate or by the President.53 At the bottom of the table, the median
number of elapsed days from initial Senate receipt until final action by the Senate or the President
is shown for three historical periods—1789-20092010, 1789-1966, and 1967-2009.
In recent decades, the median elapsed time for Supreme Court nominations to receive final action
has increased dramatically, dwarfing the median time taken on earlier nominations. Table 1
(...continued)2010.
50
See bottom rows of Table 1 for median number of days that elapsed from the date Supreme Court nominations were
received in the Senate to final Senate vote dates, for three different time spans.
51
The four Eisenhower nominations for which 44 or more days elapsed from the date received in the Senate to the date
voted on by the Senate Judiciary Committee were those of: Earl Warren to be Chief Justice in 1954, 44 days; John M.
Harlan II in 1955, 59 days; William J. Brennan Jr. in 1957, 49 days; and Potter Stewart in 1959, 93 days. Three of the
nominees—Warren, Brennan, and Stewart—were already on the Court as recess appointees, a circumstance that served
perhaps to make action on their nominations seem less urgent to the committee than if their seats on the Court had been
vacant. Harlan, however, was not a recess appointee at the time of his nomination. See “The Harlan Nomination,” New
York Times, Feb. 25, 1955, p. 20, discussing, according to the editorial, the “inexcusable delay” on the part of the
committee in acting on the nomination and the objections to the nomination voiced by a few of the committee’s
members. (Ultimately, the committee voted 10-4 to report the nomination favorably.) Receiving much more
expeditious committee action was President Eisenhower’s fifth Supreme Court nomination, of Charles E. Whittaker in
1957, which was approved by the Judiciary Committee 16 days after Senate receipt.
52
The days that elapsed from the date received in the Senate to the date voted on by the Senate Judiciary Committee
were eight days and 25 days for the 1962 nominations of Byron R. White and Arthur J. Goldberg and 13 days for the
1965 nomination of Abe Fortas to be Associate Justice.
53
Besides nominations that received official final Senate action in the form of confirmation or rejection (123124 and 11
respectively), or that were withdrawn by the President (11), six others are treated in the table as also receiving final
action, albeit not of a definitive official sort—with three having been postponed by the Senate, two tabled, and one (the
nomination of Jeremiah S. Black in 1861) not considered after a motion to proceed was defeated by a 25-26 vote.
While the six nominations remained pending in the Senate after the noted actions, the effect of the actions, it can be
argued, was decisive in eliminating any prospect of confirmation, and thus constituted a final Senate action for time
measurement purposes. Accordingly, for these six nominations, the number of days elapsed is measured from date of
Senate receipt to the dates of effective final action just noted.
Congressional Research Service
14
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2009
2010
In recent decades, the median elapsed time for Supreme Court nominations to receive final action
has increased dramatically, dwarfing the median time taken on earlier nominations. Table 1
shows that from 1967 (starting with the nomination of Thurgood Marshall) through August 6,
20095,
2010 (the date on which the Senate confirmed the nomination of Sonia SotomayorElena Kagan) a median of
68 69
days elapsed from when a Supreme Court nomination was received in the Senate until the date
it it
received final action, compared with a median of seven days for the same interval for the prior
years of 1789 to 1966.54 Most of the Supreme Court nominations receiving final action within a
relatively brief period of time—for example, within three days of initial receipt in the Senate—
occurred before the 20th century, 55 while most of the nominations receiving final action after a
relatively long period of time—for example, 75 days or more after receipt in the Senate—
occurred in the 20th century (and nearly all of these since 1967).56
The presence of Senate committee involvement has clearly tended to increase the overall length
of the Supreme Court confirmation process. Of the 26 Court nominations made prior to the
establishment of the Judiciary Committee in 1816, only one, of Alexander Wolcott in 1811,
received final action more than seven days after initial Senate receipt (being rejected by the
Senate nine days after receipt). It also was the only Court nomination prior to 1816 which was
referred to, and considered by, a select committee. Subsequently, until the Civil War, six
nominations received final action more than 50 days after initial Senate receipt. All six were first
considered and reported by the Judiciary Committee. During the same period, other Court
nominations were considered and acted on by the Senate more quickly—some with, and some
without, first being referred to committee.
Subsequent historical developments involving the Senate Judiciary Committee further served to
increase the median length of the Supreme Court confirmation process. One such development
was the Senate’s adoption of a rule in 1868 that nominations be referred to appropriate standing
committees, resulting in the referral of nearly all Supreme Court nominations thereafter to the
Judiciary Committee. Another was the increasing practice of the Judiciary Committee in the 20th
century of holding public confirmation hearings on Supreme Court nominations (ultimately to
become standard practice). A third, more recent, historical trend has involved the pace and
thoroughness of the Judiciary Committee in preparing for and conducting confirmation hearings.
Since the late 1960s, close and thorough examination of the background, qualifications, and
views of Supreme Court nominees has become the norm for the Judiciary Committee, an
approach that typically extends the confirmation process by at least several weeks, as a result of
preparation for and holding of confirmation hearings.
54
At first glance, the nomination of John G. Roberts Jr. for Chief Justice in 2005 appears to be a deviation from the
1967 to 2009 median interval from date received to final action of 68 days, as the nomination was confirmed only 23
days after its initial receipt in the Senate. However, it can be argued that a more meaningful context is to see the
Roberts Chief Justice nomination (received in the Senate on Sept. 6, 2005) in relation to the earlier July 29, 2005,
nomination of Judge Roberts to be Associate Justice. After the death of Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist on Sept. 3,
2005, the Roberts Associate Justice nomination was withdrawn, and he was re-nominated to be Chief Justice. Hearings
on the Roberts Associate Justice nomination, set to begin on Sept. 6, were cancelled, and rescheduled hearings, on the
Chief Justice nomination, began on Sept. 12. The overall time that elapsed from the Associate Justice nomination of
Judge Roberts on July 29 until Senate confirmation of his Chief Justice nomination on Sept. 29 was 62 days.
55
Table 1 shows that 43 nominations received final Senate or presidential action three days or less after date of receipt
in the Senate. Thirty-six of the 43 were pre-20th century nominations.
56
Table 1 shows that 1617 nominations received final Senate or presidential action more than 75 days after date of
receipt in the Senate. TwelveThirteen of the 1617 were 20th or 21st century nominations, with 1011 made since 1967.
Congressional Research Service
15
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Recess Appointments to the Supreme Court
On 12 occasions in the nation’s history, Presidents have made temporary recess appointments to
the Supreme Court without submitting nominations to the Senate. Table 1 identifies all of these
12 appointments, showing how each was related to a later nomination of the appointee for the
same position. The table shows that nine of the 12 recess appointments were made before the end
of the Civil War,57 with the last three made almost a century later, in the 1950s, during the
presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower. 58
Each of the 12 recess appointments occurred when a President exercised his power under the
Constitution to make recess appointments when the Senate was not in session.59 Historically,
when recesses between sessions of the Senate were much longer than they are today, recess
appointments served the purpose of averting long vacancies on the Court when the Senate was
unavailable to confirm a President’s appointees. The terms of these recess appointments,
however, were limited by the constitutional requirement that they expire at the end of the next
session of Congress (unlike the lifetime appointments Court appointees receive when nominated
and then confirmed by the Senate).60
Despite the temporary nature of these appointments, every person appointed during a recess of
the Senate except for one—John Rutledge, to be Chief Justice, in 1795—ultimately received a
lifetime appointment to the Court after being nominated by the President and confirmed by the
Senate. As Table 1 shows, all 12 of the recess appointees were subsequently nominated to the
same position, and 11 (all except for Rutledge) were confirmed.
Concluding Observations
The preceding discussion suggests that Senate treatment of Supreme Court nominations has gone
through various phases during the more than 200 years of the Republic. Initially, such
nominations were handled without Senate committee involvement. Later, from 1816 to 1868,
most nominations to the Supreme Court were referred to the Judiciary Committee, but only by
motion. Since 1868, as the result of a change in its rules, the Senate has referred nearly all Court
nominations to the Judiciary Committee. During the rest of the 19th century and early 20th century,
the committee considered nominations without public hearings. Subsequently, public hearings
gradually became the more common, if not invariable, committee practice, although many of the
earlier hearings were perfunctory and held simply to accommodate a small number of witnesses
wishing to testify against the nominees. Gradually, however, in the latter half of the 20th century,
57
See in Table 1 the recess appointments of Thomas Johnson in 1791, John Rutledge (to be Chief Justice) in 1795,
Bushrod Washington in 1798, H. Brockholst Livingston in 1806, Smith Thompson in 1823, John McKinley in 1837,
Levi Woodbury in 1845, Benjamin R. Curtis in 1851, and David Davis in 1862.
58
See in Table 1 the recess appointments of Earl Warren (to be Chief Justice) in 1953, William J. Brennan Jr. in 1956,
and Potter Stewart in 1958.
59
Specifically, Article II, Section 2, clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution empowers the President “to fill up all Vacancies
that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next
Session.”
60
For background on the history of recess appointments to the Supreme Court, and the policy and constitutional issues
associated with those appointments, see CRS Report RL31112, Recess Appointments of Federal Judges, by Louis
Fisher (out of print, available from author); and Henry B. Hogue, “The Law: Recess Appointments to Article III
Courts,” Political Science Quarterly, vol. 34, September 2004, p. 656.
Congressional Research Service
16
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
public hearings on Supreme Court nominations lasting four or more days, with nominees present
to answer extensive questioning from committee members, would become the usual practice; it
would remain the Judiciary Committee’s practice in considering the first two Supreme Court
nominations in the 21st century.
Also, the overall length of time taken by the Supreme Court confirmation process has, in general,
increased significantly over the course of more than 200 years. From the appointment of the first
Justices in 1789, continuing well into the 20th century, most Supreme Court nominations received
final action (usually, but not always, in the form of Senate confirmation) within a week of being
submitted by the President to the Senate. In recent decades, by contrast, it has become the norm
for the confirmation process to take from two to three months.
Other trends and historical phases may be discerned from Tables 1 and 2. Still other trends, of
course, may be revealed by future nominations that Presidents make and by the actions taken on
them by the Senate and its Judiciary Committee.
Congressional Research Service
17
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Table 1. Nominations to the Supreme Court of the United States, 1789-2009August 5, 2010
Senate committee actions
Final action by Senate or
President
Days from date received in Senate
to:
Date
Final actionc
First
public
hearing
date
09/24/1789
09/26/1789
Confirmed
—
—
2
Washington
09/24/1789
09/26/1789
Confirmed
—
—
2
William
Cushing of
Massachusetts
Washington
09/24/1789
09/26/1789
Confirmed
—
—
2
Robert
Harrison of
Maryland
Washington
09/24/1789
09/26/1789
Confirmed
(Nominee
declined)
—
—
2
James Wilson
of Pennsylvania
Washington
09/24/1789
09/26/1789
Confirmed
—
—
2
John Blair Jr. of
Virginia
Washington
09/24/1789
09/26/1789
Confirmed
—
—
2
James Iredell of
North Carolina
Washington
02/09/1790
02/10/1790
Confirmed
—
—
1
Nominee
President
Date
received in
Senatea
John Jay of
New York
(Chief Justice,
hereafter
C. J.)
Washington
John Rutledge
of South
Carolina
CRS-18
(Nom. Date
02/08/1790)
Public
hearing
date(s)
Final vote
dateb
Final vote
Nomination predated creation of Judiciary
Committee in 12/10/1816. No record of
other committee referral.
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Final action by Senate or
President
Senate committee actions
Nominee
Thomas
Johnson of
Maryland
President
Date
received in
Senatea
Washington
Public
hearing
date(s)
Final vote
dateb
Final vote
Date
Final actionc
Days from date received in Senate
to:
First
public
hearing
date
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
Recess Appointment, 08/05/1791
11/01/1791
11/07/1791
Confirmed
—
—
6
02/28/1793
Withdrawn
—
—
1
03/04/1793
Confirmed
—
—
0
(Nom. Date
10/31/1791)
William
Paterson of
New Jersey
Washington
02/27/1793
William
Paterson of
New Jersey
Washington
03/04/1793
John Rutledge
of South
Carolina
(C. J.)
Washington
William
Cushing of
Massachusetts
(C. J.)
Washington
Samuel Chase
of Maryland
Washington
01/26/1796
Oliver
Ellsworth of
Connecticut
(C. J.)
Washington
03/03/1796
CRS-19
Nomination predated creation of Judiciary
Committee in 12/10/1816. No record of
other committee referral.
Recess Appointment, 07/01/1795
12/10/1795
12/15/1795
Rejected
(10-14)
—
—
5
01/26/1796
01/27/1796
Confirmed
(Nominee
declined)
—
—
1
01/27/1796
Confirmed
—
—
1
03/04/1796
Confirmed
(21-1)
—
—
1
Nomination predated creation of Judiciary
Committee in 12/10/1816. No record of
other committee referral.
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Final action by Senate or
President
Senate committee actions
Nominee
President
Bushrod
Washington of
Virginia
J. Adams
Alfred Moore
of North
Carolina
Date
received in
Senatea
Public
hearing
date(s)
Final vote
dateb
Final vote
Date
Final actionc
Days from date received in Senate
to:
First
public
hearing
date
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
Recess Appointment, 09/29/1798
12/19/1798
12/20/1798
Confirmed
—
—
1
J. Adams
12/04/1799
12/10/1799
Confirmed
—
—
6
John Jay of
New York
(C. J.)
J. Adams
12/18/1800
12/19/1800
Confirmed
(Nominee
declined)
—
—
1
John Marshall
of Virginia
(C. J.)
J. Adams
01/20/1801
01/27/1801
Confirmed
—
—
7
William
Johnson of
South Carolina
Jefferson
03/22/1804
03/24/1804
Confirmed
—
—
2
H. Brockholst
Livingston of
New York
Jefferson
Thomas Todd
of Kentucky
Jefferson
02/28/1807
Levi Lincoln of
Massachusetts
Madison
01/02/1811
Alexander
Wolcott of
Connecticut
Madison
02/04/1811
CRS-20
Nomination predated creation of Judiciary
Committee in 12/10/1816. No record of
other committee referral.
Recess Appointment, 11/10/1806
12/15/1806
Nomination predated creation of Judiciary
Committee in 12/10/1816. No record of
other committee referral.
No record
of hearing
Select
Committee,
02/13/1811
Reported
12/17/1806
Confirmed
—
—
2
03/02/1807
Confirmed
—
—
2
01/03/1811
Confirmed
(Nominee
declined)
—
—
1
02/13/1811
Rejected
(9-24)
—
9
9
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Final action by Senate or
President
Senate committee actions
President
Date
received in
Senatea
John Quincy
Adams of
Massachusetts
Madison
02/21/1811
Joseph Story of
Massachusetts
Madison
11/15/1811
Gabriel Duvall
of Maryland
Madison
11/15/1811
Smith
Thompson of
New York
Monroe
Nominee
Public
hearing
date(s)
Final vote
dateb
Final vote
Nomination predated creation of Judiciary
Committee in 12/10/1816. No record of
other committee referral.
Days from date received in Senate
to:
First
public
hearing
date
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
Date
Final actionc
02/22/1811
Confirmed
(Nominee
declined)
—
—
1
11/18/1811
Confirmed
—
—
3
11/18/1811
Confirmed
—
—
3
Recess Appointment, 09/01/1823
12/08/1823
(Nom. date
12/5/1823)
Confirmed
—
—
1
05/09/1826
Confirmed
(27-5)
—
—
27
02/12/1829
Postponed
(23-17)
—
39
56
J. Q. Adams
John
Crittenden of
Kentucky
J. Q. Adams
John McLean of
Ohio
Jackson
03/06/1829
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Committee.
03/07/1829
Confirmed
—
—
1
Henry Baldwin
of Pennsylvania
Jackson
01/05/1830
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Committee.
01/05/1830
Confirmed
(41-2)
—
—
0
James M.
Wayne of
Georgia
Jackson
01/07/1835
01/09/1835
Confirmed
—
2
2
(Nom. date
04/11/1826)
12/18/1828
(Nom. date
12/17/1828)
(Nom. date
01/06/1835)
Motion to refer to Judiciary Committee
rejected by Senate, 05/09/1826
(7-25)
12/09/1823
Robert Trimble
of Kentucky
CRS-21
04/12/1826
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Committee.
No record
of hearing
No record
of hearing
01/26/1829
01/09/1835
Reported
with
recommendation not to
act
Reported
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Final action by Senate or
President
Senate committee actions
President
Date
received in
Senatea
Public
hearing
date(s)
Roger B. Taney
of Maryland
Jackson
01/15/1835
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Committee.
Roger B. Taney
of Maryland
(C. J.)
Jackson
12/28/1835
Philip P.
Barbour of
Virginia
Jackson
William Smith
of Alabama
Jackson
03/03/1837
No record
of hearing
03/08/1837
John Catron of
Tennessee
Jackson
03/03/1837
No record
of hearing
03/08/1837
John McKinley
of Alabama
Van Buren
Nominee
01/05/1836
Final vote
Reported
Date
Final actionc
03/03/1835
Postponed
(24-21)
Motion to proceed, 03/14/1836
(25-19)
03/15/1836
12/28/1835
09/19/1837
Peter V. Daniel
of Virginia
Van Buren
John C.
Spencer of
New York
Tyler
No record
of hearing
01/05/1836
Reported
First
public
hearing
date
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
—
—
47
—
8
78
—
8
78
Confirmed
(29-15)
Motion to proceed, 03/15/1836
(25-20)
03/15/1836
Confirmed
(30-11)
Reported
03/08/1837
Confirmed
(23-18)
(Nominee
declined)
—
5
5
Reported
03/08/1837
Confirmed
(28-15)
—
5
5
Recess Appointment, 04/22/1837
(Nom. date
09/18/1837)
CRS-22
No record
of hearing
Final vote
dateb
Days from date received in Senate
to:
02/27/1841
(Nom. date
02/25/1841)
01/09/1844
(Nom. date
01/08/1844
Reported
09/25/1837
Confirmed
—
6
6
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Committee.
03/02/1841
Confirmed
(22-5)
—
—
3
01/31/1844
Rejected
(21-26)
—
21
22
No record
of hearing
No record
of hearing
09/25/1837
01/30/1844
Reported
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Senate committee actions
President
Date
received in
Senatea
Public
hearing
date(s)
Reuben H.
Walworth of
New York
Tyler
03/13/1844
No record
of hearing
Edward King of
Pennsylvania
Tyler
06/05/1844
John C.
Spencer of
New York
Tyler
06/17/1844
Reuben H.
Walworth of
New York
Tyler
06/17/1844
Reuben H.
Walworth of
New York
Tyler
12/10/1844
Edward King of
Pennsylvania
Tyler
Nominee
(Nom. date
12/04/1844)
12/10/1844
(Nom. date
12/04/1844)
Samuel Nelson
of New York
Tyler
John M. Read
of Pennsylvania
Tyler
George W.
Woodward of
Pennsylvania
Polk
02/06/1845
No record
of hearing
Final vote
dateb
Final vote
06/14/1844
Reported
06/14/1844
Reported
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Committee.
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Committee.
No record
of hearing
01/21/1845
Reported
Final action by Senate or
President
Date
Final actionc
Tabled, 06/15/1844
(27-20)
01/21/1845
Reported
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
—
93
96
Withdrawn
06/15/1844
Tabled
(29-18)
—
9
10
06/17/1844
Withdrawn
—
—
0
Motion to proceed objected
to, 06/17/1844. Senate
adjourned on same day, with
no record of further action.
—
—
—
Tabled,
01/21/1845
—
42
58
—
42
60
—
2
8
Withdrawn
Tabled,
01/21/1845
02/08/1845
Withdrawn
02/14/1845
Confirmed
No record
of hearing
02/08/1845
Reported
02/08/1845
No record
of hearing
02/14/1845
Reported
No record of action
—
6
—
12/23/1845
No record
of hearing
01/20/1846
Reported
Motion to postpone
rejected, 01/22/1846
(21-28)
—
28
30
(Nom. date
02/04/1845)
01/22/1846
CRS-23
First
public
hearing
date
06/17/1844
02/06/1845
No record
of hearing
Days from date received in Senate
to:
Rejected
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Final action by Senate or
President
Senate committee actions
Nominee
President
Date
received in
Senatea
Public
hearing
date(s)
Final vote
dateb
Final vote
Date
Final actionc
Days from date received in Senate
to:
First
public
hearing
date
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
(20-29)
Levi Woodbury
of New
Hampshire
Polk
Robert C.
Grier of
Pennsylvania
Polk
Benjamin R.
Curtis of
Massachusetts
Fillmore
Recess Appointment, 09/20/1845
12/23/1845
No record
of hearing
01/03/1846
Reported
01/03/1846
Confirmed
—
11
11
08/03/1846
No record
of hearing
08/04/1846
Reported
08/04/1846
Confirmed
—
1
1
Recess Appointment, 09/22/1851
12/12/1851
(Nom. date
12/11/1851)
12/23/1851
Reported
12/23/1851
Confirmed
—
11
11
No record
of hearing
08/30/1852
Reported
08/31/1852
Tabled
—
9
10
02/11/1853
Postponed
(26-25)
—
—
32
—
—
—
Edward A.
Bradford of
Louisiana
Fillmore
George E.
Badger of
North Carolina
Fillmore
William C.
Micou of
Louisiana
Fillmore
John A.
Campbell of
Alabama
Pierce
03/21/1853
No record
of hearing
03/22/1853
Reported
03/22/1853
Confirmed
—
1
1
Nathan Clifford
of Maine
Buchanan
12/09/1857
No record
of hearing
01/06/1858
Reported
01/12/1858
Confirmed
(26-23)
—
28
34
CRS-24
08/21/1852
No record
of hearing
(Nom. Date
08/16/1852)
01/10/1853
(Nom. Date
01/03/1853)
02/24/1853
(Nom. Date
02/14/1853)
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Committee.
No record
of hearing
Referred to Judiciary Committee on 02/24/1853. Senate
ordered committee discharged of nomination on same
day; no record of Senate consideration after discharge.
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Final action by Senate or
President
Senate committee actions
President
Date
received in
Senatea
Public
hearing
date(s)
Jeremiah S.
Black of
Pennsylvania
Buchanan
02/06/1861
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Committee.
Noah H.
Swayne of
Ohio
Lincoln
Samuel F. Miller
of Iowa
Lincoln
David Davis of
Illinois
Lincoln
Nominee
(Nom. Date
02/05/1861)
01/22/1862
(Nom. Date
01/21/1862)
07/16/1862
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
Date
Final actionc
02/21/1861
Motion to
proceed
rejected
(25-26)
—
—
15
Reported
01/24/1862
Confirmed
(38-1)
—
2
2
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Committee.
07/16/1862
Confirmed
—
—
0
No record
of hearing
01/24/1862
Final vote
First
public
hearing
date
Recess Appointment, 10/17/1862
12/03/1862
(Nom. date
12/01/1862)
03/07/1863
No record
of hearing
12/05/1862
Reported
12/08/1862
Confirmed
—
2
5
No record
of hearing
03/09/1863
Reported
03/10/1863
Confirmed
—
2
3
12/06/1864
Confirmed
—
—
0
—
—
—
—
7
50
Stephen J. Field
of California
Lincoln
Salmon P.
Chase of Ohio
(C. J.)
Lincoln
12/06/1864
Henry Stanbery
of Ohio
A. Johnson
04/16/1866
No record
of hearing
Ebenezer R.
Hoar of
Massachusetts
Grant
12/15/1869
No record
of hearing
CRS-25
Final vote
dateb
Days from date received in Senate
to:
(Nom. date
03/06/1863
(Nom. date
12/14/1869)
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Committee.
Referred to Judiciary Committee on 04/16/1866. No
record of committee vote, and no record of Senate
action after referral.
12/22/1869
Reported
adversely
02/03/1870
Rejected
(24-33)
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Senate committee actions
President
Date
received in
Senatea
Edwin M.
Stanton of
Pennsylvania
Grant
12/20/1869
William Strong
of Pennsylvania
Grant
Joseph P.
Bradley of New
Jersey
Grant
Nominee
Public
hearing
date(s)
Final vote
dateb
Final vote
Final action by Senate or
President
(Nom. date
02/07/1870)
02/08/1870
(Nom. date
02/07/1870)
No record
of hearing
02/14/1870
Reported
favorably
No record
of hearing
02/14/1870
Reported
favorably
First
public
hearing
date
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
Date
Final actionc
12/20/1869
Confirmed
(46-11)
(Nominee died
before assuming
assuming office)
—
—
0
02/18/1870
Confirmed
—
6
10
—
6
41
—
5
5
—
9
37
—
0
5
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Committee
02/08/1870
Days from date received in Senate
to:
Postponed,
03/02/1870
(31-26)
Motion to postpone rejected,
03/02/1870
(23-28)
Ward Hunt
of New York
Grant
George H.
Williams of
Oregon (C. J.)
Grant
Caleb Cushing
of
Massachusetts
(C. J.)
Grant
CRS-26
12/06/1872
(Nom. date
12/03/1872)
12/02/1873
(Nom. date
12/01/1873)
01/09/1874
03/21/1870
Confirmed
(46-9)
12/11/1872
Confirmed
No record
of hearing
12/11/1872
Reported
favorably
No record
of hearing
12/11/1873
Reported
favorably
Closed
hearingsd
12/16/1873
12/17/1873
—
—
01/08/1874
Withdrawn
No record
of hearing
01/09/1874
Reported
favorably
01/14/1874
Withdrawn
Recommitted,
12/15/1873
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Senate committee actions
President
Date
received in
Senatea
Public
hearing
date(s)
Morrison R.
Waite of Ohio
(C. J.)
Grant
01/19/1874
No record
of hearing
John Marshall
Harlan of
Kentucky
Hayes
10/17/1877
William B.
Woods of
Georgia
Hayes
12/15/1880
Stanley
Matthews of
Ohio
Hayes
Stanley
Matthews of
Ohio
Garfield
Horace Gray of
Massachusetts
Arthur
Roscoe
Conkling of
New York
Samuel
Blatchford of
New York
Nominee
CRS-27
Final vote
dateb
Final action by Senate or
President
Days from date received in Senate
to:
First
public
hearing
date
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
Final vote
Date
Final actionc
01/20/1874
Reported
favorably
01/21/1874
Confirmed
(63-0)
—
1
2
No record
of hearing
11/26/1877
Reported
favorably
11/29/1877
Confirmed
—
40
43
No record
of hearing
12/20/1880
Reported
favorably
12/21/1880
Confirmed
(39-8)
—
5
6
—
19
—
Tabled motion to
reconsider, 12/22/1880
(36-3)
01/26/1881
No record
of hearing
Considered , 02/07/1881
No record of action
02/14/1881
Postponed
No record
of hearing
05/09/1881
Reported
adversely
(6-1)
05/12/1881
Confirmed
(24-23)
—
53
55
12/19/1881
No record
of hearing
12/20/1881
Reported
favorably
12/20/1881
Confirmed
(51-5)
—
1
1
Arthur
02/24/1882
No record
of hearing
03/02/1882
Reported
favorably
03/02/1882
Confirmed
(39-12)
(Nominee
declined)
—
6
6
Arthur
03/13/1882
No record
of hearing
03/22/1882
Reported
favorably
03/22/1882
Confirmed
—
9
9
03/18/1881
(Nom. date
03/14/1881)
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Senate committee actions
President
Date
received in
Senatea
Public
hearing
date(s)
Lucius Q. C.
Lamar of
Mississippi
Cleveland
12/12/1887
No record
of hearing
Melville W.
Fuller of Illinois
(C. J.)
Cleveland
David J. Brewer
of Kansas
Harrison
Nominee
(Nom. date
12/06/1887)
05/02/1888
(Nom. date
04/30/1888)
12/04/1889
Final vote
dateb
Final action by Senate or
President
Days from date received in Senate
to:
First
public
hearing
date
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
Final vote
Date
Final actionc
01/10/1888
Reported
adversely
(5-4)
01/16/1888
Confirmed
(32-28)
—
29
35
No record
of hearing
07/02/1888
Reported
without
recommendation
07/20/1888
Confirmed
(41-20)
—
61
79
No record
of hearing
12/16/1889
Reported
favorably
—
12
14
Motion to postpone
rejected, 12/18/1889
(15-54)
Motion to postpone
rejected, 12/18/1889
(25-45)
12/18/1889
Confirmed
(53-11)
Henry B.
Brown of
Michigan
Harrison
12/23/1890
No record
of hearing
12/29/1890
Reported
favorably
12/29/1890
Confirmed
—
6
6
George Shiras
Jr. of
Pennsylvania
Harrison
07/19/1892
No record
of hearing
07/25/1892
Reported
without
recommendation
07/26/1892
Confirmed
—
6
7
Howell E.
Jackson of
Tennessee
Harrison
02/02/1893
No record
of hearing
02/13/1893
Reported
favorably
02/18/1893
Confirmed
—
11
16
William B.
Hornblower of
New York
Cleveland
09/19/1893
No record
of hearing
—
—
—
CRS-28
Considered, 09/25/1893
and 10/25 & 30/1893
No record of action
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Senate committee actions
President
Date
received in
Senatea
Public
hearing
date(s)
William B.
Hornblower of
New York
Cleveland
12/06/1893
No record
of hearing
Wheeler H.
Peckham of
New York
Cleveland
Nominee
Final vote
dateb
Considered, 12/11, 14 &
18/1893
01/08/1894
01/22/1894
No record
of hearing
Final vote
First
public
hearing
date
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
Date
Final actionc
01/15/1894
Rejected
(24-30)
—
33
40
02/16/1894
Rejected
(32-41)
—
21
25
02/19/1894
Confirmed
—
—
0
Reported
adversely
On question of reporting
favorably, committee vote
divided, 02/12/1894
(5-5)
02/12/1894
Final action by Senate or
President
Days from date received in Senate
to:
Reported
without
recommendation
Edward D.
White of
Louisiana
Cleveland
02/19/1894
Rufus W.
Peckham of
New York
Cleveland
12/03/1895
No record
of hearing
12/09/1895
Reported
favorably
12/09/1895
Confirmed
—
6
6
Joseph
McKenna of
California
McKinley
12/16/1897
No record
of hearing
01/13/1898
Reported
favorably
01/21/1898
Confirmed
—
28
36
Oliver Wendell
Holmes of
Massachusetts
T.
Roosevelt
12/02/1902
No record
of hearing
12/04/1902
Reported
favorably
12/04/1902
Confirmed
—
2
2
William R. Day
of Ohio
T.
Roosevelt
02/19/1903
No record
of hearing
02/23/1903
Reported
favorably
02/23/1903
Confirmed
—
4
4
William H.
Moody of
Massachusetts
T.
Roosevelt
12/03/1906
No record
of hearing
12/10/1906
Reported
favorably
12/12/1906
Confirmed
—
7
9
CRS-29
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Committee
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Senate committee actions
Final
action by
Senate or
President
Final vote
Date
Final actionc
12/16/1909
Reported
favorably
12/20/1909
Confirmed
—
3
7
05/02/1910
Reported
favorably
05/02/1910
Confirmed
—
7
7
12/12/1910
Confirmed
—
—
0
Reported
favorably
12/15/1910
Confirmed
—
3
3
12/15/1910
Reported
favorably
12/15/1910
Confirmed
—
3
3
No record
of hearing
03/04/1912
Reported
favorably
03/13/1912
Confirmed
(50-26)
—
14
23
No record
of hearing
08/24/1914
Reported
favorably
08/29/1914
Confirmed
(44-6)
—
5
10
President
Public
hearing
date(s)
Horace H.
Lurton of
Tennessee
Taft
12/13/1909
No record
of hearing
Charles Evans
Hughes of New
York
Taft
04/25/1910
No record
of hearing
Edward D.
White of
Louisiana
(C. J.)
Taft
12/12/1910
Willis Van
Devanter of
Wyoming
Taft
12/12/1910
No record
of hearing
12/15/1910
Joseph R.
Lamar of
Georgia
Taft
12/12/1910
No record
of hearing
Mahlon Pitney
of New Jersey
Taft
02/19/1912
James C.
McReynolds of
Tennessee
Wilson
08/19/1914
CRS-30
Committee
final vote
date
First
public
hearing
date
Date
received in
Senatea
Nominee
Final action by Senate or
President
Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final vote
dateb
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Committee.
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Senate committee actions
President
Date
received in
Senatea
Public
hearing
date(s)
Louis D.
Brandeis of
Massachusetts
Wilson
01/28/1916
02/09/1916
02/10/1916
02/15/1916
02/16/1916
02/17/1916
02/18/1916
02/24/1916
02/25/1916
02/26/1916
02/29/1916
03/01/1916
03/02/1916
03/03/1916
03/04/1916
03/06/1916
03/07/1916
03/08/1916
03/14/1916
03/15/1916
John H. Clarke
of Ohio
Wilson
07/14/1916
No record
of hearing
William
Howard Taft of
Connecticut
(C. J.)
Harding
06/30/1921
George
Sutherland of
Utah
Harding
09/05/1922
Pierce Butler of
Minnesota
Harding
11/23/1922
Nominee
CRS-31
(Nom. date
11/22/1922)
Final vote
dateb
First
public
hearing
date
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
Final vote
Date
Final actionc
05/24/1916
Reported
favorably
(10-8)
06/01/1916
Confirmed
(47-22)
12
117
125
07/24/1916
Reported
favorably
07/24/1916
Confirmed
—
10
10
06/30/1921
Confirmed
(60-4)e
—
—
0
09/05/1922
Confirmed
—
—
0
—
5
—
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Committee.
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Committee.
No record
of hearing
Final action by Senate or
President
Days from date received in Senate
to:
11/28/1922
Reported
favorably
Placed on Executive Calendar,
11/28/1922, with no record of
further action
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Senate committee actions
Nominee
Pierce Butler of
Minnesota
President
Date
received in
Senatea
Public
hearing
date(s)
Harding
12/05/1922
Closed
hearings
12/09/1922
12/13/1922
12/18/1922
01/29/1923
Edward T.
Sanford of
Tennessee
Harding
01/24/1923
No record
of hearing
Harlan F. Stone
of New York
Coolidge
01/05/1925
Closed
hearing
01/12/1925f
Final vote
Reported
favorably
Reported
favorably
Reported favorably
01/21/1925
Date
Final actionc
Motion to recommit defeated,
12/21/1922
(7-63)
12/21/1922
Confirmed
(61-8)
01/29/1923
Confirmed
Recommitted
01/26/1925
01/28/1925
(after
01/26/1925
recomt’l)f
02/02/1925
Reported
favorably
02/05/1925
No hearing
held
02/10/1930
Reported
favorably
(10-2)
Motion to recommit rejected,
02/13/1930 (31-49)
Charles Evans
Hughes of New
York
(C. J.)
Hoover
John J. Parker
of North
Carolina
Hoover
03/21/1930
04/05/1930
04/21/1930
Owen J.
Roberts of
Pennsylvania
Hoover
05/09/1930
No hearing
held
Benjamin N.
Cardozo of
New York
Hoover
02/15/1932
02/19/1932
CRS-32
02/03/1930
Final vote
dateb
Final action by Senate or
President
Confirmed
(71-6)
Days from date received in Senate
to:
First
public
hearing
date
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
—
13
16
—
5
5
—
28
31
—
7
10
23
02/13/1930
Confirmed
(52-26)
Reported
adversely
(10-6)
05/07/1930
Rejected
(39-41)
15
31
47
05/19/1930
Reported
favorably
05/20/1930
Confirmed
—
10
11
02/23/1932
Reported
favorably
02/24/1932
Confirmed
4
8
9
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Senate committee actions
Nominee
Hugo L. Black
of Alabama
President
F.
Roosevelt
Date
received in
Senatea
Public
hearing
date(s)
08/12/1937
No hearing
held
Final vote
dateb
08/16/1937
Final vote
Reported
favorably
(13-4)
Final action by Senate or
President
Date
Final actionc
Motion to recommit rejected,
08/17/1937
(15-66)
08/17/1937
Confirmed
(63-16)
Days from date received in Senate
to:
First
public
hearing
date
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
—
4
5
Stanley F. Reed
of Kentucky
F.
Roosevelt
01/15/1938
01/20/1938
01/24/1938
Reported
favorably
01/25/1938
Confirmed
5
9
10
Felix
Frankfurter of
Massachusetts
F.
Roosevelt
01/05/1939
01/10/1939
01/11/1939
01/12/1939
01/16/1939
Reported
favorably
01/17/1939
Confirmed
5
11
12
William O.
Douglas of
Connecticut
F.
Roosevelt
03/20/1939
03/24/1939
03/27/1939
Reported
favorably
04/04/1939
Confirmed
(62-4)
4
7
15
Frank Murphy
of Michigan
F.
Roosevelt
01/04/1940
01/11/1940
01/15/1940
Reported
favorably
01/16/1940
Confirmed
8
11
12
Harlan F. Stone
of New York
(C. J.)
F.
Roosevelt
06/12/1941
06/21/1941
06/23/1941
Reported
favorably
06/27/1941
Confirmed
9
11
15
James F. Byrnes
of South
Carolina
F.
Roosevelt
06/12/1941
06/12/1941
Confirmed
—
—
0
Robert H.
Jackson of New
York
F.
Roosevelt
06/12/1941
06/21/1941
06/231941
06/27/1941
06/30/1941
06/30/1941
Reported
favorably
07/07/1941
Confirmed
9
18
25
Wiley B.
Rutledge of
Iowa
F.
Roosevelt
01/11/1943
01/22/1943
02/01/1943
Reported
favorably
02/08/1943
Confirmed
11
21
28
CRS-33
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Committee.
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Final action by Senate or
President
Senate committee actions
Date
Final actionc
09/19/1945
Reported
favorably
09/19/1945
Confirmed
—
1
1
06/14/1946
06/19/1946
Reported
favorably
06/20/1946
Confirmed
8
13
14
08/02/1949
08/09/1949
08/10/1949
08/11/1949
08/12/1949
Reported
favorably
(9-2)
08/18/1949
Confirmed
(73-8)
7
10
16
09/15/1949
09/27/1949
10/03/1949
Reported
favorably
(9-2)
Motion to
recommit rejected, 10/04/1949
(21-45)
12
18
19
22
44
49
Harold H.
Burton of Ohio
Truman
09/18/1945
No hearing
held
Fred M. Vinson
of Kentucky
(C. J.)
Truman
06/06/1946
Tom C. Clark
of Texas
Truman
Sherman
Minton of
Indiana
Truman
Final vote
dateb
10/04/1949
Eisenhower
John M. Harlan
II of New York
Final
action by
Senate or
President
Final vote
President
Public
hearing
date(s)
Earl Warren of
California (C. J.)
Committee
final vote
date
First
public
hearing
date
Date
received in
Senatea
Nominee
Days from date received in Senate
to:
Confirmed
(48-16)
Recess Appointment, 10/02/1953
01/11/1954
02/02/1954
02/19/1954
02/24/1954
Eisenhower
11/09/1954
No hearing
held
Referred to Judiciary Committee on 11/09/1954. No record of
committee vote or Senate action.
—
—
—
John M. Harlan
II of New York
Eisenhower
01/10/1955
02/25/1955g
03/10/1955
45
59
65
William J.
Brennan Jr. of
New Jersey
Eisenhower
Charles E.
Whittaker of
Missouri
Eisenhower
CRS-34
Reported
favorably
(12-3)
Reported
favorably
(10-4)
03/01/1954
03/16/1955
Confirmed
Confirmed
(71-11)
Recess Appointment, 10/15/1956
01/14/1957
02/26/1957
02/27/1957
03/04/1957
Reported
favorably
03/19/1957
Confirmed
43
49
64
03/02/1957
03/18/1957
03/18/1957
Reported
favorably
03/19/1957
Confirmed
16
16
17
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Final action by Senate or
President
Senate committee actions
Nominee
President
Potter Stewart
of Ohio
Eisenhower
Byron R. White
of Colorado
Date
received in
Senatea
Public
hearing
date(s)
Final vote
dateb
Final vote
Date
Final actionc
Days from date received in Senate
to:
First
public
hearing
date
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
Recess Appointment, 10/14/1958
01/17/1959
04/09/1959
04/14/1959
04/20/1959
Reported
favorably
(12-3)
05/05/1959
Confirmed
(70-17)
82
93
108
Kennedy
04/03/1962
04/11/1962
04/11/1962
Reported
favorably
04/11/1962
Confirmed
8
8
8
Arthur J.
Goldberg of
Illinois
Kennedy
08/31/1962
09/11/1962
09/13/1962
09/25/1962
Reported
favorably
09/25/1962
Confirmed
11
25
25
Abe Fortas of
Tennessee
L. Johnson
07/28/1965
08/05/1965
08/10/1965
Reported
favorably
08/11/1965
Confirmed
8
13
14
Thurgood
Marshall of
New York
L. Johnson
06/13/1967
07/13/1967
07/14/1967
07/18/1967
07/19/1967
07/24/1967
08/03/1967
Reported
favorably
(11-5)
08/30/1967
Confirmed
(69-11)
30
51
78
Abe Fortas of
Tennessee
(C. J.)
L. Johnson
06/26/1968
07/11/1968
07/12/1968
07/16/1968
07/17/1968
07/18/1968
07/19/1968
07/20/1968
07/22/1968
07/23/1968
09/13/1968
09/16/1968
09/17/1968
Reported
favorably
(11-6)
Cloture motion rejected,
10/01/1968
(45-43)h
15
83
100
CRS-35
10/04/1968
Withdrawn
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Senate committee actions
Final
action by
Senate or
President
Date
Final actionc
Referred to Judiciary
Committee, 06/26/1968.
No committee vote taken.
10/04/1968
Withdrawn
15
—
100
06/03/1969
06/03/1969
Reported
favorably
06/09/1969
Confirmed
(74-3)
11
11
17
08/21/1969
09/16/1969
09/17/1969
09/18/1969
09/19/1969
09/23/1969
09/24/1969
09/25/1969
09/26/1969
10/09/1969
Reported
favorably
(10-7)
11/21/1969
Rejected
(45-55)
26
49
92
Nixon
01/19/1970
01/27/1970
01/28/1970
01/29/1970
02/02/1970
02/03/1970
02/16/1970
Reported
favorably
(13-4)
04/08/1970
Rejected
(45-51)
8
28
79
Nixon
04/15/1970
04/29/1970
05/06/1970
Reported
favorably
(17-0)
05/12/1970
Confirmed
(94-0)
14
21
27
President
Public
hearing
date(s)
Homer
Thornberry of
Texas
L. Johnson
06/26/1968
07/11/1968
07/12/1968
07/16/1968
07/17/1968
07/18/1968
07/19/1968
07/20/1968
07/22/1968
07/23/1968
09/13/1968
09/16/1968
Warren E.
Burger of
Virginia (C. J.)
Nixon
05/23/1969
Clement F.
Haynsworth Jr.
of South
Carolina
Nixon
George
Harrold
Carswell of
Florida
Harry A.
Blackmun of
Minnesota
CRS-36
Committee
final vote
date
First
public
hearing
date
Date
received in
Senatea
Nominee
Final action by Senate or
President
Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final vote
dateb
Final vote
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Senate committee actions
President
Date
received in
Senatea
Public
hearing
date(s)
Lewis F. Powell
Jr. of Virginia
Nixon
10/22/1971
11/03/1971
11/04/1971
11/08/1971
11/09/1971
11/10/1971
William H.
Rehnquist of
Arizona
Nixon
10/22/1971
11/03/1971
11/04/1971
11/08/1971
11/09/1971
11/10/1971
Nominee
John Paul
Stevens of
Illinois
Ford
Sandra Day
O’Connor of
Arizona
Reagan
William H.
Rehnquist of
Arizona (C. J.)
Reagan
Antonin Scalia
of Virginia
Reagan
CRS-37
12/01/1975
Final vote
dateb
Final action by Senate or
President
Days from date received in Senate
to:
First
public
hearing
date
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
Final vote
Date
Final actionc
11/23/1971
Reported
favorably
(16-0)
12/06/1971
Confirmed
(89-1)
12
32
45
11/23/1971
Reported
favorably
(12-4)
Cloture motion rejected,
12/10/1971
(52-42)i
12
32
49
Motion to postpone until
01/18/1972 rejected,
12/10/1971
(22-70)
12/10/1971
Confirmed
(68-26)
12/08/1975
12/09/1975
12/10/1975
12/11/1975
Reported
favorably
(13-0)
12/17/1975
Confirmed
(98-0)
7
10
16
08/19/1981
09/09/1981
09/10/1981
09/11/1981
09/15/1981
Reported
favorably
(17-1)
09/21/1981
Confirmed
(99-0)
21
27
33
06/20/1986
07/29/1986
07/30/1986
07/31/1986
08/01/1986
08/14/1986
Reported
favorably
(13-5)
39
55
89
08/05/1986
08/06/1986
08/14/1986
42
51
85
(Nom. Date
11/28/1975)
06/24/1986
Reported
favorably
(18-0)
Cloture invoked, 09/17/1986
(68-31)j
09/17/1986
Confirmed
(65-33)
09/17/1986
Confirmed
(98-0)
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Senate committee actions
Nominee
Robert H. Bork
of District of
Columbia
President
Date
received in
Senatea
Public
hearing
date(s)
Reagan
07/07/1987
09/15/1987
09/16/1987
09/17/1987
09/18/1987
09/19/1987
09/21/1987
09/22/1987
09/23/1987
09/25/1987
09/28/1987
09/29/1987
09/30/1987
Final vote
dateb
Final vote
Motion to report favorably
rejected, 10/06/1987
(5-9)
10/06/1987
Final action by Senate or
President
Date
Final actionc
10/23/1987
Rejected
(42-58)
Days from date received in Senate
to:
First
public
hearing
date
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
70
91
108
Reported
unfavorably
(9-5)
On 10/29/1987, following the Senate’s rejection of the nomination of Robert H. Bork, President Ronald Reagan announced his intention to nominate Douglas H. Ginsburg of the
District of Columbia to be Associate Justice. Ginsburg, however, withdrew his name from consideration on 11/07/1987, before an official nomination had been made.
Anthony M.
Kennedy of
California
Reagan
11/30/1987
12/14/1987
12/15/1987
12/16/1987
01/27/1988
Reported
favorably
(14-0)
02/03/1988
Confirmed
(97-0)
14
58
65
David H.
Souter of New
Hampshire
G. H. W.
Bush
07/25/1990
09/13/1990
09/14/1990
09/17/1990
09/18/1990
09/19/1990
09/27/1990
Reported
favorably
(13-1)
10/02/1990
Confirmed
(90-9)
50
64
69
Clarence
Thomas of
Virginia
G. H. W.
Bush
07/08/1991
64
81
99
CRS-38
09/10/1991
09/11/1991
09/12/1991
09/13/1991
09/16/1991
09/17/1991
09/19/1991
09/20/1991
10/11/1991
10/12/1991
10/13/1991
Motion to report favorably
failed, 09/27/1991
(7-7)k
UC agreement reached,
10/08/1991, to reschedule vote
on confirmation from
10/08/1991 to 10/15/991, to
allow for additional hearings
09/27/1991
10/15/1991
Reported
without
recommendation
(13-1)
Confirmed
(52-48)
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Senate committee actions
President
Date
received in
Senatea
Public
hearing
date(s)
Ruth Bader
Ginsburg of
New York
Clinton
06/22/1993
07/20/1993
07/21/1993
07/22/1993
07/23/1993
Stephen G.
Breyer of
Massachusetts
Clinton
05/17/1994
07/12/1994
07/13/1994
07/14/1994
07/15/1994
John G.
Roberts Jr. of
Maryland
G. W. Bush
07/29/2005
John G.
Roberts Jr. of
Maryland
(C. J.)
G. W. Bush
09/06/2005
Harriet E. Miers
of Texas
G. W. Bush
10/07/2005
Samuel A. Alito
Jr. of New
Jersey
G. W. Bush
11/10/2005
Nominee
CRS-39
Final vote
dateb
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
Date
Final actionc
07/29/1993
Reported
favorably
(18-0)
08/03/1993
Confirmed
(96-3)
28
37
42
07/19/1994
Reported
favorably
(18-0)
07/29/1994
Confirmed
(87-9)
56
63
73
09/06/2005
Withdrawn
—
—
39
09/29/2005
Confirmed
(78-22)
6
16
23
10/28/2005
Withdrawn
—
—
21
60
75
82
09/22/2005
Reported
favorably
(13-5)
Referred to Judiciary Committee,
10/07/2005. No hearing held and no
committee vote taken.
01/09/2006
01/10/2006
01/11/2006
01/12/2006
01/13/2006
First
public
hearing
date
Final vote
Referred to Judiciary Committee,
07/29/2005. No hearing held and no
committee vote taken.
09/12/2005
09/13/2005
09/14/2005
09/15/2005
Final action by Senate or
President
Days from date received in Senate
to:
01/24/2006
Reported
favorably
(10-8)
Cloture invoked,
01/30/2006
(72-25)
01/31/2006
Confirmed
(58 - -42)
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2009
Senate committee actions
Nominee
Sonia
Sotomayor of
New York
Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
President
First
public
hearing
date
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
42
57
66
Median number of days from date received in Senate, 1789-20092010
Senate committee actions
President
Date
received in
Senatea
Public
hearing
date(s)
Sonia
Sotomayor of
New York
Obama
06/01/2009
07/13/2009
07/14/2009
07/15/2009
07/16/2009
Elena Kagan of
Massachusetts
Obama
05/10/2010
06/28/2010
06/29/2010
06/30/2010
07/01/2010
Nominee
Final vote
dateb
Final action by Senate or
President
Days from date received in Senate
to:
First
public
hearing
date
Committee
final vote
date
Final
action by
Senate or
President
Final vote
Date
Final actionc
07/28/2009
Reported
favorably
(13-6)
08/06/2009
Confirmed
(68-31)
42
57
66
07/20/2010
Reported
favorably
(13-6)
08/05/2010
Confirmed
(63-37)
49
71
87
Median number of days from date received in Senate, 1789-2010
14
11
10
Median number of days from date received in Senate, 1789-1966
10
9
7
Median number of days from date received in Senate, 1967-2009
24
51
68
President
Date
received in
Senatea
Public
hearing
date(s)
Obama
06/01/2009
07/13/2009
07/14/2009
07/15/2009
07/16/2009
Final vote
dateb
07/28/2009
Final vote
Date
Final actionc
Reported
favorably
(13-6)
08/06/2009
Confirmed
(68-31)2010
26
51
69
Sources: U.S. Congress, Senate, Journal of the Executive Proceedings of the Senate of the United States of America (hereafter, Senate Executive Journal), various editions from the
1st Congress through the 110th Congress; Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Legislative and Executive Calendar, various editions from the 77th Congress through the 103rd
Congress; various newspaper accounts accessed on-line through ProQuest Historical Newspapers (the primary source for recorded vote tallies in committee prior to the
1980s); CRS Report RL31171, Supreme Court Nominations Not Confirmed, 1789-2008August 2010, by Henry B. Hogue; and “Nominations” database in the Legislative Information
System,
available at http://www.congress.gov/nomis/.
AcknowledgmentAcknowledgments: Extensive preliminary research for this table was performed by Mitchel A. Sollenberger, former CRS Analyst. Calculations in this table, of median
number of days for time intervals at different time periods, were performed by Susan Navarro Smelcer, CRS Aanalyst on the Federal Judiciary.
a.
Usually the date on which the President formally makes a nomination, by signing a nomination message, is the same as the date on which the nomination is received,
and these two dates are the same for any given nomination when only one date is shown in the “Date received in Senate” column. However, for the occasional
nomination made by a President on a date prior to the nomination’s receipt by the Senate, the earlier presidential nomination date (“Nom. date”) is distinguished, in
parentheses, from the date when the nomination was received by the Senate.
b.
For nominations prior to 1873 that were referred to committee, the “Final vote date” is the date recorded in the Senate Executive Journal on which the committee’s
chairman or other member reported the nomination to the Senate. For nominations from 1873 to 2005, the “Final vote date” is the date on which the Judiciary
Committee voted to report a nomination or, in one instance (on Feb. 14 1881, involving the first Stanley Matthews nomination), voted to postpone taking taking
action.
c.
“Final action,” for purposes of this table, covers the following mutually exclusive outcomes: confirmation by the Senate (“Confirmed”), withdrawal of a nomination by
the President (“Withdrawn”) and Senate rejection by a vote disapproving a nomination (“Rejected”). In other instances, when none of the preceding three outcomes
CRS-40
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010
occurred, the last procedural action taken by the Senate on a nomination is indicated. On certain nominations, as indicated in the table, the last procedural outcome
entailed tabling a nomination (“Tabled”), postponing consideration (“Postponed”), or rejecting a motion to proceed to consideration (“Motion to proceed rejected”).
Final Senate actions taken by roll-call votes are shown in parentheses. Final Senate actions without roll-call votes shown in parentheses were reached by voice vote or
unanimous consent. For roll-call votes shown above, the number of Yea votes always comes before the number of Nay votes. Thus, under “Confirmed” or “Rejected,”
the first number in the vote tally is the number of Senators who voted in favor of confirmation, and the second the number voting against confirmation.
CRS-40
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2009
d.
On Dec. 16 and 17, 1873, the Judiciary Committee held closed-door sessions to examine documents and hear testimony from witnesses relevant to a controversy that
arose over the Williams nomination only after the committee had reported the nomination to the Senate. The controversy prompted the Senate to recommit the
nomination to the Judiciary Committee and to authorize the committee “to send for persons and papers.” Senate Executive Journal, vol. 19, p. 211. After holding the
two closed-door sessions , the committee did not re-report the nomination to the Senate. Amid press reports of significant opposition to the nomination in both the
Judiciary Committee and the Senate as a whole, the nomination, at Williams’s request, was withdrawn by President Ulysses S. Grant on Jan. 8, 1874. The Dec. 16 and
17 sessions can be regarded as an early, perhaps the earliest, example of a Judiciary Committee closed-door hearing. However, the above table, which focuses in part
on the times that elapsed between dates nominations were received in the Senate and dates of public confirmation hearings, does not count the time that elapsed from
the date the Williams nominations was received in the Senate until the Dec. 16 and 17, 1873, sessions, because they were closed to the public.
e.
The 60-4 roll call vote to confirm Taft, conducted by the Senate in closed-door executive session, was not recorded in the Senate Executive Journal. Newspaper
accounts, however, reported that a roll call vote on the nomination was demanded in the executive session, and that the vote was 60-4 to confirm, with an agreement
reached afterwards not to make the roll call public. See Robert J. Bender, “Ex-President Taft New Chief Justice of United States,” Atlanta Constitution, July 1, 1921, p. 1;
Charles S. Groves, “Taft Is Confirmed, as Chief Justice,” Boston Daily Globe, July 1, 1921, p. 1; and “Proceedings of Congress and Committees in Brief,” Washington Post,
July 1, 1921, p. 6.
f.
The Jan. 12, 1925, hearing, held in closed session, heard the testimony of former Sen. Willard Saulsbury of Delaware. “Nomination of Stone Is Held Up Once More,”
New York Times, Jan. 13, 1925, p. 4. At the Jan. 28, 1925, hearing, which was held in open session, the nominee was questioned by the Judiciary Committee for four
hours. This was the first confirmation hearing for a Supreme Court nomination at which the nominee appeared in person to testify. See Albert W. Fox, “Stone Tells
Senate Committee He Assumes Full Responsibility for Pressing New Wheeler Case,” Washington Post, Jan. 29, 1925, p. 1.
g.
The Judiciary Committee held two days of confirmation hearings on the Harlan nomination, on Feb. 24 and 25, 1955. The Feb. 24 session, held in closed session, heard
the testimony of nine witnesses (seven in favor of confirmation, and two opposed). Luther A. Huston, “Harlan Hearing Held by Senators,” New York Times, Feb. 25,
1955, p. 8. The committee also began the Feb. 25 hearing in closed session, to hear the testimony of additional witnesses. However, for Judge Harlan, who was the last
scheduled witness, the committee “voted to open the hearing to newspaper reporters for his testimony.” Luther A. Huston, “Harlan Disavows ‘One World’ Aims in
Senate Inquiry,” New York Times, Feb. 26, 1955, p. 1.
h.
The 45 votes in favor of the motion to close debate fell far short of the super-majority required under Senate rules—then two-thirds of Senators present and voting.
The cloture motion, if approved, would have closed a lengthy debate (which had consumed more than 25 hours over a four-day period) on a motion to proceed to
consider the Fortas nomination.
i.
The 52 votes in favor of the motion to close debate fell short of the super-majority required under Senate rules—then two-thirds of Senators present and voting.
Although the cloture motion failed, the Senate later that day (Dec. 10, 1971) agreed, without a procedural vote, to close debate and then voted to confirm Rehnquist
68-26.
j.
The 68 votes in favor of the motion to close debate, by invoking cloture, exceeded the majority required under Senate rules—then, and currently, three-fifths of the
Senate’s full membership.
k.
Motions to gain approval in Senate committees require a majority vote in favor and thus fail if there is a tie vote.
CRS-41
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 20092010
Table 2. Senate Votes on Whether to Confirm Supreme Court Nominations:
Number Made by Voice Vote/Unanimous Consent (UC) or by Roll-Call Vote
By voice vote or UC
(all to confirm)
By roll-call vote (votes to
reject in parentheses)
Totals
1789-1829
24
4 (2)
28
1830-1889
15
21 (3)
36
1890-1965
34
16 (3)
50
1966-20092010
0
2021 (3)
2021
73
6162 (11)
134135 (11)
Years
Totals
Sources: U.S. Congress, Senate, Journal of the Executive Proceedings of the Senate of the United States of America,
various editions from the 1st Congress through the 110th Congress; also, “Nominations” database in the
Legislative Information System, available at http://www.congress.gov/nomis/.
Author Contact Information
Denis Steven Rutkus
Specialist on the Federal Judiciary
srutkusdrutkus@crs.loc.gov, 7-7162
Congressional Research Service
Maureen Bearden
Information Research Specialist
mbearden@crs.loc.gov, 7-8955
42