Order Code RL33225
Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2006:
Actions by the Senate, the Judiciary Committee,
and the President

Updated September 15, 2006
Denis Steven Rutkus
Specialist in American National Government
Government and Finance Division
Maureen Bearden
Information Research Specialist
Government and Finance Division

---

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2006: Actions by
the Senate, the Judiciary Committee, and the President
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.
Thirty-nine of the 42 Presidents in the history of the United States have made
a total of 158 nominations to the Supreme Court, of which 122 (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nominations, 11 were rejected in Senate roll-call votes, 11 were withdrawn by the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.
A total of 115 of the 158 nominations were referred to a Senate committee, with
114 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, focusing, among other
things, on when the Senate first became aware of each President’s nominee
selections (e.g., via public announcements of the President), see CRS Report
RL33118, Speed of Presidential and Senate Actions on Supreme Court Nominations,
1900-2006 by R. Sam Garrett, Denis Steven Rutkus, and Curtis W. Copeland. 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, 1789-2005, by Richard S. Beth and Betsy Palmer.
This report will be updated upon the next occasion for a Court appointment.

---

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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Date That Nominations Were Received in Senate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Referral of Nominations to Senate Judiciary Committee . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Nominations That Received Public Confirmation Hearings . . . . . . . . . 6
Nominations Reported Out of Committee to Full Senate . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Nominations Not Reported Out of Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Final Action by the Senate or the President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Days from Date of Senate Receipt of Nomination to First Hearing . . 13
Days from Senate Receipt to Final Committee Vote . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Days from Senate Receipt to Final Senate or Presidential Action . . . . 16
Recess Appointments to the Supreme Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Concluding Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
List of Tables
Table 1. Nominations to the Supreme Court of the United States, 1789-2006 . . 20
Table 2. Senate Votes on Whether to Confirm Supreme Court Nominations:
Number Made by Voice Vote/Unanimous Consent (UC) or by
Roll-Call Vote . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

---

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2006:
Actions Taken by the Senate, the Judiciary
Committee, and the President
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 appointment of a Supreme Court Justice might or might not proceed
smoothly. From the first appointments in 1789, the Senate has confirmed 122 out of
158 Court nominations. Of the 36 unsuccessful nominations, 11 were rejected in
Senate roll-call votes, while nearly all 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.
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.

---

CRS-2
Specifically, the table lists, for each Supreme Court nomination, the following:
! name of the person nominated (the nominee);
! 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 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-
2006.

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
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.

---

CRS-3
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 Procedures and Practice,
1789-2006.
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 110 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 158 Supreme
Court nominations since 1789. Each of the 158 nominations entailed a President
signing a nomination message, which was then transmitted to, and received by, the
Senate. A lesser number of separate individuals, 139, were actually nominated to the
Court, with some of them nominated more than once.4
Of the 158 total nominations to the Court, 22 were to the position of Chief
Justice and the other 136 to a position as Associate Justice. The 22 Chief Justice
nominations involved 20 persons nominated once, and one person nominated twice.5
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.supremecourtus.gov/about/members.pdf], presents first
the names of 17 persons who have served as Chief Justice, followed by the 98 persons who
have served as Associate Justices. The listing of 115 names in all (17 + 98) includes those
of five Chief Justices who earlier had served as Associate Justices, hence reducing to 110
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 139 (the number of persons nominated to the
Court at least once) is 158 (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
(continued...)

---

CRS-4
The 136 Associate Justice nominations involved 119 persons nominated once, seven
persons nominated twice, and one person nominated three times.

Presidents Who Made the Nominations. Thirty-nine of the 42 Presidents
in the history of the United States have made nominations to the Supreme Court.6
These 39 are listed in the second column of Table 1. All but one of the 39 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 in1866, 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 half of the 42 Presidents
made four or more nominations, and half made three or fewer. Half of the 42
Presidents saw three or more of their Court nominations confirmed, and half 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. 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
5 (...continued)
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 Court Nominations, by
President, 1789 to October 2005,” in CRS Report RL31171, Supreme Court Nominations
Not Confirmed, 1789-2006, 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. 69-74. (Hereafter cited as Jacobstein and Mersky, The Rejected.)

---

CRS-5
six Court nominations, all of which were confirmed. Six Presidents made only one
Supreme Court nomination each, with the nominations of five of these Presidents
receiving confirmation.8 And, as noted above, three of the nation’s 42 Presidents
were unable to make a single nomination to the Court, because no vacancies occurred
on the Court during their presidencies.
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.9 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 115
of 158 Supreme Court nominations have been referred to a Senate committee, 114
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 afer 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.
8 The five Presidents whose single Supreme Court nominations received Senate confirmation
were Franklin Pierce, James A. Garfield, William McKinley, Calvin Coolidge, and Gerald
R. Ford. As mentioned above, the one President whose single Court nomination did not
receive confirmation was Andrew Johnson.
9 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 2006, 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, 1900-2006, by R. Sam Garrett, Denis
Steven Rutkus, and Curtis W. Copeland.

---

CRS-6
In 1868, Senate rules were changed to provide that all nominations be referred
to appropriate standing committees, unless otherwise ordered by the Senate.10
Subsequently, from 1868 to the present day, 87 of 94 Supreme Court nominations
have been referred to the Judiciary Committee. The seven not referred to committee
were persons who, at the time of their nomination, were a former President, a
Senator, a former Senator, an Attorney General and former U.S. Representative, or
a former Secretary of War,11 and all 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.12 In 1916, for the first time, the committee held open
10 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 .... “
11 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 Taft in 1921
(former President); George Sutherland in 1922 (former Senator); and James F. Byrnes in
1941 (Senator).
12 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
(continued...)

---

CRS-7
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 to1923) 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.13 During the next two
decades, the Stone nomination was one of 11 Court nominations that received public
confirmation hearings before either the full Judiciary Committee or a Judiciary
subcommittee,14 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.15
12 (...continued)
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.
13 For a discussion of the advent of Supreme Court nominee appearances before the Senate
Judiciary Committee, 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.
14 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.”)
15 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
(continued...)

---

CRS-8
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;16 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.17
From Tom C. Clark’s appointment in 1949 through the nomination of Samuel
A. Alito, Jr. in 2005-2006, all but three of 34 Supreme Court nominations have
received public confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee or a
Judiciary subcommittee.18 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 re-nominated, and hearings were held on that nomination.19 The second and
third exceptions 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.
15 (...continued)
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.
16 See, in Table 1, the multiple hearing days for the nominations of Felix Frankfurter in
1939 and Robert H. Jackson in 1941.
17 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.
18 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.
19 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 newspaper reporters for his testimony.” Luther A.
Huston, “Harlan Disavows ‘One World’ Aims in Senate Inquiry,” New York Times, Feb. 26,
1955, p. 1.

---

CRS-9
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 January 2006, 15 of the 21 Court
nominations which advanced through the hearings stage received four or more days
of open confirmation hearings. Four of the 15 nominations received 11 or more days
of hearings,20 while another received eight days of hearings.21 By contrast, only three
of the 21 nominations received two or fewer days of hearings.22
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 the committee has almost never employed
the strategy of not reporting. Of the114 Supreme Court nominations referred to the
Judiciary Committee, 106 were reported to the Senate.23 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. Twenty-three nominations
were reported to the Senate in this way, and 15 of them were confirmed.
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
20 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).
21 In 1969, eight days of confirmation hearings were held on the nomination of Clement F.
Haynsworth.
22 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.
23 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 the 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.

---

CRS-10
committee has favorably reported 72 Supreme Court nominations, with 66 receiving
Senate confirmation.24
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.25 The Senate
confirmed three of the nominations that were reported in this way, while rejecting the
fourth.26
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);27 the Senate rejected
four of the others28 and postponed taking action on the fifth.29
24 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.
25 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.
26 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.
27 See in Table 1 the second nomination of Stanley Matthews in 1881 (confirmed 24-23)
and the nomination of Lucius Q. C. Lamar in 1888 (confirmed 32-28).
28 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).
29 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.

---

CRS-11
Nominations Not Reported Out of Committee. Of the 114 Supreme
Court nominations referred to the Judiciary Committee since its establishment, eight
were not reported by the committee to the Senate. The final outcome for all eight
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. While five of the
nominees were never confirmed to the Court,30 the other three ultimately were, after
being re-nominated.31
Final Action by the Senate or the President. From the first Supreme
Court appointments in 1789 to the present day, Presidents have made 158
nominations to the Court. Table 1 shows, in the “Final action by Senate or
President” column, that the Senate confirmed 122 of these nominations, or roughly
three-fourths.32 Of the 36 nominations that were not confirmed, 11 were rejected by
the Senate (all in roll-call votes),33 11 were withdrawn by the President,34 and 14
30 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.
31 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.
32 The exact confirmation percentage is 77.2%, reached by dividing 122 confirmations by
158 nominations.
33 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:
(continued...)

---

CRS-12
lapsed at the end of a session of Congress without a Senate vote cast on whether to
confirm.35
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 133 Senate votes on whether to
confirm (resulting in 122 confirmations and 11 rejections), 60 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
33 (...continued)
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.
34 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 to be Associate Justice, he re-nominated Roberts to
be Chief Justice, and the latter nomination was confirmed.
35 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
re-nominated in the next congressional session and confirmed (Taney in 1835, Matthews in
1881, Butler in 1922, and Harlan in 1955).

---

CRS-13
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.36 Most votes, however, have been overwhelmingly in favor of
confirmation.37
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 43
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 next-longest
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 Samuel A. Alito Jr. to be Associate Justice in
36 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, 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 by themselves suggested, since
passage of the motion required a two-thirds vote of the Members present and voting.
37 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 (99-0), 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 (89-1), and Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 1993 (96-3).

---

CRS-14
2005-2006,38 a median of 21 days elapsed between Senate receipt and first day of
confirmation hearings.39
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 nominations, in
preparation for the hearings. In the case of five of the six 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.40 While the elapsed time for the sixth 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 108 Court
nominations that received final committee votes,41 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.42
The committee votes on 14 other nominations to the court occurred three days or less
38 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.
39 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.
40 For the five 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, and 60 days for Samuel A. Alito Jr. in 2005-2006.
41 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.
42 Ironically, five days after the committee’s favorable, and extremely prompt,
recommendation of Cushing, President Ulysses S. Grant withdrew the nomination.

---

CRS-15
after the dates of Senate receipt.43 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.44
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.45 From the Supreme Court nomination of Thurgood Marshall in 1967 through
the nomination of Samuel A. Alito Jr. in 2005 (voted on by the committee in 2006),
a median of 50 days elapsed between Senate receipt and final committee vote.46
Somewhat earlier, during the presidency of Dwight Eisenhower (1953 to 1961),
two of five Supreme Court nominations were pending, prior to Judiciary Committee
vote, in excess of the 1967-to-2006 median of 50 days for that time interval (while
two other nominations were pending 44 and 49 days respectively before receiving
committee action);47 however, the corresponding time intervals for the next three
43 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.
44 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).
45 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.
46 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.
47 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,
(continued...)

---

CRS-16
Court nominations (two by President John F. Kennedy and one by President Lyndon
B. Johnson) were all well below the 50-day median.48
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 150 of the 158
nominations listed in the table, with no elapsed time shown for the pending Alito
nomination or 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.49 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-
2006, 1789-1966, and 1967-2006.
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 January 30, 2006 (the date on which the Senate
confirmed the nomination of Samuel A. Alito Jr., a median of 69 days elapsed from
47 (...continued)
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 and final Supreme Court
nomination, of Charles E. Whittaker, which was approved by the Judiciary Committee 16
days after Senate receipt.
48 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.
49 Besides nominations that received official final Senate action in the form of confirmation
or rejection (122 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.

---

CRS-17
when a Supreme Court nomination was received in the Senate until the date it
received final action, compared with a median of seven days for the same interval for
the prior years of 1789 to 1966.50 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,51 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).52
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
50 At first glance, the most recently confirmed nomination, of John G. Roberts Jr. for Chief
Justice, appears to be a deviation from the 1967 to 2005 median interval from date received
to final action of 69 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.
51 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.
52 Table 1 shows that 16 nominations received final Senate or presidential action more than
75 days after date of receipt in the Senate. Twelve of the 16 were 20th century nominations,
with 10 made since 1967.

---

CRS-18
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.
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,53 with the last three made almost a century later,
in the 1950s, during the presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower.54
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.55 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).56
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
53 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.
54 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.
55 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.”
56 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; and Henry B. Hogue,
“The Law: Recess Appointments to Article III Courts,” Political Science Quarterly, vol. 34,
September 2004, p. 656.

---

CRS-19
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, 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.
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.

---

CRS-20
Table 1. Nominations to the Supreme Court of the United States, 1789-2006
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
John Jay of New York
Washington
09/24/1789
09/26/1789
Confirmed
—
—
2
(Chief Justice,
hereafter C. J.)
John Rutledge
Washington
09/24/1789
09/26/1789
Confirmed
—
—
2
of South Carolina
William Cushing
Washington
09/24/1789
09/26/1789
Confirmed
—
—
2
of Massachusetts
Robert Harrison
Washington
09/24/1789
09/26/1789
Confirmed
—
—
2
Nomination predated creation of Judiciary
of Maryland
(Nominee
Committee in 12/10/1816. No record of
declined)
other committee referral.
James Wilson
Washington
09/24/1789
09/26/1789
Confirmed
—
—
2
of Pennsylvania
John Blair Jr.
Washington
09/24/1789
09/26/1789
Confirmed
—
—
2
of Virginia
James Iredell
Washington
02/09/1790
02/10/1790
Confirmed
—
—
1
of North Carolina
(Nom. date
02/08/1790)
Thomas Johnson
Washington
Recess Appointment, 08/05/1791
of Maryland
11/01/1791
11/07/1791
Confirmed
—
—
6
(Nom. date
Nomination predated creation of Judiciary
10/31/1791)
Committee in 12/10/1816. No record of
other committee referral.
William Paterson
Washington
02/27/1793
02/28/1793
Withdrawn
—
—
1
of New Jersey

---

CRS-21
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
William Paterson
Washington
03/04/1793
03/04/1793
Confirmed
—
—
0
of New Jersey
John Rutledge
Washington
Recess Appointment, 07/01/1795
of South Carolina
(C. J.)
12/10/1795
12/15/1795
Rejected
—
—
5
(10-14)
William Cushing
Washington
01/26/1796
01/27/1796
Confirmed
—
—
1
of Massachusetts (C.
(Nominee
J.)
Nomination predated creation of Judiciary
declined)
Committee in 12/10/1816. No record of
Samuel Chase
Washington
01/26/1796
other committee referral.
01/27/1796
Confirmed
—
—
1
of Maryland
Oliver Ellsworth of
Washington
03/03/1796
03/04/1796
Confirmed
—
—
1
Connecticut
(21-1)
(C. J.)
Bushrod Washington
J. Adams
Recess Appointment, 09/29/1798
of Virginia
12/19/1798
12/20/1798
Confirmed
—
—
1
Alfred Moore
J. Adams
12/04/1799
12/10/1799
Confirmed
—
—
6
of North Carolina
John Jay
J. Adams
12/18/1800
12/19/1800
Confirmed
—
—
1
of New York (C. J.)
Nomination predated creation of Judiciary
(Nominee
Committee in 12/10/1816. No record of
declined)
other committee referral.
John Marshall
J. Adams
01/20/1801
01/27/1801
Confirmed
—
—
7
of Virginia
(C. J.)
William Johnson
Jefferson
03/22/1804
03/24/1804
Confirmed
—
—
2
of South Carolina

---

CRS-22
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
H. Brockholst
Jefferson
Recess Appointment, 11/10/1806
Livingston
of New York
12/15/1806
12/17/1806
Confirmed
—
—
2
Thomas Todd
Jefferson
02/28/1807
Nomination predated creation of Judiciary
03/02/1807
Confirmed
—
—
2
of Kentucky
Committee in 12/10/1816. No record of
other committee referral.
Levi Lincoln
Madison
01/02/1811
01/03/1811
Confirmed
—
—
1
of Massachusetts
(Nominee
declined)
Alexander Wolcott
Madison
02/04/1811
No record
Select
Reported
02/13/1811
Rejected
—
9
9
of Connecticut
of
Committee,
(9-24)
hearing
02/13/1811
John Quincy Adams
Madison
02/21/1811
02/22/1811
Confirmed
—
—
1
of Massachusetts
(Nominee
declined)
Nomination predated creation of Judiciary
Joseph Story
Madison
11/15/1811
Committee in 12/10/1816. No record of
11/18/1811
Confirmed
—
—
3
of Massachusetts
other committee referral.
Gabriel Duvall
Madison
11/15/1811
11/18/1811
Confirmed
—
—
3
of Maryland
Smith Thompson
Monroe
Recess Appointment, 09/01/1823
of New York
12/08/1823
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
12/09/1823
Confirmed
—
—
1
Committee.
(Nom. date
12/5/1823)
Robert Trimble
J. Q. Adams
04/12/1826
Motion to refer to Judiciary Committee
05/09/1826
Confirmed
—
—
27
of Kentucky
rejected by Senate, 05/09/1826
(27-5)
(Nom. date
(7-25)
04/11/1826)

---

CRS-23
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
John Crittenden
J. Q. Adams
12/18/1828
No record
01/26/1829
Reported
02/12/1829
Postponed
—
39
56
of Kentucky
of
with
(23-17)
(Nom. date
hearing
recommen-
12/17/1828)
dation not to
act
John McLean
Jackson
03/06/1829
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
03/07/1829
Confirmed
—
—
1
of Ohio
Committee.
Henry Baldwin
Jackson
01/05/1830
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
01/05/1830
Confirmed
—
—
0
of Pennsylvania
Committee.
(41-2)
James M. Wayne
Jackson
01/07/1835
No record
01/09/1835
Reported
01/09/1835
Confirmed
—
2
2
of Georgia
of
(Nom. date
hearing
01/06/1835)
Roger B. Taney
Jackson
01/15/1835
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
03/03/1835
Postponed
—
—
47
of Maryland
Committee.
(24-21)
Roger B. Taney
Jackson
12/28/1835
No record
01/05/1836
Reported
Motion to proceed,
—
8
78
of Maryland (C. J.)
of
03/14/1836
hearing
(25-19)
03/15/1836
Confirmed
(29-15)
Philip P. Barbour
Jackson
12/28/1835
No record
01/05/1836
Reported
Motion to proceed,
—
8
78
of Virginia
of
03/15/1836
hearing
(25-20)
03/15/1836
Confirmed
(30-11)

---

CRS-24
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
William Smith
Jackson
03/03/1837
No record
03/08/1837
Reported
03/08/1837
Confirmed
—
5
5
of Alabama
of
(23-18)
hearing
(Nominee
declined)
John Catron
Jackson
03/03/1837
No record
03/08/1837
Reported
03/08/1837
Confirmed
—
5
5
of Tennessee
of
(28-15)
hearing
John McKinley
Van Buren
Recess Appointment, 04/22/1837
of Alabama
09/19/1837
No record
09/25/1837
Reported
09/25/1837
Confirmed
—
6
6
of
(Nom. date
hearing
09/18/1837)
Peter V. Daniel
Van Buren
02/27/1841
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
03/02/1841
Confirmed
—
—
3
of Virginia
Committee.
(22-5)
(Nom. date
02/25/1841)
John C. Spencer
Tyler
01/09/1844
No record
01/30/1844
Reported
01/31/1844
Rejected
—
21
22
of New York
of
(21-26)
(Nom. date
hearing
01/08/1844
Reuben H. Walworth
Tyler
03/13/1844
No record
06/14/1844
Reported
Tabled, 06/15/1844
—
93
96
of New York
of
(27-20)
hearing
06/17/1844 Withdrawn
Edward King
Tyler
06/05/1844
No record
06/14/1844
Reported
06/15/1844
Tabled
—
9
10
of Pennsylvania
of
(29-18)
hearing

---

CRS-25
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
John C. Spencer
Tyler
06/17/1844
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
06/17/1844
Withdrawn
—
—
0
of New York
Committee.
Reuben H. Walworth
Tyler
06/17/1844
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Motion to proceed
—
—
—
of New York
Committee.
objected to, 06/17/1844.
Senate adjourned on same
day, with no record of
further action.
Reuben H. Walworth
Tyler
12/10/1844
No record
01/21/1845
Reported
Tabled,
—
42
58
of New York
of
01/21/1845
(Nom. date
hearing
12/04/1844)
02/06/1845
Withdrawn
Edward King
Tyler
12/10/1844
No record
01/21/1845
Reported
Tabled,
—
42
60
of Pennsylvania
of
01/21/1845
(Nom. date
hearing
12/04/1844)
02/08/1845
Withdrawn
Samuel Nelson
Tyler
02/06/1845
No record
02/08/1845
Reported
02/14/1845
Confirmed
—
2
8
of New York
of
(Nom. date
hearing
02/04/1845)
John M. Read
Tyler
02/08/1845
No record
02/14/1845
Reported
No record of action
—
6
—
of Pennsylvania
of
hearing
George W. Woodward
Polk
12/23/1845
No record
01/20/1846
Reported
Motion to postpone
—
28
30
of Pennsylvania
of
rejected, 01/22/1846
hearing
(21-28)
01/22/1846
Rejected
(20-29)

---

CRS-26
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
Levi Woodbury
Polk
Recess Appointment, 09/20/1845
of New Hampshire
12/23/1845
No record
01/03/1846
Reported
01/03/1846
Confirmed
—
11
11
of
hearing
Robert C. Grier of
Polk
08/03/1846
No record
08/04/1846
Reported
08/04/1846
Confirmed
—
1
1
Pennsylvania
of
hearing
Benjamin R. Curtis of
Fillmore
Recess Appointment, 09/22/1851
Massachusetts
12/12/1851
No record
12/23/1851
Reported
12/23/1851
Confirmed
—
11
11
of
(Nom. date
hearing
12/11/1851)
Edward A. Bradford
Fillmore
08/21/1852
No record
08/30/1852
Reported
08/31/1852
Tabled
—
9
10
of Louisiana
of
(Nom. date
hearing
08/16/1852)
George E. Badger
Fillmore
01/10/1853
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
02/11/1853
Postponed
—
—
32
of North Carolina
Committee.
(26-25)
(Nom. date
01/03/1853)
William C. Micou of
Fillmore
02/24/1853
No record
Referred to Judiciary Committee on 02/24/1853. Senate
—
—
—
Louisiana
of
ordered committee discharged of nomination on same
(Nom. date
hearing
day; no record of Senate consideration after discharge.
02/14/1853)
John A. Campbell
Pierce
03/21/1853
No record
03/22/1853
Reported
03/22/1853
Confirmed
—
1
1
of Alabama
of
hearing

---

CRS-27
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
Nathan Clifford
Buchanan
12/09/1857
No record
01/06/1858
Reported
01/12/1858
Confirmed
—
28
34
of Maine
of
(26-23)
hearing
Jeremiah S. Black
Buchanan
02/06/1861
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
02/21/1861
Motion to
—
—
15
of Pennsylvania
Committee.
proceed
(Nom. date
rejected
02/05/1861)
(25-26)
Noah H. Swayne
Lincoln
01/22/1862
No record
01/24/1862
Reported
01/24/1862
Confirmed
—
2
2
of Ohio
of
(38-1)
(Nom. date
hearing
01/21/1862)
Samuel F. Miller
Lincoln
07/16/1862
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
07/16/1862
Confirmed
—
—
0
of Iowa
Committee.
David Davis
Lincoln
Recess Appointment, 10/17/1862
of Illinois
12/03/1862
No record
12/05/1862
Reported
12/08/1862
Confirmed
—
2
5
of
(Nom. date
hearing
12/01/1862)
Stephen J. Field
Lincoln
03/07/1863
No record
03/09/1863
Reported
03/10/1863
Confirmed
—
2
3
of California
of
(Nom. date
hearing
03/06/1863
Salmon P. Chase
Lincoln
12/06/1864
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
12/06/1864
Confirmed
—
—
0
of Ohio (C. J.)
Committee.
Henry Stanbery
A. Johnson
04/16/1866
No record
Referred to Judiciary Committee on 04/16/1866. No
—
—
—
of Ohio
of
record of committee vote, and no record of Senate
hearing
action after referral.

---

CRS-28
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
Ebenezer R. Hoar
Grant
12/15/1869
No record
12/22/1869
Reported
02/03/1870
Rejected
—
7
50
of Massachusetts
of
adversely
(24-33)
(Nom. date
hearing
12/14/1869)
Edwin M. Stanton
Grant
12/20/1869
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
12/20/1869
Confirmed
—
—
0
of Pennsylvania
Committee
(46-11)
(Nominee
died before
assuming
office)
William Strong
Grant
02/08/1870
No record
02/14/1870
Reported
02/18/1870
Confirmed
—
6
10
of Pennsylvania
of
favorably
(Nom. date
hearing
02/07/1870)
Joseph P. Bradley
Grant
02/08/1870
No record
02/14/1870
Reported
Postponed,
—
6
41
of New Jersey
of
favorably
03/02/1870
(Nom. date
hearing
(31-26)
02/07/1870)
Motion to postpone
rejected, 03/02/1870
(23-28)
03/21/1870
Confirmed
(46-9)
Ward Hunt
Grant
12/06/1872
No record
12/11/1872
Reported
12/11/1872
Confirmed
—
5
5
of New York
of
favorably
(Nom. date
hearing
12/03/1872)

---

CRS-29
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
George H. Williams
Grant
12/02/1873
No record
12/11/1873
Reported
Recommitted,
—
9
37
of Oregon
of hearing
favorably
12/15/1873
(C. J.)
(Nom. date
12/01/1873)
Closed
—
—
01/08/1874
Withdrawn
hearings d
12/16/1873
12/17/1873
Caleb Cushing
Grant
01/09/1874
No record
01/09/1874
Reported
01/14/1874
Withdrawn
—
0
5
of Massachusetts
of
favorably
(C. J.)
hearing
Morrison R. Waite
Grant
01/19/1874
No record
01/20/1874
Reported
01/21/1874
Confirmed
—
1
2
of Ohio (C. J.)
of
favorably
(63-0)
hearing
John Marshall Harlan
Hayes
10/17/1877
No record
11/26/1877
Reported
11/29/1877
Confirmed
—
40
43
of Kentucky
of
favorably
hearing
William B. Woods
Hayes
12/15/1880
No record
12/20/1880
Reported
12/21/1880
Confirmed
—
5
6
of Georgia
of
favorably
(39-8)
hearing
Tabled motion to
reconsider, 12/22/1880
(36-3)
Stanley Matthews
Hayes
01/26/1881
No record
Considered , 02/07/1881
No record of action
—
19
—
of Ohio
of
hearing
02/14/1881
Postponed
Stanley Matthews
Garfield
03/18/1881
No record
05/09/1881
Reported
05/12/1881
Confirmed
—
53
55
of Ohio
of
adversely
(24-23)
(Nom. date
hearing
(6-1)
03/14/1881)

---

CRS-30
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
Horace Gray
Arthur
12/19/1881
No record
12/20/1881
Reported
12/20/1881
Confirmed
—
1
1
of Massachusetts
of
favorably
(51-5)
hearing
Roscoe Conkling
Arthur
02/24/1882
No record
03/02/1882
Reported
03/02/1882
Confirmed
—
6
6
of New York
of
favorably
(39-12)
hearing
(Nominee
declined)
Samuel Blatchford
Arthur
03/13/1882
No record
03/22/1882
Reported
03/22/1882
Confirmed
—
9
9
of New York
of
favorably
hearing
Lucius Q. C. Lamar
Cleveland
12/12/1887
No record
01/10/1888
Reported
01/16/1888
Confirmed
—
29
35
of Mississippi
of
adversely
(32-28)
(Nom. date
hearing
(5-4)
12/06/1887)
Melville W. Fuller
Cleveland
05/02/1888
No record
07/02/1888
Reported
07/20/1888
Confirmed
—
61
79
of Illinois
of
without
(41-20)
(C. J.)
(Nom. date
hearing
recommen-
04/30/1888)
dation
David J. Brewer
Harrison
12/04/1889
No record
12/16/1889
Reported
Motion to postpone
—
12
14
of Kansas
of
favorably
rejected, 12/18/1889
hearing
(15-54)
Motion to postpone
rejected, 12/18/1889
(25-45)
12/18/1889 Confirmed
(53-11)

---

CRS-31
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
Henry B. Brown
Harrison
12/23/1890
No record
12/29/1890
Reported
12/29/1890
Confirmed
—
6
6
of Michigan
of
favorably
hearing
George Shiras Jr.
Harrison
07/19/1892
No record
07/25/1892
Reported
07/26/1892
Confirmed
—
6
7
of Pennsylvania
of
without
hearing
recommen-
dation
Howell E. Jackson
Harrison
02/02/1893
No record
02/13/1893
Reported
02/18/1893
Confirmed
—
11
16
of Tennessee
of
favorably
hearing
William B.
Cleveland
09/19/1893
No record
Considered, 09/25/1893
No record of action
—
—
—
Hornblower
of
and 10/25 & 30/1893
of New York
hearing
William B.
Cleveland
12/06/1893
No record
Considered, 12/11, 14 &
01/15/1894
Rejected
—
33
40
Hornblower
of
18/1893
(24-30)
of New York
hearing
01/08/1894
Reported
adversely
Wheeler H. Peckham
Cleveland
01/22/1894
No record
On question of reporting
02/16/1894
Rejected
—
21
25
of New York
of
favorably, committee vote
(32-41)
hearing
divided, 02/12/1894
(5-5)
02/12/1894
Reported
without
recommen-
dation
Edward D. White
Cleveland
02/19/1894
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
02/19/1894
Confirmed
—
—
0
of Louisiana
Committee

---

CRS-32
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
Rufus W. Peckham
Cleveland
12/03/1895
No record
12/09/1895
Reported
12/09/1895
Confirmed
—
6
6
of New York
of
favorably
hearing
Joseph McKenna
McKinley
12/16/1897
No record
01/13/1898
Reported
01/21/1898
Confirmed
—
28
36
of California
of
favorably
hearing
Oliver Wendell
T. Roosevelt
12/02/1902
No record
12/04/1902
Reported
12/04/1902
Confirmed
—
2
2
Holmes
of
favorably
of Massachusetts
hearing
William R. Day
T. Roosevelt
02/19/1903
No record
02/23/1903
Reported
02/23/1903
Confirmed
—
4
4
of Ohio
of
favorably
hearing
William H. Moody
T. Roosevelt
12/03/1906
No record
12/10/1906
Reported
12/12/1906
Confirmed
—
7
9
of Massachusetts
of
favorably
hearing
Horace H. Lurton
Taft
12/13/1909
No record
12/16/1909
Reported
12/20/1909
Confirmed
—
3
7
of Tennessee
of
favorably
hearing
Charles Evans Hughes
Taft
04/25/1910
No record
05/02/1910
Reported
05/02/1910
Confirmed
—
7
7
of New York
of
favorably
hearing
Edward D. White
Taft
12/12/1910
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
12/12/1910
Confirmed
—
—
0
of Louisiana (C. J.)
Committee.
Willis Van Devanter
Taft
12/12/1910
No record
12/15/1910
Reported
12/15/1910
Confirmed
—
3
3
of Wyoming
of
favorably
hearing

---

CRS-33
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
Joseph R. Lamar
Taft
12/12/1910
No record
12/15/1910
Reported
12/15/1910
Confirmed
—
3
3
of Georgia
of
favorably
hearing
Mahlon Pitney
Taft
02/19/1912
No record
03/04/1912
Reported
03/13/1912
Confirmed
—
14
23
of New Jersey
of
favorably
(50-26)
hearing
James C. McReynolds
Wilson
08/19/1914
No record
08/24/1914
Reported
08/29/1914
Confirmed
—
5
10
of Tennessee
of
favorably
(44-6)
hearing
Louis D. Brandeis
Wilson
01/28/1916
02/09/1916
05/24/1916
Reported
06/01/1916
Confirmed
12
117
125
of Massachusetts
02/10/1916
favorably
(47-22)
02/15/1916
(10-8)
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
Wilson
07/14/1916
No record
07/24/1916
Reported
07/24/1916
Confirmed
—
10
10
of Ohio
of
favorably
hearing

---

CRS-34
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
William Howard Taft
Harding
06/30/1921
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
06/30/1921
Confirmed
—
—
0
of Connecticut (C. J.)
Committee.
(60-4) e
George Sutherland
Harding
09/05/1922
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
09/05/1922
Confirmed
—
—
0
of Utah
Committee.
Pierce Butler
Harding
11/23/1922
No record
11/28/1922
Reported
Placed on Executive
—
5
—
of Minnesota
of
favorably
Calendar, 11/28/1922,
(Nom. date
hearing
with no record of further
11/22/1922)
action
Pierce Butler
Harding
12/05/1922
Closed
12/18/1922
Reported
Motion to recommit
—
13
16
of Minnesota
hearings
favorably
defeated, 12/21/1922
12/09/1922
(7-63)
12/13/1922
12/21/1922
Confirmed
(61-8)
Edward T. Sanford
Harding
01/24/1923
No record
01/29/1923
Reported
01/29/1923
Confirmed
—
5
5
of Tennessee
of
favorably
hearing
Harlan F. Stone
Coolidge
01/05/1925
Closed
Reported favorably
Recommitted
—
28
31
of New York
hearing
01/21/1925
01/26/1925
01/12/1925
f
01/28/1925
02/02/1925
Reported
02/05/1925
Confirmed
23
(after
favorably
(71-6)
01/26/1925
recomt’l) f
Charles Evans Hughes
Hoover
02/03/1930
No hearing
02/10/1930
Reported
Motion to recommit
—
7
10
of New York (C. J.)
held
favorably
rejected, 02/13/1930 (31-
(10-2)
49)
02/13/1930
Confirmed
(52-26)

---

CRS-35
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
John J. Parker
Hoover
03/21/1930
04/05/1930
04/21/1930
Reported
05/07/1930
Rejected
15
31
47
of North Carolina
adversely
(39-41)
(10-6)
Owen J. Roberts
Hoover
05/09/1930
No hearing
05/19/1930
Reported
05/20/1930
Confirmed
—
10
11
of Pennsylvania
held
favorably
Benjamin N. Cardozo
Hoover
02/15/1932
02/19/1932 02/23/1932
Reported
02/24/1932
Confirmed
4
8
9
of New York
favorably
Hugo L. Black
F. Roosevelt
08/12/1937
No hearing
08/16/1937
Reported
Motion to recommit
—
4
5
of Alabama
held
favorably
rejected, 08/17/1937
(13-4)
(15-66)
08/17/1937
Confirmed
(63-16)
Stanley F. Reed
F. Roosevelt
01/15/1938
01/20/1938
01/24/1938
Reported
01/25/1938
Confirmed
5
9
10
of Kentucky
favorably
Felix Frankfurter
F. Roosevelt
01/05/1939
01/10/1939
01/16/1939
Reported
01/17/1939
Confirmed
5
11
12
of Massachusetts
01/11/1939
favorably
01/12/1939
William O. Douglas
F. Roosevelt
03/20/1939
03/24/1939
03/27/1939
Reported
04/04/1939
Confirmed
4
7
15
of Connecticut
favorably
(62-4)
Frank Murphy
F. Roosevelt
01/04/1940
01/11/1940
01/15/1940
Reported
01/16/1940
Confirmed
8
11
12
of Michigan
favorably
Harlan F. Stone
F. Roosevelt
06/12/1941
06/21/1941
06/23/1941
Reported
06/27/1941
Confirmed
9
11
15
of New York (C. J.)
favorably
James F. Byrnes
F. Roosevelt
06/12/1941
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
06/12/1941
Confirmed
—
—
0
of South Carolina
Committee.

---

CRS-36
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
Robert H. Jackson
F. Roosevelt
06/12/1941
06/21/1941
06/30/1941
Reported
07/07/1941
Confirmed
9
18
25
of New York
06/231941
favorably
06/27/1941
06/30/1941
Wiley B. Rutledge
F. Roosevelt
01/11/1943
01/22/1943
02/01/1943
Reported
02/08/1943
Confirmed
11
21
28
of Iowa
favorably
Harold H. Burton
Truman
09/18/1945
No hearing
09/19/1945
Reported
09/19/1945
Confirmed
—
1
1
of Ohio
held
favorably
Fred M. Vinson of
Truman
06/06/1946
06/14/1946
06/19/1946
Reported
06/20/1946
Confirmed
8
13
14
Kentucky (C. J.)
favorably
Tom C. Clark
Truman
08/02/1949
08/09/1949
08/12/1949
Reported
08/18/1949
Confirmed
7
10
16
of Texas
08/10/1949
favorably
(73-8)
08/11/1949
(9-2)
Sherman Minton
Truman
09/15/1949
09/27/1949
10/03/1949
Reported
Motion to
12
18
19
of Indiana
favorably
recommit rejected,
(9-2)
10/04/1949
(21-45)
10/04/1949
Confirmed
(48-16)
Earl Warren
Eisenhower
Recess Appointment, 10/02/1953
of California (C. J.)
01/11/1954
02/02/1954
02/24/1954
Reported
03/01/1954
Confirmed
22
44
49
02/19/1954
favorably
(12-3)
John M. Harlan II
Eisenhower
11/09/1954
No hearing
Referred to Judiciary Committee on 11/09/1954. No
—
—
—
of New York
held
record of committee vote or Senate action.
John M. Harlan II
Eisenhower
01/10/1955
02/25/1955
03/10/1955
Reported
03/16/1955
Confirmed
45
59
65
of New York
g
favorably
(71-11)
(10-4)

---

CRS-37
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
William J. Brennan Jr.
Eisenhower
Recess Appointment, 10/15/1956
of New Jersey
01/14/1957
02/26/1957
03/04/1957
Reported
03/19/1957
Confirmed
43
49
64
02/27/1957
favorably
Charles E. Whittaker
Eisenhower
03/02/1957
03/18/1957
03/18/1957
Reported
03/19/1957
Confirmed
16
16
17
of Missouri
favorably
Potter Stewart
Eisenhower
Recess Appointment, 10/14/1958
of Ohio
01/17/1959
04/09/1959
04/20/1959
Reported
05/05/1959
Confirmed
82
93
108
04/14/1959
favorably
(70-17)
(12-3)
Byron R. White
Kennedy
04/03/1962
04/11/1962
04/11/1962
Reported
04/11/1962
Confirmed
8
8
8
of Colorado
favorably
Arthur J. Goldberg
Kennedy
08/31/1962
09/11/1962
09/25/1962
Reported
09/25/1962
Confirmed
11
25
25
of Illinois
09/13/1962
favorably
Abe Fortas
L. Johnson
07/28/1965
08/05/1965
08/10/1965
Reported
08/11/1965
Confirmed
8
13
14
of Tennessee
favorably
Thurgood Marshall
L. Johnson
06/13/1967
07/13/1967
08/03/1967
Reported
08/30/1967
Confirmed
30
51
78
of New York
07/14/1967
favorably
(69-11)
07/18/1967
(11-5)
07/19/1967
07/24/1967

---

CRS-38
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
Abe Fortas
L. Johnson
06/26/1968
07/11/1968
09/17/1968
Reported
Cloture motion rejected,
15
83
100
of Tennessee (C. J.)
07/12/1968
favorably
10/01/1968
07/16/1968
(11-6)
(45-43) h
07/17/1968
07/18/1968
07/19/1968
07/20/1968
10/04/1968
Withdrawn
07/22/1968
07/23/1968
09/13/1968
09/16/1968
Homer Thornberry
L. Johnson
06/26/1968
07/11/1968
Referred to Judiciary
10/04/1968
Withdrawn
15
—
100
of Texas
07/12/1968
Committee, 06/26/1968.
07/16/1968
No committee vote taken.
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
Nixon
05/23/1969
06/03/1969
06/03/1969
Reported
06/09/1969
Confirmed
11
11
17
of Virginia
favorably
(74-3)
(C. J.)
Clement F.
Nixon
08/21/1969
09/16/1969
10/09/1969
Reported
11/21/1969
Rejected
26
49
92
Haynsworth Jr. of
09/17/1969
favorably
(45-55)
South Carolina
09/18/1969
(10-7)
09/19/1969
09/23/1969
09/24/1969
09/25/1969
09/26/1969

---

CRS-39
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
George Harrold
Nixon
01/19/1970
01/27/1970
02/16/1970
Reported
04/08/1970
Rejected
8
28
79
Carswell of Florida
01/28/1970
favorably
(45-51)
01/29/1970
(13-4)
02/02/1970
02/03/1970
Harry A. Blackmun
Nixon
04/15/1970
04/29/1970
05/06/1970
Reported
05/12/1970
Confirmed
14
21
27
of Minnesota
favorably
(94-0)
(17-0)
Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Nixon
10/22/1971
11/03/1971
11/23/1971
Reported
12/06/1971
Confirmed
12
32
45
of Virginia
11/04/1971
favorably
(89-1)
11/08/1971
(16-0)
11/09/1971
11/10/1971
William H. Rehnquist
Nixon
10/22/1971
11/03/1971
11/23/1971
Reported
Cloture motion rejected,
12
32
49
of Arizona
11/04/1971
favorably
12/10/1971
11/08/1971
(12-4)
(52-42) i
11/09/1971
11/10/1971
Motion to postpone until
01/18/1972 rejected,
12/10/1971
(22-70)
12/10/1971
Confirmed
(68-26)
John Paul Stevens
Ford
12/01/1975
12/08/1975
12/11/1975
Reported
12/17/1975
Confirmed
7
10
16
of Illinois
12/09/1975
favorably
(98-0)
(Nom. date
12/10/1975
(13-0)
11/28/1975)
Sandra Day O’Connor
Reagan
08/19/1981
09/09/1981
09/15/1981
Reported
09/21/1981
Confirmed
21
27
33
of Arizona
09/10/1981
favorably
(99-0)
09/11/1981
(17-1)

---

CRS-40
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
William H. Rehnquist
Reagan
06/20/1986
07/29/1986
08/14/1986
Reported
Cloture invoked,
39
55
89
of Arizona (C. J.)
07/30/1986
favorably
09/17/1986
07/31/1986
(13-5)
(68-31) j
08/01/1986
09/17/1986
Confirmed
(65-33)
Antonin Scalia
Reagan
06/24/1986
08/05/1986
08/14/1986
Reported
09/17/1986
Confirmed
42
51
85
of Virginia
08/06/1986
favorably
(98-0)
(18-0)
Robert H. Bork
Reagan
07/07/1987
09/15/1987
Motion to report favorably
10/23/1987
Rejected
70
91
108
of District of
09/16/1987
rejected, 10/06/1987
(42-58)
Columbia
09/17/1987
(5-9)
09/18/1987
09/19/1987
09/21/1987
09/22/1987
10/06/1987
Reported
09/23/1987
unfavorably
09/25/1987
(9-5)
09/28/1987
09/29/1987
09/30/1987
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
Reagan
11/30/1987
12/14/1987
01/27/1988
Reported
02/03/1988
Confirmed
14
58
65
of California
12/15/1987
favorably
(97-0)
12/16/1987
(14-0)
David H. Souter
G. H. W.
07/25/1990
09/13/1990
09/27/1990
Reported
10/02/1990
Confirmed
50
64
69
of New Hampshire
Bush
09/14/1990
favorably
(90-9)
09/17/1990
(13-1)
09/18/1990
09/19/1990

---

CRS-41
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
Clarence Thomas
G. H. W.
07/08/1991
09/10/1991
Motion to report favorably
UC agreement reached,
64
81
99
of Virginia
Bush
09/11/1991
failed, 09/27/1991
10/08/1991, to reschedule
09/12/1991
(7-7) k
vote on confirmation
09/13/1991
from 10/08/1991 to
09/16/1991
10/15/991, to allow for
09/17/1991
additional hearings
09/19/1991
09/20/1991
09/27/1991
Reported
10/15/1991
Confirmed
10/11/1991
without
(52-48)
10/12/1991
recommen-
10/13/1991
dation
(13-1)
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Clinton
06/22/1993
07/20/1993
07/29/1993
Reported
08/03/1993
Confirmed
28
37
42
of New York
07/21/1993
favorably
(96-3)
07/22/1993
(18-0)
07/23/1993
Stephen G. Breyer
Clinton
05/17/1994
07/12/1994
07/19/1994
Reported
07/29/1994
Confirmed
56
63
73
of Massachusetts
07/13/1994
favorably
(87-9)
07/14/1994
(18-0)
07/15/1994
John G. Roberts Jr.
G. W. Bush
07/29/2005
Referred to Judiciary Committee,
09/06/2005
Withdrawn
—
—
39
of Maryland
07/29/2005. No hearing held and no
committee vote taken.
John G. Roberts Jr.
G. W. Bush
09/06/2005
09/12/2005
09/22/2005
Reported
09/29/2005
Confirmed
6
16
23
of Maryland (C. J.)
09/13/2005
favorably
(78-22)
09/14/2005
(13-5)
09/15/2005
Harriet E. Miers
G. W. Bush
10/07/2005
Referred to Judiciary Committee,
10/28/2005
Withdrawn
—
—
21
of Texas
10/07/2005. No hearing held and no
committee vote taken.

---

CRS-42
Days from date received in Senate to:
Final action by Senate
Senate committee actions
or President
Date
First
Nominee
President
received in
Committee
Final action
public
Senate a
final vote
by Senate or
Public
hearing
Final vote
Final
date
President
hearing
Final vote
Date
date
date b
action c
date(s)
Samuel A. Alito Jr.
G. W. Bush
11/10/2005
01/09/2006
01/24/2006
Reported
Cloture invoked,
60
75
82
01/10/2006
favorably
01/30/2006
01/11/2006
(10-8)
(72-25)
01/12/2006
01/13/2006
01/31/2006
Confirmed
(58 - 42)
Median number of days from date received in Senate, 1789-2006
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, 1967-2006
21
50
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 107th 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-August 2006, by Henry B. Hogue; and “Nominations” database in the Legislative Information System, available at
[http://www.congress.gov/nomis/].
Acknowledgment: Extensive preliminary research for this table was performed by Mitchel A. Sollenberger, former CRS Analyst in American National Government.
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 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.
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

---

CRS-43
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-44
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
By roll-call vote (votes to
Years
Totals
(all to confirm)
reject in parentheses)
1789-1829
24
4 (2)
28
1830-1889
15
21 (3)
36
1890-1965
34
16 (3)
50
1966-2006
0
19 (3)
19
Totals
73
60 (11)
133 (11)
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 107th Congress; also,
“Nominations” database in the Legislative Information System, available at
[http://www.congress.gov/nomis/].

---