Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010:
Actions by the Senate, the Judiciary
Committee, and the President

Denis Steven Rutkus
Specialist on the Federal Judiciary
Maureen Bearden
Information Research Specialist
August 23, 2010
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RL33225
CRS Report for Congress
P
repared for Members and Committees of Congress

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Summary
The process of appointing Supreme Court Justices has undergone changes over two centuries, but
its most basic feature, the sharing of power between the President and Senate, has remained
unchanged. To receive a lifetime appointment to the Court, a candidate must first be nominated
by the President and then confirmed by the Senate. A key role also has come to be played midway
in the process by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Table 1 of this report lists and describes actions taken by the Senate, the Senate Judiciary
Committee, and the President on all Supreme Court nominations, from 1789 to the present. The
table provides the name of each person nominated to the Court and the name of the President
making the nomination. It also tracks the dates of formal actions taken, and time elapsing
between these actions, by the Senate or Senate Judiciary Committee on each nomination, starting
with the date that the Senate received the nomination from the President.
Of the 43 Presidents in the history of the United States, 40 made nominations to the Supreme
Court. They made a total of 160 nominations, of which 124 (more than three-quarters) received
Senate confirmation. Also, on 12 occasions in the nation’s history, Presidents have made
temporary recess appointments to the Court, without submitting nominations to the Senate. Of the
36 unsuccessful Supreme Court nominations, 11 were rejected in Senate roll-call votes, 11 were
withdrawn by the President, and 14 lapsed at the end of a session of Congress. Six individuals
whose initial nominations were not confirmed were later re-nominated and confirmed to positions
on the Court.
A total of 117 of the 160 nominations were referred to a Senate committee, with 116 of them to
the Judiciary Committee (including almost all nominations since 1868). Prior to 1916, the
Judiciary Committee considered these nominations behind closed doors. Since 1946, however,
almost all nominees have received public confirmation hearings. Most recent hearings have lasted
four or more days.
In recent decades, from the late 1960s to the present, the Judiciary Committee has tended to take
more time before starting hearings and casting final votes on Supreme Court nominations than it
did previously. The median time taken for the full Senate to take final action on Supreme Court
nominations also has increased in recent decades, dwarfing the median time taken on earlier
nominations.
For another perspective on Supreme Court nominations, which reviews, among other things,
when Presidents announced their intentions to nominate someone (as distinct from when they
formally transmitted Supreme Court nominations to the Senate), see CRS Report RL33118, Speed
of Presidential and Senate Actions on Supreme Court Nominations, 1900-2010
, by R. Sam
Garrett and Denis Steven Rutkus. For an examination of floor procedures used by the full Senate
in considering Supreme Court nominations, see CRS Report RL33247, Supreme Court
Nominations: Senate Floor Procedure and Practice, 1789-2010
, by Richard S. Beth and Betsy
Palmer.
This report will be updated upon the occasion of the next Supreme Court nomination.

Congressional Research Service

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1
Description of Report’s Contents................................................................................................. 1
Findings from the Nominations Table.......................................................................................... 3
Number of Nominations and Nominees ................................................................................. 3
Presidents Who Made the Nominations ................................................................................. 3
Date That Nominations Were Received in Senate .................................................................. 5
Referral of Nominations to Senate Judiciary Committee........................................................ 5
Nominations That Received Public Confirmation Hearings ................................................... 6
Advent of Public Hearings .............................................................................................. 6
Length of Hearings in Days............................................................................................. 8
Nominations Reported Out of Committee to Full Senate........................................................ 8
Reporting........................................................................................................................ 8
Reporting with a Favorable Recommendation ................................................................. 9
Reporting Without Recommendation............................................................................... 9
Reporting with an Unfavorable Recommendation............................................................ 9
Nominations Not Reported Out of Committee ..................................................................... 10
Final Action by the Senate or the President.......................................................................... 10
Days from Date of Senate Receipt of Nomination to First Hearing ...................................... 12
Days from Senate Receipt to Final Committee Vote............................................................. 13
Days from Senate Receipt to Final Senate or Presidential Action ......................................... 14
Recess Appointments to the Supreme Court ........................................................................ 16
Concluding Observations .......................................................................................................... 16

Tables
Table 1. Nominations to the Supreme Court of the United States, 1789-August 5, 2010 ............. 18
Table 2. Senate Votes on Whether to Confirm Supreme Court Nominations: Number
Made by Voice Vote/Unanimous Consent (UC) or by Roll-Call Vote ...................................... 42

Contacts
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 42

Congressional Research Service

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Introduction
The procedure for appointing a Justice to the Supreme Court of the United States is provided for
by the Constitution in only a few words. The “Appointments Clause” (Article II, Section 2, clause
2) states that the President “shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the
Senate, shall appoint ... Judges of the supreme Court.” The process of appointing Justices has
undergone changes over two centuries, but its most basic feature—the sharing of power between
the President and Senate—has remained unchanged. To receive a lifetime appointment to the
Court, a candidate must first be nominated by the President and then confirmed by the Senate. An
important role also has come to be played midway in the process (after the President selects, but
before the Senate considers) by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
On rare occasions, Presidents also have made Supreme Court appointments without the Senate’s
consent, when the Senate was in recess. Such “recess appointments,” however, were temporary,
with their terms expiring at the end of the Senate’s next session. The last recess appointments to
the Court were made in the 1950s.
The need for a Supreme Court nomination arises when a vacancy occurs or is scheduled to occur on
the Court. The most recent Court vacancy was created when Associate Justice John Paul Stevens
retired on June 28, 2010. Justice Stevens had given President Barack Obama advance notice, on April
9, of his intention to step down. In response, President Obama on May 10 nominated Elena Kagan,
Solicitor General of the United States, to replace Justice Stevens. It was the 160th time a President of
the United States has nominated someone to be a Supreme Court Justice. On July 20, following four
days of confirmation hearings, the Senate Judiciary Committee, by a vote of 13-6, favorably reported
the Kagan nomination to the Senate. Following three days of floor debate, the Senate, on August 5,
confirmed Ms.Kagan to the Court by a vote of 63-37.
In the past, most, but not all, Supreme Court nominations have received Senate confirmation. From
the first appointments in 1789, the Senate has confirmed 124 out of 160 Court nominations. Of the 36
unsuccessful nominations, 11 were rejected in Senate roll-call votes, while most of the rest, in the
face of committee or Senate opposition to the nominee or the President, were withdrawn by the
President, or were postponed, tabled, or never voted on by the Senate. The 36 unconfirmed
nominations, however, included those of six individuals who were later re-nominated and confirmed.
Description of Report’s Contents
This report lists and describes actions taken by the Senate, the Senate Judiciary Committee, and
the President on all Supreme Court nominations, from 1789 to the present. The listing appears in
a Supreme Court nominations table, Table 1, later in this report. Preceding the table is summary
text, which highlights certain nominations statistics derived from the table. The text also provides
historical background information on the Supreme Court appointment process and uses
nominations statistics from the table to shed light on ways in which the appointment process has
evolved over time. Many of the statistical findings discussed, for example, provide historical
perspective on the emergence, and then increased involvement, of the Senate Judiciary
Committee in the appointment process.
Congressional Research Service
1

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Specifically, the table lists, for each Supreme Court nomination, the following:
• name of the person nominated (the nominee);
• 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 learned of
prospective Court vacancies or announced their intention to nominate someone to be a Justice. A
discussion focusing more closely on such informal steps in the Supreme Court appointment
process can be found in CRS Report RL33118, Speed of Presidential and Senate Actions on
Supreme Court Nominations, 1900-2010
, by R. Sam Garrett and Denis Steven Rutkus.
Actions by the full Senate tracked systematically in Table 1 are those on which the Senate took
final action (ordinarily in the form of confirmation, and less often in the form of rejecting,
tabling, or postponing action on a nomination). For certain Supreme Court nominations, Table 1
also provides dates of procedural actions taken on the Senate floor, prior to or after final Senate
action, in order to put the final action in fuller context. The table, however, does not account for
all Senate procedural actions on, or for all dates of Senate floor consideration of, Supreme Court
nominations. For more comprehensive information on procedural actions taken by the full Senate
on past Supreme Court nominations, see CRS Report RL33247, Supreme Court Nominations:
Senate Floor Procedure and Practice, 1789-2010
, by Richard S. Beth and Betsy Palmer.

1 Usually the date on which the President formally makes a nomination, by signing a nomination message, is the same
as the date on which the nomination is received in the Senate. In Table 1, these two dates are the same for any given
nomination when only one date is shown in the “Date received in Senate” column. However, for the occasional
nomination made by a President on a date prior to the nomination’s receipt by the Senate, the earlier presidential
nomination date is distinguished, in parentheses, from the date when the nomination was received by the Senate.
Congressional Research Service
2

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

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 111 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 160 Supreme Court nominations since 1789. Each of the 160 nominations
entailed a President signing a nomination message, which was then transmitted to, and received
by, the Senate. A lesser number of separate individuals, 141, were actually nominated to the
Court, with some of them nominated more than once.4
Of the 160 total nominations to the Court, 22 were to the position of Chief Justice and the other
138 to a position as Associate Justice. The 22 Chief Justice nominations involved 20 persons
nominated once, and one person nominated twice.5 The 138 Associate Justice nominations
involved 121 persons nominated once, 7 persons nominated twice, and 1 person nominated three
times.
Presidents Who Made the Nominations
Of the 43 Presidents in the history of the United States, 40 have made nominations to the
Supreme Court.6 These 40 are listed in the second column of Table 1. All but one of the 40

2 Table 1 identifies eight Supreme Court nominees who subsequent to Senate confirmation did not assume the office to
which they had been appointed: Seven declined the office, and one died before assuming it. It should be noted,
however, that one of the seven who declined the office, William Cushing—confirmed to be Chief Justice in 1796—was
at the time serving on the Court as an Associate Justice, and continued to serve in that capacity until 1810. Another of
the seven, John Jay—confirmed to be Chief Justice in 1800—had served earlier on the Court, as the Court’s first Chief
Justice, from 1789 to 1795.
3 The list, available at http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/members_text.aspx, presents first the names of 17 persons
who have served as Chief Justice, followed by the 100 persons who have served as Associate Justices. The listing of
117 names in all (17 + 100) includes those of five Chief Justices who earlier had served as Associate Justices, hence
reducing to 112 the total number of persons who have served as members of the Court.
4 Specifically, eight persons were nominated twice to the same Court position (seven to be Associate Justice, one to be
Chief Justice); one person was nominated three times to be Associate Justice; and nine persons were nominated first to
be Associate Justice and later to be Chief Justice. The sum of 19 (the number of Court nominations that were not a
person’s first nomination to the Court) and 140 (the number of persons nominated to the Court at least once) is 159
(total Supreme Court nominations).
5 The nation’s first Chief Justice, John Jay, was nominated to that position twice. Jay was first nominated, and
confirmed, in September 1789. He resigned as Chief Justice in 1795 to serve as governor of New York. In December
1800, Jay was nominated and confirmed a second time as Chief Justice, but declined the appointment. For analysis of
the process by which a Chief Justice is appointed, accompanied by a list of all Chief Justice nominations from 1789 to
the present (including the nomination, confirmation, judicial oath, and end-of-service dates of Chief Justice nominees,
as well as their ages at time of appointment and upon termination of service), see CRS Report RL32821, The Chief
Justice of the United States: Responsibilities of the Office and Process for Appointment
, by Denis Steven Rutkus and
Lorraine H. Tong.
6 The three Presidents not to have made any Supreme Court nominations were William Henry Harrison, Zachary
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
3

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Presidents succeeded in having at least one Supreme Court nomination receive Senate
confirmation. The one exception was President Andrew Johnson, whose only Court nomination,
of Henry Stanbery in 1866, was thwarted when the Senate enacted legislation eliminating the
Associate Justice position to which Stanbery had been nominated.7
As Table 1 shows, the number of nominations made to the Supreme Court has varied greatly
from President to President. For any given President, the number of nominations will be affected
by various factors, including the length of time the President was in office, the number of
vacancies occurring on the Court during that presidency, and whether more than one nomination
was required to fill a Court vacancy due to a previous nomination’s failure to be confirmed.
Examination of the nominations to the Court for each President reveals that one less than half of
the Presidents (21 of 43) made four or more nominations, and one more than half (22 of 43) made
three or fewer. One less than half of the Presidents (21 of 43) saw three or more of their Court
nominations confirmed, and one more than half (22 of 43) saw two or fewer confirmed.
The President with the most Supreme Court nominations and confirmations was George
Washington with 14 nominations, 12 of which were confirmed.8 The two Presidents with the
second-largest number of Court nominations were John Tyler and Franklin D. Roosevelt, with
nine each. Only one of Tyler’s nine nominations, however, received Senate confirmation, while
all nine of FDR’s were confirmed. The President with the largest number of Supreme Court
confirmations in one term (apart from the first eight of George Washington’s nominations—all in
his first term, and all confirmed) was William Howard Taft, who, during his four years in office,
made six Court nominations, all of which were confirmed. Six Presidents made only one Supreme
Court nomination each, with the nominations of five of these Presidents receiving confirmation.9
And, as noted above, three of the nation’s 43 Presidents were unable to make a single nomination
to the Court, because no vacancies occurred on the Court during their presidencies.

(...continued)
Taylor, and Jimmy Carter, with no Court vacancies having occurred while they were in office. See “Table 3. Supreme
Court Nominations, by President, 1789 to 2008,” in CRS Report RL31171, Supreme Court Nominations Not
Confirmed, 1789-August 2010
, by Henry B. Hogue, which lists the number of vacancies on the Court that existed
during each presidency, from George Washington to George W. Bush. While it is unremarkable that no vacancies
occurred during the short-lived presidencies of Harrison (Mar. 4 to Apr. 4, 1841) and Taylor (Mar. 5, 1849 to July 9,
1850), Jimmy Carter’s presidency (Jan. 20, 1977 to Jan. 20, 1981) is remarkable as the only one lasting a full term
during which no Supreme Court vacancies occurred.
7 See Myron Jacobstein and Roy M. Mersky, The Rejected (Milpitas, CA: Toucan Valley Publications, 1993), pp. 69-
74. (Hereafter cited as Jacobstein and Mersky, The Rejected.)
8 President Washington, early in his first term of office, was presented with the opportunity to make six Supreme Court
nominations, as the Judiciary Act of 1789 (1 Stat. 73 (1789)) set the number of Justice positions on the newly
established Court at six. On September 24, 1789, the President nominated six persons to the Court, and two days later
the Senate voted for their confirmation. However, one of the confirmed nominees, Robert Harrison of Maryland,
declined the appointment, resulting in President Washington, in 1790, making a seventh nomination, of James Iredell of
North Carolina, whose confirmation by the Senate put the six-member Court at full strength. Subsequently during the
Washington presidency, four vacancies occurred on the Court, which resulted in the President making seven more
nominations. Four of these seven nominations were confirmed by the Senate, with the nominees accepting their
appointments to the Court. The other three nominations involved the first of two nominations of William Paterson of
New Jersey in 1793 (who, after his first nomination was withdrawn, was re-nominated by President Washington and
confirmed), John Rutledge of South Carolina (whose nomination in 1795 to be Chief Justice was rejected by the
Senate), and William Cushing of Massachusetts (whose nomination in 1796 to be Chief Justice was confirmed by the
Senate, but who declined the appointment).
9 The 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 Supreme Court nomination did not receive confirmation was Andrew Johnson.
Congressional Research Service
4

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Date That Nominations Were Received in Senate
The Supreme Court appointment process officially begins when the President signs a message to
the Senate nominating someone for appointment to the Court. Usually on the date of the signing,
the message is delivered to the Senate and recorded in the Senate Executive Journal as having
been received that day.10 However, in 30 instances (all but two prior to the 20th century), Supreme
Court messages were recorded in the Senate Executive Journal as received in the Senate on a day
after they were signed by the President—usually the next day. In Table 1, in the “Date received in
Senate” column, a second date is provided in parentheses (as the “Nom. date”), whenever a
President made a nomination on a day prior to its receipt by the Senate.
Referral of Nominations to Senate Judiciary Committee
Although referral of Supreme Court nominations to the Senate Judiciary Committee is now
standard practice, such referrals were not always the case. Table 1 shows that 117 of 160
Supreme Court nominations have been referred to a Senate committee, 116 of them to the
Judiciary Committee.
The first standing legislative committees of the Senate, including the Judiciary Committee, were
created in 1816. Only once previously was a Supreme Court nomination referred to committee,
when, in 1811, the Senate referred the nomination of Alexander Wolcott to a select committee of
three Members. For roughly half a century after the Judiciary Committee’s creation, nominations,
rather than being automatically referred to the committee, were referred by motion only. From
1816 to 1868, more than two-thirds of the nominations (26 out of 38 nominations), were referred
to the committee. During this period, the confirmation success rate was roughly the same for
nominations referred, 15 of 26, as it was for those not referred, seven out of 12.
In 1868, Senate rules were changed to provide that all nominations be referred to appropriate
standing committees, unless otherwise ordered by the Senate.11 Subsequently, from 1868 to the
present day, 90 of 96 Supreme Court nominations have been referred to the Judiciary Committee.
The seven nominations not referred to committee were of persons who, at the time of their
nomination, were a former President, a Senator, a former Senator, an Attorney General and
former U.S. Representative, a former Secretary of War, or a sitting Associate Justice,12 and all

10 A President may announce the selection of a nominee well before transmitting a nomination message to the Senate.
For instance, President George W. Bush announced his selection of Samuel A. Alito Jr. to be a Supreme Court nominee
on Oct. 31, 2005, but formally signed and transmitted the nomination of Alito to the Senate on Nov. 10, 2005. For a
complete list, from 1900 to 2009, of the dates on which Presidents announced their Supreme Court nominees (as
distinguished from when they signed and transmitted nomination documents to the Senate), see CRS Report RL33118,
Speed of Presidential and Senate Actions on Supreme Court Nominations, 1900-2010, by R. Sam Garrett and Denis
Steven Rutkus.
11 See U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on the Judiciary, History of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States
Senate, 1816-1981.
Sen. Doc. No. 97-18, 97th Cong., 1st sess. (Washington: GPO, 1982), p. iv; also, U.S. Senate,
History of the Committee on Rules and Administration—United States Senate, prepared by Floyd M. Riddick,
Parliamentarian Emeritus of the Senate, 96th Cong., 1st sess., S. Doc. No. 96-27 (Washington: GPO, 1980). Riddick
provides, on pp. 21-28, the full text of the general revision of the Senate rules, adopted in 1868, including, on p. 26, the
following rule: “When nominations shall be made by the President of the United States to the Senate, they shall, unless
otherwise ordered by the Senate, be referred to appropriate committees.... ”
12 The nominations from 1868 to the present not referred to the Judiciary Committee were those of: Edwin M. Stanton
in 1869 (at time of nomination, former Secretary of War); Edward D. White in 1894 (Senator); Edward D. White again,
in 1910, this time to be Chief Justice (Associate Justice at time of nomination, and former Senator); William Howard
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
5

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

were easily confirmed. The last Supreme Court nomination not referred to the Judiciary
Committee was that of Senator James F. Byrnes in 1941. The Senate by unanimous consent
considered and confirmed the Byrnes nomination, without referral to committee, on the day it
received the nomination from the President.
Nominations That Received Public Confirmation Hearings
Table 1, in the “Public hearing date(s)” column, lists dates on which the full Judiciary
Committee, or a Judiciary subcommittee, held public confirmation hearings on Supreme Court
nominations. Included in this listing are public sessions of the committee at which either Supreme
Court nominees testified on their own behalf and/or outside witnesses testified for or against the
nominees.
Advent of Public Hearings
Before 1916, the Judiciary Committee considered Supreme Court nominations behind closed
doors. Thus, until that year, there are no entries in the “Public hearing date(s)” column. Rather,
committee sessions on Court nominations typically were limited to committee members
discussing and voting on a nominee in executive session, without hearing testimony from outside
witnesses.13 In 1916, for the first time, the committee held open confirmation hearings on a
Supreme Court nomination—that of Louis D. Brandeis to be an Associate Justice—at which
outside witnesses (but not the nominee) testified. More days of public hearings (19) were held on
the Brandeis nomination than on any Supreme Court nomination since. The Brandeis hearings,
however, did not set immediately into place a new policy of open confirmation hearings for
Supreme Court nominations, since each of the next six nominations (during the years 1916 to
1923) was either considered directly by the Senate, without referral to the Judiciary Committee,
or was acted on by the committee without the holding of confirmation hearings.
From 1925 to 1946, public confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominations became the
more common, if not invariable, practice of the Judiciary Committee. In 1925, Harlan F. Stone
became the first Supreme Court nominee to appear in person and testify at his confirmation
hearings.14 During the next two decades, the Stone nomination was one of 11 Court nominations

(...continued)
Taft in 1921 (former President); George Sutherland in 1922 (former Senator); and James F. Byrnes in 1941 (Senator).
13 At least once in the 19th century, however, in 1873, the Judiciary Committee did hear witnesses testify concerning a
Supreme Court nomination—that of George H. Williams to be Chief Justice—but these two days of hearings, on Dec.
16 and 17, 1873, were held in closed session. The closed-door sessions were held to examine documents and hear
testimony from witnesses relevant to a controversy that arose over the Williams nomination only after the committee
had reported the nomination to the Senate. The controversy prompted the Senate to recommit the nomination to the
Judiciary Committee and to authorize the committee “to send for persons and papers.” U.S. Congress, Senate, Journal
of the Executive Proceedings of the Senate of the United States of America
, vol. 19 (Washington: GPO, 1901), p. 189.
After holding the two closed-door sessions on Dec. 16 and 17, the committee did not re-report the nomination to the
Senate. Amid press reports of significant opposition to the nomination both in the Judiciary Committee and the Senate
as a whole, the nomination, at Williams’s request, was withdrawn by President Ulysses S. Grant on Jan. 8, 1874. See
Jacobstein and Mersky, The Rejected, pp. 82-87.
14 For a discussion of the advent of Supreme Court nominee appearances before the Senate Judiciary Committee,
starting with Harlan F. Stone in 1925 (and carrying through the nominations of Abe Fortas and Homer Thornberry in
1968), see, James A. Thorpe, “The Appearance of Supreme Court Nominees Before the Senate Judiciary Committee,”
Journal of Public Law, vol. 18, 1969, pp. 371-402.
Congressional Research Service
6

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

that received public confirmation hearings before either the full Judiciary Committee or a
Judiciary subcommittee,15 while five other nominations did not receive public hearings. One of
the five nominees not receiving a public confirmation hearing was Senator James F. Byrnes,
whose nomination in 1941, as noted earlier, was considered directly by the Senate without
referral to the Judiciary Committee.16
Not indicated in the “Public hearing date(s)”column is the precise length (in minutes or hours) of
each public hearing session. The hearing sessions for a few Supreme Court nominations during
the 1925 to 1946 period lasted for hours, extending over several days;17 others, however, were
brief and perfunctory in nature, held only long enough to accommodate the small number of
witnesses who wished to testify against a nominee.18
From Tom C. Clark’s appointment in 1949 through the nomination of Elena Kagan in 2010, all
but three of 36 Supreme Court nominations have received public confirmation hearings before the
Senate Judiciary Committee or a Judiciary subcommittee.19 The first of the three exceptions
involved the 1954 nomination of John M. Harlan II, made less than a month before the final
adjournment of a Congress. At the beginning of the next Congress, however, Harlan was re-
nominated, and hearings were held on that nomination.20 The second and third exceptions

15 A scholar examining the procedures followed by the committee in its consideration of 15 Supreme Court
nominations referred to it between 1923 and 1946 found that, with two exceptions—the nominations of Charles Evans
Hughes in 1930 and Harold H. Burton to be Associate Justices in 1945—all of the nominations were first “processed by
a subcommittee prior to consideration by the full committee membership.” David Gregg Farrelly, “Operational Aspects
of the Senate Judiciary Committee,” (Ph.D. diss., Princeton University: 1949), pp. 184-185. (Hereafter cited as Farrelly,
“Operational Aspects.”)
16 The four other nominations not receiving public confirmation hearings even though referred to the Judiciary
Committee were of former New York governor and former Supreme Court Associate Justice Charles Evans Hughes in
1930, former federal prosecutor Owen J. Roberts in 1930, Senator Hugo L. Black in 1937, and Senator Harold H.
Burton in 1945.
Farrelly, in “Operational Aspects,” also lists the Supreme Court nomination of former Michigan governor Frank
Murphy in 1940 as one not receiving a confirmation hearing. Farrelly notes, at pp. 191-192, that the Senate Judiciary
subcommittee which first processed the nomination “voted against public hearings.” That vote notwithstanding, the
nominee voluntarily appeared before the subcommittee on Jan. 11, 1940, in a public session at which four Senators “all
questioned Mr. Murphy about his views of the Constitution and the duties of a Supreme Court Justice.” “Senate Body
Backs Murphy for Court,” New York Times, Jan. 12, 1940, p. 1. Based on this and other similar newspaper accounts of
the subcommittee session, Jan. 11, 1940 is listed below, in Table 1, as a public hearing date for the Murphy
nomination.
17 See, in Table 1, the multiple hearing days for the nominations of Felix Frankfurter in 1939 and Robert H. Jackson in
1941.
18 For example, a Judiciary subcommittee hearing on the 1932 nomination of Benjamin N. Cardozo lasted only five
minutes, during which one witness testified in opposition. Likewise, when the Judiciary Committee extended open
invitations for witnesses to testify in opposition at the confirmation hearings for Stanley F. Reed in 1938, William O.
Douglas in 1939, Harlan F. Stone (for Chief Justice) in 1941, Wiley B. Rutledge in 1943, and Fred M.Vinson (for Chief
Justice) in 1946, no witnesses appeared to protest against Douglas or Stone, and “only one or two persons filed protests
in each case against Reed, Vinson and Rutledge.” Farrelly, “Operational Aspects,” pp. 194-195.
19 The last Supreme Court nomination on which a Senate Judiciary subcommittee held hearings was the 1954
nomination of Earl Warren to be Chief Justice. The subcommittee held public hearings on the nomination on Feb. 2 and
19, 1954, after which the full committee, on Feb. 24, 1954, voted to report the nomination favorably. All subsequent
hearings on Supreme Court nominations were held by the full Judiciary Committee.
20 The Judiciary Committee held two days of confirmation hearings on the second Harlan nomination, on Feb. 24 and
25, 1955. The Feb. 24 session, held in closed session, heard the testimony of nine witnesses (seven in favor of
confirmation, and two opposed). Luther A. Huston, “Harlan Hearing Held by Senators,” New York Times, Feb. 25,
1955, p. 8. The committee also began the Feb. 25 hearing in closed session, to hear the testimony of additional
witnesses. However, for Judge Harlan, who was the last scheduled witness, the committee “voted to open the hearing to
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
7

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

involved the Associate Justice nominations of John G. Roberts Jr. and Harriet E. Miers in 2005,
both of which were withdrawn by the President before the scheduled start of confirmation
hearings.
Length of Hearings in Days
The number of days given to public confirmation hearings has varied greatly from one Supreme
Court nomination to another, particularly in recent decades. Following the 19 days of hearings
held on the Brandeis nomination in 1916, Court nominations through the Associate Justice
nomination of Abe Fortas in 1965 typically received either one or two days of hearings. However,
from 1967 through August 2010, 17 of the 23 Court nominations which advanced through the
hearings stage received four or more days of open confirmation hearings. Four of the 17
nominations received 11 or more days of hearings,21 while another received eight days of
hearings.22 By contrast, only three of the 23 nominations received two or fewer days of
hearings.23
Nominations Reported Out of Committee to Full Senate
Supreme Court nominations referred to the Judiciary Committee have almost always been
reported to the Senate. If a majority of its members oppose confirmation, the Judiciary Committee
technically may decide not to report a Supreme Court nomination. (This tactic would prevent the
full Senate from considering the nominee, unless the Senate were able to undertake successfully
the discharge of the committee.) Table 1, however, shows that instances of the committee not
reporting have been rare. Of the 116 Supreme Court nominations referred to the Judiciary
Committee, 108 were reported to the Senate.24 The committee has reported these nominations in
the following four ways.
Reporting
For most of the first five decades in which the Judiciary Committee considered Supreme Court
nominations (1828 to 1863), its usual practice was simply to report these nominations to the
Senate, without any official indication of the committee members’ opinions regarding them.
Twenty-three nominations were reported to the Senate in this way, and 15 of them were
confirmed.

(...continued)
newspaper reporters for his testimony.” Luther A. Huston, “Harlan Disavows ‘One World’ Aims in Senate Inquiry,”
New York Times, Feb. 26, 1955, p. 1.
21 These were the nominations of Robert H. Bork in 1987 (12 hearing days), Clarence Thomas in 1991 (11 days), and
Abe Fortas and Homer Thornberry in 1968 (11 days for their joint hearings).
22 In 1969, eight days of confirmation hearings were held on the nomination of Clement F. Haynsworth.
23 One day of hearings each was held on the nominations of Warren E. Burger (to be Chief Justice) in 1969 and Harry
A. Blackmun in 1970, while two days of hearings were held on the nomination of Antonin Scalia in 1986.
24 As noted earlier, only once prior to the establishment of the Judiciary Committee in 1816 was a Supreme Court
nomination referred to committee, and that nomination was reported to the Senate as well. See, in Table 1the
nomination in 1811 of Alexander Wolcott, which was considered by a select committee and then reported to the Senate,
where it was rejected by a 9-24 vote.
Congressional Research Service
8

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Reporting with a Favorable Recommendation
In 1870, the Judiciary Committee initiated the practice of reporting to the Senate an explicit
recommendation in favor of confirmation whenever a majority of members supported a Supreme
Court nominee. Over the course of almost a century and a half, the committee has favorably
reported 74 Supreme Court nominations, with 68 receiving Senate confirmation.25
Reporting Without Recommendation
On four occasions—three times in the late 19th century and once in the late 20th century—the
Judiciary Committee has voted to report a Supreme Court nomination while explicitly stating it
was not making a recommendation to the Senate. On each occasion, the committee reported a
nomination without urging the Senate either to confirm or to reject.26 The Senate confirmed three
of the nominations that were reported in this way, while rejecting the fourth.27
Reporting with an Unfavorable Recommendation
On seven occasions—five times in the 19th century and twice in the 20th century—the Judiciary
Committee voted to report a Supreme Court nomination with a recommendation to the Senate that
it reject the nomination. Only two of the seven nominations received Senate confirmation (and
each only by a close roll call vote);28 the Senate rejected four of the others29 and postponed taking
action on the fifth.30

25 The six favorably reported nominations which failed to receive Senate confirmation involved these nominees:
George H. Williams, for Chief Justice, in 1873 (nomination withdrawn); Caleb Cushing, in 1874 (nomination
withdrawn); Pierce Butler in 1922 (no action taken by Senate); Abe Fortas, for Chief Justice, in 1968 (nomination
withdrawn); Clement F. Haynsworth Jr. in 1969 (rejected by Senate); and G. Harrold Carswell in 1970 (rejected by
Senate). Butler, it should be noted, was re-nominated and confirmed.
26 A report that states it is not accompanied by a recommendation can be a way to alert the Senate that a substantial
number of committee members have some reservations about the nominee which, however, do not rise, at that point, to
the level of opposition; it might also be a way to bridge or downplay differences between committee members who
favor confirmation and other members who oppose it. The latter, for example, was said to be the purpose for the
Judiciary Committee in 1888 reporting the Chief Justice nomination of Melville W. Fuller without recommendation;
the action was described in a news account as a “compromise between the Democratic minority who desired a report to
the Senate in favor of confirmation, and the Republican majority, who desired to defeat the nomination .... ” “Mr.
Fuller’s Nomination,” Washington Post, July 3, 1888, p. 1.
27 The three nominees confirmed by the Senate after the Judiciary Committee explicitly reported their nominations
without recommendation were: Melville W. Fuller, for Chief Justice, in 1888; George Shiras Jr. in 1892; and Clarence
Thomas in 1991. A fourth nomination reported without recommendation, Wheeler H. Peckham, in 1894, was rejected
by the Senate.
28 See, in Table 1, the second nomination of Stanley Matthews in 1881 (confirmed 24-23) and the nomination of
Lucius Q. C. Lamar in 1888 (confirmed 32-28).
29 The nominations reported unfavorably and then rejected by the Senate involved these nominees: Ebenezer R. Hoar in
1869 (rejected 24-33); William B. Hornblower in 1894 (rejected 24-30); John J. Parker in 1930 (rejected 39-41); and
Robert H. Bork in 1987 (rejected 42-58).
30 The Senate in 1829 postponed taking action on the nomination of John Crittenden after receiving an adverse report
on the nomination from the Judiciary Committee.
Congressional Research Service
9

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Nominations Not Reported Out of Committee
Of the 116 Supreme Court nominations referred to the Judiciary Committee since its
establishment, eight were not reported by the committee to the Senate. Although five of the
nominees were never confirmed to the Court,31 the other three ultimately were, after being re-
nominated.32
Final Action by the Senate or the President
From the first Supreme Court appointments in 1789 to the present day, Presidents have made 160
nominations to the Court. Table 1 shows, in the “Final action by Senate or President” column,
that the Senate confirmed 124 of these nominations, or roughly three-fourths.33 Of the 36
nominations that were not confirmed, 11 were rejected by the Senate (all in roll-call votes),34 11
were withdrawn by the President,35 and 14 lapsed at the end of a session of Congress without a

31 The final outcome for these five nominees, however, was determined not by the failure of their nominations to be
reported out of committee, but by action, or lack of action, taken outside the committee—by the Senate, Congress as a
whole, or the President. In 1853, the nomination of William C. Micou was referred to the Judiciary Committee and on
the same day ordered discharged by the Senate, where no action was taken. In 1866, the nomination of Henry Stanbery
was referred to the Judiciary Committee, but shortly afterwards, while the nomination was pending in the Senate, the
Associate Justice position to which Stanbery had been nominated was eliminated by statute. In 1893, the nomination of
William B. Hornblower was referred to the Judiciary Committee, but not reported; later that year, in a new session of
Congress, Hornblower was re-nominated, reported unfavorably by the Judiciary Committee (in early 1894), and
rejected by the Senate, 24-30. In 1968, the Judiciary Committee declined to report the nomination of Homer
Thornberry to succeed Associate Justice Abe Fortas until the final outcome of the nomination of Fortas to be Chief
Justice was determined. The Thornberry and Fortas nominations were both withdrawn by the President after a motion
to close debate on the Fortas nomination failed to pass in the Senate. (The failure of Fortas’s Chief Justice nomination
eliminated the prospective Associate Justice vacancy that Thornberry had been nominated to fill.) In 2005, the
nomination of Harriet E. Miers was withdrawn by the President before the Judiciary Committee held hearings on the
nomination.
32 In February 1881, just before the final adjournment of the 46th Congress, the Judiciary Committee voted to postpone
taking action on the Supreme Court nomination of Stanley Matthews; shortly afterwards, however, in a special session
of the 47th Congress, Matthews was re-nominated, and, although his second nomination was reported unfavorably by
the Judiciary Committee, it was confirmed by the Senate, 24-23. In Nov. 1954, late in the 83rd Congress, the
nomination of John M. Harlan II was referred to the Judiciary Committee, where no action was taken; in 1955, Harlan
was re-nominated, considered and reported favorably by the Judiciary Committee, and confirmed by the Senate. In
Sept. 2005, before the scheduled start of confirmation hearings, the nomination of John G. Roberts Jr. to be Associate
Justice was withdrawn and, on the same day of the withdrawal, Roberts was re-nominated for Chief Justice; the second
Roberts nomination was reported favorably by the Judiciary Committee and confirmed by the Senate.
33 The exact confirmation percentage is 77.5%, reached by dividing 124 confirmations by 160 nominations.
34 The earliest Senate rejection of a Supreme Court nomination occurred in 1795, when President George Washington’s
nomination of John Rutledge to be Chief Justice failed on a 10-14 vote. The latest instance was the Senate’s rejection
of Robert H. Bork in 1987, by a 42-58 vote. Between Rutledge and Bork, the following nominations were also rejected:
Alexander Wolcott in 1811, John C. Spencer in 1844, George W. Woodward in 1846, Ebenezer R. Hoar in 1870,
William B. Hornblower in 1894, Wheeler H. Peckham in 1894, John J. Parker in 1930, Clement F. Haynsworth Jr. in
1969, and G. Harrold Carswell in 1970.
35 The following Supreme Court nominations were withdrawn, in the years indicated, with the Presidents who withdrew
them shown in parentheses: The first nomination of William Paterson, in 1793 (George Washington); the first
nomination of Reuben H. Walworth, in 1844 (John Tyler); the second nomination of John C. Spencer, in 1844 (John
Tyler); the third nomination of Reuben H. Walworth, in 1845 (John Tyler); the second nomination of Edward King, in
1845 (John Tyler); George H. Williams and Caleb Cushing, both in 1874 (Ulysses S. Grant); Abe Fortas and Homer
Thornberry, both in 1968 (Lyndon B. Johnson); John G. Roberts Jr. and Harrier E. Miers, both in 2005 (George W.
Bush). Less than a week after his first nomination was withdrawn, Paterson was re-nominated by President Washington
and confirmed by the Senate on the same day. On the same day that President Bush withdrew the Roberts nomination
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
10

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Senate vote cast on whether to confirm.36 The 36 nominations not confirmed by the Senate
represented 31 individuals, some of whom were nominated more than once.37 Six individuals
whose initial nominations were not confirmed were later re-nominated and confirmed for
positions on the Court.38
While the invariable practice of the Senate in recent decades has been to vote on Supreme Court
nominations by roll call, this historically was usually not the case. Table 2, at the end of this
report, shows that of the 135 Senate votes on whether to confirm (resulting in 124 confirmations
and 11 rejections), 62 decisions were reached by roll-call votes, and the other 73 by voice vote or
unanimous consent.
Initially, for some 40 years, the Senate rarely used roll-call votes to decide Supreme Court
nominations. Starting in the 1830s, however, and continuing through the 1880s, the Senate used
roll-call votes on Supreme Court nominations somewhat more often than unrecorded votes. The
trend reversed between 1890 and 1965, when fewer than one-third of Senate decisions on
confirming Court nominations were by roll-call vote. Since 1967, though, every Senate vote on
whether to confirm a Supreme Court nomination has been by roll call. Table 2 shows these trends
within the four historical periods just noted, by breaking down the number of Senate decisions on
confirmation within each period according to whether made by voice vote or unanimous consent
(UC) on the one hand, or by roll-call vote, on the other. As already mentioned, all 11 Senate
rejections of Supreme Court nominations were accomplished by roll-call votes.
Historically, recorded vote margins on Supreme Court nominations have varied considerably.
Some roll-call votes, either confirming or rejecting a nomination, have been close.39 Most votes,

(...continued)
to be Associate Justice, he re-nominated Roberts to be Chief Justice, and the latter nomination was confirmed.
36 The 14 nominations that lapsed at the end of a session of Congress, without a Senate confirmation or rejection vote
or a withdrawal by the President having occurred, can be broken into the following groups according to Senate actions,
or lack of Senate actions, taken: On three nominations (John Crittenden in 1829, the first nomination of Roger Taney in
1835, and George E. Badger in 1853), the Senate voted to postpone taking action; the Senate tabled two nominations
(the first nomination of Edward King in 1844 and Edward A. Bradford in 1852); on one nomination, the Senate
rejected a motion to proceed (Jeremiah S. Black in 1861, by a 25-26 vote); and on eight nominations, there was no
record of any vote taken (the second nomination of Reuben H. Walworth in 1844, John M. Read in 1845, William C.
Micou in 1853, Henry Stanbery in 1866, the first nomination of Stanley Matthews in 1881, the first nomination of
William B. Hornblower in 1893, the first nomination of Pierce Butler in 1922, and the first nomination of John M.
Harlan II in 1954). However, four of the 14 persons whose nominations lapsed in one session of Congress were re-
nominated in the next congressional session and confirmed (Taney in 1835, Matthews in 1881, Butler in 1922, and
Harlan in 1955).
37 For a list consisting solely of the 36 unconfirmed Supreme Court nominations (including dates that they were
received in the Senate and received confirmation hearings, committee votes, and Senate debate), see Table 4 in CRS
Report RL31171, Supreme Court Nominations Not Confirmed, 1789-August 2010, by Henry B. Hogue.
38 The six individuals who were not confirmed only to be later re-nominated and confirmed were, in the following years
of confirmation shown in parentheses, William Paterson (1793), Roger B. Taneuy (1836), Stanley Matthews (1881),
Pierce Butler (1922), John M. Harlan II (1955), and John G. Roberts Jr. (2005).
39 The closest roll calls ever cast on Supreme Court nominations were the 24-23 vote in 1881 confirming Stanley
Matthews, the 25-26 vote in 1861 rejecting a motion to proceed to consider the nomination of Jeremiah S. Black, and
the 26-25 Senate vote in 1853 to postpone consideration of the nomination of George E. Badger. Since the 1960s, the
closest roll calls on Supreme Court nominations were the 52-48 vote in 1991 confirming Clarence Thomas, the 45-51
vote in 1970 rejecting G. Harrold Carswell, the 45-55 vote in 1969 rejecting Clement Haynsworth Jr., the 58-42 vote in
2006 confirming Samuel A. Alito Jr., the 42-58 vote in 1987 rejecting Robert H. Bork, the 63-37 vote in 2010
confirming Elena Kagan, and the 65-33 vote confirming William H. Rehnquist to be Chief Justice in 1986. Also
noteworthy was the 45-43 vote in 1968 rejecting a motion to close debate on the nomination of Abe Fortas to be Chief
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
11

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

however, have been overwhelmingly in favor of confirmation.40 On other occasions, as occurred
with the three most recent nominations to the Court, a solid majority of the Senate has voted in
favor of confirmation, but with a minority of more than 30% of the Senate’s Members voting
against confirmation.41
Days from Date of Senate Receipt of Nomination to First Hearing
For Supreme Court nominations, the amount of time elapsing between Senate receipt and start of
confirmation hearings has varied greatly. Table 1 shows that, for all 45 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 Elena Kagan to be Associate Justice in
2010,42 a median of 26 days elapsed between Senate receipt and first day of confirmation
hearings.43
Starting in the 1990s, the inclination of the Judiciary Committee has been to allow at least four
weeks to pass between Senate receipt of Supreme Court nominations and the start of confirmation

(...continued)
Justice; however, the roll call was not as close as the numbers by themselves suggested, since passage of the motion
required a two-thirds vote of the Members present and voting.
40 The most lopsided of these votes were the unanimous roll calls confirming Morrison R. Waite to be Chief Justice in
1874 (63-0), Harry A. Blackmun in 1970 (94-0), John Paul Stevens in 1975 (98-0), Sandra Day O’Connor in 1981 (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).
41 In the case of the three most recent Supreme Court nominees, the Senate in 2006 confirmed Samuel A. Alito Jr. by a
58-42 vote, in 2009 confirmed Sonia Sotomayor by a 68-31 vote, and in 2010 confirmed Elena Kagan by a 63-37 vote.
In the much more distant past, the Senate confimed two of President Andrew Jackson’s nominees to the Court (Roger
B. Taney to be Chief Justice in 1836 and John Catron in 1837) by comfortable vote margins, although on both
occasions more than one-third of the votes cast were against confirmation, with the Senate confirming Taney 29-15 and
Catron 28-15.
42 In calculating the median elapsed time for the contemporary period, the Marshall nomination in 1967 was selected as
the starting point for the following reason. The Marshall nomination, it could be argued, marked the start of an era in
which the confirmation hearings of most, if not all, Supreme Court nominees were highly charged events, covered
closely by the news media, with nominees interrogated rigorously and extensively (and for more than a day) about their
judicial philosophy as well as their views on constitutional issues and the proper role of the Supreme Court in the U.S.
government. For the Marshall nomination, the elapsed time between Senate receipt and start of confirmation hearings
was 30 days.
43 See bottom rows of Table 1 for median number of days that elapsed from the date Supreme Court nominations were
received in the Senate to first hearing dates, for three different time spans.
Congressional Research Service
12

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

hearings. This block of time is intended to be used by the committee members and staff for
thorough study and review of background information about nominees and issues relevant to their
nominations, in preparation for the hearings. In the case of seven of the eight most recent Court
nominations to receive confirmation hearings (starting with the David H. Souter nomination in
1990), the shortest elapsed time between Senate receipt and first day of hearings was 28 days.44
While the elapsed time for the eighth 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 110 Court nominations
that received final committee votes,45 the nomination receiving the most prompt committee vote
was of Caleb Cushing in 1874, which was reported by the Judiciary Committee on the same day
that the Senate received it from the President.46 The committee votes on 14 other nominations to
the court occurred three days or less after the dates of Senate receipt.47 At the other extreme was
the 1916 nomination of Louis D. Brandeis, on which the Judiciary Committee voted 117 days
after Senate receipt and referral to the committee. Five other nominations as well, one in the 19th
century and four in the 20th, received committee votes more than 80 days after Senate receipt
from the President.48
In recent decades, the Judiciary Committee has taken much more time in casting a final vote on
Supreme Court nominations than it did previously. Table 1 shows that prior to 1967, a median of
nine days elapsed between Senate receipt of Supreme Court nominations and the committee’s
final vote on reporting them to the full Senate.49 From the Supreme Court nomination of

44 For the seven nominations, the elapsed time between Senate receipt of nomination and the first day of confirmation
hearings was 50 days for David Souter in 1990, 64 days for Clarence Thomas in 1991, 28 days for Ruth Bader
Ginsburg in 1993, 56 days for Stephen G. Breyer in 1994, 60 days for Samuel A. Alito Jr. in 2005-2006, 42 days for
Sonia Sotomayor in 2009, and 49 days for Elena Kagan in 2010.
45 As already mentioned, the first such nomination, of Alexander Wolcott in 1811, was reported by a select committee;
all subsequently reported nominations were reported by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
46 Ironically, five days after the committee’s favorable, and extremely prompt, recommendation of Cushing, President
Ulysses S. Grant withdrew the nomination.
47 Five nominations were voted on by the Judiciary Committee one day after their receipt by the Senate: Robert C.
Grier in 1846; John A. Campbell in 1853; Morrison R. Waite, to be Chief Justice, in 1874; Horace Gray in 1881; and
Harold H. Burton in 1945. Six nominations were voted on by the committee two days after Senate receipt: James M.
Wayne in 1835; Samuel Nelson in 1845; Noah H. Swayne in 1862; David Davis in 1862; Stephen J. Field in 1963; and
Oliver Wendell Holmes in 1902. Three nominations were voted on by the committee three days after Senate receipt:
Horace H. Lurton in 1909; Willis Van Devanter in 1910; and Joseph R. Lamar in 1910.
48 The first of Reuben H. Walworth’s three nominations to the Court in 1844 was voted on by the Judiciary Committee
93 days after Senate receipt and committee referral. During the 20th century, the Judiciary Committee, in addition to its
1916 vote on the Brandeis nomination, voted on the following nominations more than 80 days after Senate receipt:
Potter Stewart in 1959 (93 days); Robert H. Bork in 1987 (91 days), Abe Fortas, to be Chief Justice, in 1968 (83 days);
and Clarence Thomas in 1991 (81 days).
49 All of the 15 aforementioned nominations on which the Judiciary Committee voted three days or less after Senate
receipt were made prior to 1946, and 14 of the 15 were made prior to 1911.
Congressional Research Service
13

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Thurgood Marshall in 1967 through the nomination of Elena Kagan in 2010, a median of 51 days
elapsed between Senate receipt and final committee vote.50
Somewhat earlier, during the presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower (1953 to 1961), two of five
Supreme Court nominations were pending, prior to Judiciary Committee vote, in excess of the
1967-to-2010 median of 51 days for that time interval (while two other nominations were pending
44 and 49 days respectively before receiving committee action);51 however, the corresponding
time intervals for the next three Court nominations (two by President John F. Kennedy and one by
President Lyndon B. Johnson) were all well below the 51-day median.52
Days from Senate Receipt to Final Senate or Presidential Action
The Supreme Court confirmation process now typically extends over a much longer period of
time than it once did. Table 1 shows that from the appointment of the first Justices in 1789,
continuing into the early 20th century, most Senate confirmations of Supreme Court nominees
occurred within a week of the nominations being made by the President. In recent decades, by
contrast, it has become the norm for the Court appointment process—from Senate receipt of
nominations from the President to Senate confirmation or other final action (such as Senate
rejection, or withdrawal by the President)—to take more than two months.
The last column of Table 1 shows the number of days that elapsed from the dates Supreme Court
nominations were received in the Senate until the dates of final Senate or presidential action. The
number of elapsed days is shown for 152 of the 160 nominations listed in the table, with no
elapsed time shown for eight nominations on which there was no record of any kind of official or
effective final action by the Senate or by the President.53 At the bottom of the table, the median
number of elapsed days from initial Senate receipt until final action by the Senate or the President
is shown for three historical periods—1789-2010, 1789-1966, and 1967-2010.

50 See bottom rows of Table 1 for median number of days that elapsed from the date Supreme Court nominations were
received in the Senate to final Senate vote dates, for three different time spans.
51 The four Eisenhower nominations for which 44 or more days elapsed from the date received in the Senate to the date
voted on by the Senate Judiciary Committee were those of: Earl Warren to be Chief Justice in 1954, 44 days; John M.
Harlan II in 1955, 59 days; William J. Brennan Jr. in 1957, 49 days; and Potter Stewart in 1959, 93 days. Three of the
nominees—Warren, Brennan, and Stewart—were already on the Court as recess appointees, a circumstance that served
perhaps to make action on their nominations seem less urgent to the committee than if their seats on the Court had been
vacant. Harlan, however, was not a recess appointee at the time of his nomination. See “The Harlan Nomination,” New
York Times
, Feb. 25, 1955, p. 20, discussing, according to the editorial, the “inexcusable delay” on the part of the
committee in acting on the nomination and the objections to the nomination voiced by a few of the committee’s
members. (Ultimately, the committee voted 10-4 to report the nomination favorably.) Receiving much more
expeditious committee action was President Eisenhower’s fifth Supreme Court nomination, of Charles E. Whittaker in
1957, which was approved by the Judiciary Committee 16 days after Senate receipt.
52 The days that elapsed from the date received in the Senate to the date voted on by the Senate Judiciary Committee
were eight days and 25 days for the 1962 nominations of Byron R. White and Arthur J. Goldberg and 13 days for the
1965 nomination of Abe Fortas to be Associate Justice.
53 Besides nominations that received official final Senate action in the form of confirmation or rejection (124 and 11
respectively), or that were withdrawn by the President (11), six others are treated in the table as also receiving final
action, albeit not of a definitive official sort—with three having been postponed by the Senate, two tabled, and one (the
nomination of Jeremiah S. Black in 1861) not considered after a motion to proceed was defeated by a 25-26 vote.
While the six nominations remained pending in the Senate after the noted actions, the effect of the actions, it can be
argued, was decisive in eliminating any prospect of confirmation, and thus constituted a final Senate action for time
measurement purposes. Accordingly, for these six nominations, the number of days elapsed is measured from date of
Senate receipt to the dates of effective final action just noted.
Congressional Research Service
14

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

In recent decades, the median elapsed time for Supreme Court nominations to receive final action
has increased dramatically, dwarfing the median time taken on earlier nominations. Table 1
shows that from 1967 (starting with the nomination of Thurgood Marshall) through August 5,
2010 (the date on which the Senate confirmed the nomination of Elena Kagan) a median of 69
days elapsed from 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 1966.54 Most of the Supreme Court nominations receiving final action within a
relatively brief period of time—for example, within three days of initial receipt in the Senate—
occurred before the 20th century,55 while most of the nominations receiving final action after a
relatively long period of time—for example, 75 days or more after receipt in the Senate—
occurred in the 20th century (and nearly all of these since 1967).56
The presence of Senate committee involvement has clearly tended to increase the overall length
of the Supreme Court confirmation process. Of the 26 Court nominations made prior to the
establishment of the Judiciary Committee in 1816, only one, of Alexander Wolcott in 1811,
received final action more than seven days after initial Senate receipt (being rejected by the
Senate nine days after receipt). It also was the only Court nomination prior to 1816 which was
referred to, and considered by, a select committee. Subsequently, until the Civil War, six
nominations received final action more than 50 days after initial Senate receipt. All six were first
considered and reported by the Judiciary Committee. During the same period, other Court
nominations were considered and acted on by the Senate more quickly—some with, and some
without, first being referred to committee.
Subsequent historical developments involving the Senate Judiciary Committee further served to
increase the median length of the Supreme Court confirmation process. One such development
was the Senate’s adoption of a rule in 1868 that nominations be referred to appropriate standing
committees, resulting in the referral of nearly all Supreme Court nominations thereafter to the
Judiciary Committee. Another was the increasing practice of the Judiciary Committee in the 20th
century of holding public confirmation hearings on Supreme Court nominations (ultimately to
become standard practice). A third, more recent, historical trend has involved the pace and
thoroughness of the Judiciary Committee in preparing for and conducting confirmation hearings.
Since the late 1960s, close and thorough examination of the background, qualifications, and
views of Supreme Court nominees has become the norm for the Judiciary Committee, an
approach that typically extends the confirmation process by at least several weeks, as a result of
preparation for and holding of confirmation hearings.

54 At first glance, the nomination of John G. Roberts Jr. for Chief Justice in 2005 appears to be a deviation from the
1967 to 2009 median interval from date received to final action of 68 days, as the nomination was confirmed only 23
days after its initial receipt in the Senate. However, it can be argued that a more meaningful context is to see the
Roberts Chief Justice nomination (received in the Senate on Sept. 6, 2005) in relation to the earlier July 29, 2005,
nomination of Judge Roberts to be Associate Justice. After the death of Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist on Sept. 3,
2005, the Roberts Associate Justice nomination was withdrawn, and he was re-nominated to be Chief Justice. Hearings
on the Roberts Associate Justice nomination, set to begin on Sept. 6, were cancelled, and rescheduled hearings, on the
Chief Justice nomination, began on Sept. 12. The overall time that elapsed from the Associate Justice nomination of
Judge Roberts on July 29 until Senate confirmation of his Chief Justice nomination on Sept. 29 was 62 days.
55 Table 1 shows that 43 nominations received final Senate or presidential action three days or less after date of receipt
in the Senate. Thirty-six of the 43 were pre-20th century nominations.
56 Table 1 shows that 17 nominations received final Senate or presidential action more than 75 days after date of
receipt in the Senate. Thirteen of the 17 were 20th or 21st century nominations, with 11 made since 1967.
Congressional Research Service
15

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Recess Appointments to the Supreme Court
On 12 occasions in the nation’s history, Presidents have made temporary recess appointments to
the Supreme Court without submitting nominations to the Senate. Table 1 identifies all of these
12 appointments, showing how each was related to a later nomination of the appointee for the
same position. The table shows that nine of the 12 recess appointments were made before the end
of the Civil War,57 with the last three made almost a century later, in the 1950s, during the
presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower.58
Each of the 12 recess appointments occurred when a President exercised his power under the
Constitution to make recess appointments when the Senate was not in session.59 Historically,
when recesses between sessions of the Senate were much longer than they are today, recess
appointments served the purpose of averting long vacancies on the Court when the Senate was
unavailable to confirm a President’s appointees. The terms of these recess appointments,
however, were limited by the constitutional requirement that they expire at the end of the next
session of Congress (unlike the lifetime appointments Court appointees receive when nominated
and then confirmed by the Senate).60
Despite the temporary nature of these appointments, every person appointed during a recess of
the Senate except for one—John Rutledge, to be Chief Justice, in 1795—ultimately received a
lifetime appointment to the Court after being nominated by the President and confirmed by the
Senate. As Table 1 shows, all 12 of the recess appointees were subsequently nominated to the
same position, and 11 (all except for Rutledge) were confirmed.
Concluding Observations
The preceding discussion suggests that Senate treatment of Supreme Court nominations has gone
through various phases during the more than 200 years of the Republic. Initially, such
nominations were handled without Senate committee involvement. Later, from 1816 to 1868,
most nominations to the Supreme Court were referred to the Judiciary Committee, but only by
motion. Since 1868, as the result of a change in its rules, the Senate has referred nearly all Court
nominations to the Judiciary Committee. During the rest of the 19th century and early 20th century,
the committee considered nominations without public hearings. Subsequently, public hearings
gradually became the more common, if not invariable, committee practice, although many of the
earlier hearings were perfunctory and held simply to accommodate a small number of witnesses
wishing to testify against the nominees. Gradually, however, in the latter half of the 20th century,

57 See in Table 1 the recess appointments of Thomas Johnson in 1791, John Rutledge (to be Chief Justice) in 1795,
Bushrod Washington in 1798, H. Brockholst Livingston in 1806, Smith Thompson in 1823, John McKinley in 1837,
Levi Woodbury in 1845, Benjamin R. Curtis in 1851, and David Davis in 1862.
58 See in Table 1 the recess appointments of Earl Warren (to be Chief Justice) in 1953, William J. Brennan Jr. in 1956,
and Potter Stewart in 1958.
59 Specifically, Article II, Section 2, clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution empowers the President “to fill up all Vacancies
that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next
Session.”
60 For background on the history of recess appointments to the Supreme Court, and the policy and constitutional issues
associated with those appointments, see CRS Report RL31112, Recess Appointments of Federal Judges, by Louis
Fisher (out of print, available from author); and Henry B. Hogue, “The Law: Recess Appointments to Article III
Courts,” Political Science Quarterly, vol. 34, September 2004, p. 656.
Congressional Research Service
16

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

public hearings on Supreme Court nominations lasting four or more days, with nominees present
to answer extensive questioning from committee members, would become the usual practice; it
would remain the Judiciary Committee’s practice in considering the first two Supreme Court
nominations in the 21st century.
Also, the overall length of time taken by the Supreme Court confirmation process has, in general,
increased significantly over the course of more than 200 years. From the appointment of the first
Justices in 1789, continuing well into the 20th century, most Supreme Court nominations received
final action (usually, but not always, in the form of Senate confirmation) within a week of being
submitted by the President to the Senate. In recent decades, by contrast, it has become the norm
for the confirmation process to take from two to three months.
Other trends and historical phases may be discerned from Tables 1 and 2. Still other trends, of
course, may be revealed by future nominations that Presidents make and by the actions taken on
them by the Senate and its Judiciary Committee.
Congressional Research Service
17

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Table 1. Nominations to the Supreme Court of the United States, 1789-August 5, 2010
Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
John Jay of
Washington 09/24/1789
09/26/1789 Confirmed


2
New York
(Chief Justice,
hereafter
C. J.)
John Rutledge
Washington 09/24/1789
09/26/1789 Confirmed


2
of South
Carolina
William
Washington 09/24/1789
09/26/1789 Confirmed


2
Cushing of
Massachusetts
Nomination predated creation of Judiciary
Committee in 12/10/1816. No record of
Robert
Washington 09/24/1789
09/26/1789 Confirmed
— — 2
other committee referral.
Harrison of
(Nominee
Maryland
declined)
James Wilson
Washington 09/24/1789
09/26/1789 Confirmed


2
of Pennsylvania
John Blair Jr. of
Washington 09/24/1789
09/26/1789 Confirmed


2
Virginia
James Iredel of
Washington 02/09/1790
02/10/1790 Confirmed


1
North Carolina
(Nom. Date
02/08/1790)
CRS-18

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
Thomas
Washington
Recess Appointment, 08/05/1791
Johnson of
Maryland
11/01/1791
11/07/1791 Confirmed


6
(Nom. Date
10/31/1791)
William
Washington 02/27/1793 Nomination predated creation of Judiciary
02/28/1793 Withdrawn


1
Paterson of
Committee in 12/10/1816. No record of
New Jersey
other committee referral.
William
Washington 03/04/1793
03/04/1793 Confirmed


0
Paterson of
New Jersey
John Rutledge
Washington
Recess Appointment, 07/01/1795
of South
Carolina
12/10/1795 12/15/1795
Rejected

— — 5
(C. J.)
(10-14)
William
Washington 01/26/1796
01/27/1796 Confirmed
— — 1
Cushing of
(Nominee
Massachusetts
declined)
(C. J.)
Nomination predated creation of Judiciary
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
Washington 03/03/1796
03/04/1796 Confirmed
— — 1
Ellsworth of
(21-1)
Connecticut
(C. J.)
CRS-19

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
Bushrod
J. Adams
Recess Appointment, 09/29/1798
Washington 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 of
J. Adams
12/18/1800
12/19/1800
Confirmed
— — 1
New York
Nomination predated creation of Judiciary
(Nominee
(C. J.)
Committee in 12/10/1816. No record of
declined)
other committee referral.
John Marshal
J. Adams
01/20/1801
01/27/1801
Confirmed


7
of Virginia
(C. J.)
William
Jefferson 03/22/1804
03/24/1804 Confirmed


2
Johnson of
South Carolina
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
03/02/1807 Confirmed —

2
Nomination predated creation of Judiciary
of Kentucky
Committee in 12/10/1816. No record of
Levi Lincoln of
Madison 01/02/1811
other committee referral.
01/03/1811 Confirmed
— — 1
Massachusetts
(Nominee
declined)
Alexander
Madison 02/04/1811
No
record Select
Reported 02/13/1811 Rejected

— 9 9
Wolcott of
of hearing
Committee,
(9-24)
Connecticut
02/13/1811
CRS-20

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
John Quincy
Madison 02/21/1811
02/22/1811 Confirmed — — 1
Adams of
(Nominee
Massachusetts
declined)
Nomination predated creation of Judiciary
Joseph Story of
Madison 11/15/1811 Committee in 12/10/1816. No record of
11/18/1811 Confirmed —

3
Massachusetts
other committee referral.
Gabriel Duvall
Madison 11/15/1811
11/18/1811 Confirmed


3
of Maryland
Smith
Monroe
Recess Appointment, 09/01/1823
Thompson of
New York
12/08/1823
12/09/1823 Confirmed


1
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
(Nom. date
Committee.
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)
John
J. Q. Adams
12/18/1828
No record
01/26/1829 Reported 02/12/1829 Postponed
— 39 56
Crittenden of
of hearing
with
(23-17)
Kentucky
(Nom. date
recommen-
12/17/1828)
dation not to
act
John McLean of Jackson
03/06/1829
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
03/07/1829 Confirmed


1
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.
Jackson 01/07/1835
No record
01/09/1835 Reported 01/09/1835 Confirmed

2
2
Wayne of
of hearing
Georgia
(Nom. date
01/06/1835)
CRS-21

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
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
M
otion to proceed, 03/14/1836
— 8 78
of Maryland
of hearing
(25-19)
(C. J.)
03/15/1836 Confirmed

(29-15)
Philip P.
Jackson 12/28/1835
No
record
01/05/1836 Reported
M
otion to proceed, 03/15/1836
— 8 78
Barbour of
of hearing
(25-20)
Virginia
03/15/1836 Confirmed

(30-11)
William Smith
Jackson 03/03/1837
No
record
03/08/1837 Reported 03/08/1837 Confirmed
— 5 5
of Alabama
of hearing
(23-18)
(Nominee
declined)
John Catron of
Jackson 03/03/1837
No
record
03/08/1837 Reported 03/08/1837 Confirmed
— 5 5
Tennessee
of hearing
(28-15)
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 hearing
(Nom. date
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.
Tyler 01/09/1844
No record
01/30/1844 Reported 01/31/1844 Rejected

— 21 22
Spencer of
of hearing
(21-26)
New York
(Nom. date
01/08/1844
CRS-22

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
Reuben H.
Tyler 03/13/1844
No
record
06/14/1844 Reported
Tabled, 06/15/1844
— 93 96
Walworth of
of hearing
(27-20)
New York
06/17/1844 Withdrawn
Edward King of
Tyler 06/05/1844
No
record
06/14/1844 Reported 06/15/1844 Tabled

— 9 10
Pennsylvania
of hearing
(29-18)
John C.
Tyler 06/17/1844
06/17/1844 Withdrawn


0
Spencer of
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
New York
Committee.
Reuben H.
Tyler 06/17/1844
Motion to proceed objected
— — —
Walworth of
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
to, 06/17/1844. Senate
New York
Committee.
adjourned on same day, with
no record of further action.
Reuben H.
Tyler 12/10/1844
No record
01/21/1845 Reported
Tabled,
— 42 58
Walworth of
of hearing
01/21/1845
New York
(Nom. date
12/04/1844)
02/06/1845 Withdrawn
Edward King of
Tyler 12/10/1844
No record
01/21/1845 Reported
Tabled,
— 42 60
Pennsylvania
of hearing
01/21/1845
(Nom. date
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 hearing
(Nom. date
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.
Polk 12/23/1845
No
record
01/20/1846 Reported
Motion to postpone
— 28 30
Woodward of
of hearing
rejected, 01/22/1846
Pennsylvania
(21-28)
01/22/1846 Rejected

CRS-23

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
(20-29)
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.
Polk 08/03/1846
No
record
08/04/1846 Reported 08/04/1846 Confirmed

1
1
Grier of
of hearing
Pennsylvania
Benjamin R.
Fillmore
Recess Appointment, 09/22/1851
Curtis of
Massachusetts
12/12/1851
No record
12/23/1851 Reported 12/23/1851 Confirmed

11
11
of hearing
(Nom. date
12/11/1851)
Edward A.
Fillmore 08/21/1852
No record
08/30/1852 Reported 08/31/1852 Tabled

9
10
Bradford of
of hearing
Louisiana
(Nom. Date
08/16/1852)
George E.
Fillmore 01/10/1853
02/11/1853 Postponed
— — 32
Badger of
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
(26-25)
North Carolina
(Nom. Date
Committee.
01/03/1853)
William C.
Fillmore 02/24/1853
No record
Referred to Judiciary Committee on 02/24/1853. Senate
— — —
Micou of
of hearing
ordered committee discharged of nomination on same
Louisiana
(Nom. Date
02/14/1853)
day; no record of Senate consideration after discharge.
John A.
Pierce 03/21/1853
No
record
03/22/1853 Reported 03/22/1853 Confirmed

1
1
Campbel of
of hearing
Alabama
Nathan Clifford Buchanan 12/09/1857 No
record 01/06/1858 Reported 01/12/1858 Confirmed
— 28 34
of Maine
of hearing
(26-23)
CRS-24

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
Jeremiah S.
Buchanan 02/06/1861 Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
02/21/1861 Motion
to
— — 15
Black of
Committee.
proceed
Pennsylvania
(Nom. Date
rejected
02/05/1861)
(25-26)
Noah H.
Lincoln 01/22/1862
No record
01/24/1862 Reported 01/24/1862 Confirmed
— 2 2
Swayne of
of hearing
(38-1)
Ohio
(Nom. Date
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 of
Lincoln
Recess Appointment, 10/17/1862
Illinois
12/03/1862
No record
12/05/1862 Reported 12/08/1862 Confirmed

2
5
of hearing
(Nom. date
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 hearing
(Nom. date
03/06/1863
Salmon P.
Lincoln 12/06/1864
12/06/1864 Confirmed


0
Chase of Ohio
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
(C. J.)
Committee.
Henry Stanbery A. Johnson
04/16/1866
No record
Referred to Judiciary Committee on 04/16/1866. No
— — —
of Ohio
of hearing
record of committee vote, and no record of Senate
action after referral.
Ebenezer R.
Grant 12/15/1869
No record
12/22/1869 Reported 02/03/1870 Rejected
— 7 50
Hoar of
of hearing
adversely
(24-33)
Massachusetts
(Nom. date
12/14/1869)
CRS-25

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
Edwin M.
Grant 12/20/1869
12/20/1869 Confirmed
— — 0
Stanton of
(46-11)
Pennsylvania
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Committee
(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 hearing
favorably
(Nom. date
02/07/1870)
Joseph P.
Grant 02/08/1870
No record
02/14/1870 Reported
Postponed,
— 6 41
Bradley of New
of hearing
favorably
03/02/1870
Jersey
(Nom. date
(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 hearing
favorably
(Nom. date
12/03/1872)
George H.
Grant 12/02/18
No rec
73 ord
12/11/1873 Reported
Recommitted,
— 9 37
Williams of
of hearing
favorably
12/15/1873
Oregon (C. J.)
(Nom. date
12/01/1873)
Closed
— —
01/08/1874
Withdrawn
hearingsd
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
of hearing
favorably
Massachusetts
(C. J.)
CRS-26

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
Morrison R.
Grant 01/19/1874
No
record
01/20/1874 Reported 01/21/1874 Confirmed
— 1 2
Waite of Ohio
of hearing
favorably
(63-0)
(C. J.)
John Marshal
Hayes 10/17/1877
No
record
11/26/1877 Reported 11/29/1877 Confirmed

40
43
Harlan of
of hearing
favorably
Kentucky
William B.
Hayes 12/15/1880
No
record
12/20/1880 Reported
12/

21/1880 Confirmed
— 5 6
Woods of
of hearing
favorably
(39-8)
Georgia
Tabled motion to
reconsider, 12/22/1880
(36-3)
Stanley
Hayes 01/26/1881
No
record
Con
sidered , 02/07/1881
No record of action

19

Matthews of
of hearing
Ohio
02/14/1881 Postponed
Stanley
Garfield 03/18/1881
No record
05/09/1881 Reported 05/12/1881 Confirmed
— 53 55
Matthews of
of hearing
adversely
(24-23)
Ohio
(Nom. date
(6-1)
03/14/1881)
Horace Gray of Arthur 12/19/1881
No
record
12/20/1881 Reported 12/20/1881 Confirmed
— 1 1
Massachusetts
of hearing
favorably
(51-5)
Roscoe
Arthur 02/24/1882
No
record
03/02/1882 Reported 03/02/1882 Confirmed
— 6 6
Conkling of
of hearing
favorably
(39-12)
New York
(Nominee
declined)
Samuel
Arthur 03/13/1882
No
record
03/22/1882 Reported 03/22/1882 Confirmed

9
9
Blatchford of
of hearing
favorably
New York
CRS-27

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
Lucius Q. C.
Cleveland 12/12/1887 No record
01/10/1888 Reported 01/16/1888 Confirmed
— 29 35
Lamar of
of hearing
adversely
(32-28)
Mississippi
(Nom. date
(5-4)
12/06/1887)
Melville W.
Cleveland 05/02/1888 No record
07/02/1888 Reported 07/20/1888 Confirmed
— 61 79
Fuller of Illinois
of hearing
without
(41-20)
(C. J.)
(Nom. date
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 hearing
favorably
rejected, 12/18/1889
(15-54)
Motion to postpone
rejected, 12/18/1889
(25-45)
12/18/1889 Confirmed

(53-11)
Henry B.
Harrison 12/23/1890
No
record
12/29/1890 Reported 12/29/1890 Confirmed

6
6
Brown of
of hearing
favorably
Michigan
George Shiras
Harrison 07/19/1892
No
record
07/25/1892 Reported 07/26/1892 Confirmed

6
7
Jr. of
of hearing
without
Pennsylvania
recommen-
dation
Howell E.
Harrison 02/02/1893
No
record
02/13/1893 Reported 02/18/1893 Confirmed

11
16
Jackson of
of hearing
favorably
Tennessee
William B.
Cleveland 09/19/1893 No
record Considered, 09/25/1893
No record of action



Hornblower of
of hearing
and 10/25 & 30/1893
New York
CRS-28

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
William B.
Cleveland 12/06/1893 No
record Considered, 12/11, 14 &
01/15/1894 Rejected
— 33 40
Hornblower of
of hearing
18/1893
(24-30)
New York
01/08/1894 Reported
adversely
Wheeler H.
Cleveland 01/22/1894 No
record On question of reporting
02/16/1894 Rejected
— 21 25
Peckham of
of hearing
favorably, committee vote
(32-41)
New York
divided, 02/12/1894
(5-5)
02/12/1894 Reported
without
recommen-
dation
Edward D.
Cleveland
02/19/1894
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
02/19/1894 Confirmed


0
White of
Committee
Louisiana
Rufus W.
Cleveland 12/03/1895 No
record 12/09/1895 Reported 12/09/1895 Confirmed

6
6
Peckham of
of hearing
favorably
New York
Joseph
McKinley 12/16/1897 No
record 01/13/1898 Reported 01/21/1898 Confirmed

28
36
McKenna of
of hearing
favorably
California
Oliver Wendell T.
12/02/1902 No
record 12/04/1902 Reported 12/04/1902 Confirmed

2
2
Holmes of
Roosevelt
of hearing
favorably
Massachusetts
William R. Day
T.
02/19/1903 No
record 02/23/1903 Reported 02/23/1903 Confirmed

4
4
of Ohio
Roosevelt
of hearing
favorably
William H.
T.
12/03/1906 No
record 12/10/1906 Reported 12/12/1906 Confirmed

7
9
Moody of
Roosevelt
of hearing
favorably
Massachusetts
CRS-29

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
Horace H.
Taft 12/13/1909
No
record
12/16/1909 Reported 12/20/1909 Confirmed

3
7
Lurton of
of hearing
favorably
Tennessee
Charles Evans
Taft 04/25/1910
No
record
05/02/1910 Reported 05/02/1910 Confirmed

7
7
Hughes of New
of hearing
favorably
York
Edward D.
Taft 12/12/1910
12/12/1910 Confirmed


0
White of
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Louisiana
Committee.
(C. J.)
Willis Van
Taft 12/12/1910
No
record
12/15/1910 Reported 12/15/1910 Confirmed

3
3
Devanter of
of hearing
favorably
Wyoming
Joseph R.
Taft 12/12/1910
No
record
12/15/1910 Reported 12/15/1910 Confirmed

3
3
Lamar of
of hearing
favorably
Georgia
Mahlon Pitney
Taft 02/19/1912
No
record
03/04/1912 Reported 03/13/1912 Confirmed
— 14 23
of New Jersey
of hearing
favorably
(50-26)
James C.
Wilson 08/19/1914
No
record
08/24/1914 Reported 08/29/1914 Confirmed
— 5 10
McReynolds of
of hearing
favorably
(44-6)
Tennessee
CRS-30

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
Louis D.
Wilson 01/28/1916
02/09/1916
05/24/1916 Reported
06/01/1916 Confirmed
12 117 125
Brandeis of
02/10/1916
favorably
(47-22)
Massachusetts
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 hearing
favorably
William
Harding 06/30/1921
06/30/1921 Confirmed
— — 0
Howard Taft of
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
(60-4)e
Connecticut
Committee.
(C. J.)
George
Harding 09/05/1922
09/05/1922 Confirmed


0
Sutherland of
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Utah
Committee.
Pierce Butler of Harding 11/23/1922
No record
11/28/1922 Reported Placed on Executive Calendar,
— 5 —
Minnesota
of hearing
favorably
11/28/1922, with no record of
(Nom. date
further action
11/22/1922)
CRS-31

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
Pierce Butler of Harding 12/05/1922 Closed 12/18/1922 Reported
Mo

tion to recommit defeated,
— 13 16
Minnesota
hearings
favorably
12/21/1922
12/09/1922
(7-63)
12/13/1922
12/21/1922 Confirmed

(61-8)
Edward T.
Harding 01/24/1923
No
record
01/29/1923 Reported 01/29/1923 Confirmed

5
5
Sanford of
of hearing
favorably
Tennessee
Harlan F. Stone
Coolidge 01/05/1925 Closed
Reported favorably
Recommitted

28 31
of New York
hearing
01/21/1925
01/26/1925
01/12/1925f
01/28/1925
02/02/1925 Reported 02/05/1925 Confirmed
23
(after
favorably
(71-6)
01/26/1925
recomt’l)f
Charles Evans
Hoover 02/03/1930
No
hearing
02/10/1930 Reported
Mo

tion to recommit rejected,
— 7 10
Hughes of New
held
favorably
02/13/1930 (31-49)
York
(10-2)
(C. J.)
02/13/1930 Confirmed

(52-26)
John J. Parker
Hoover 03/21/1930
04/05/1930
04/21/1930
Reported
05/07/1930 Rejected
15 31 47
of North
adversely
(39-41)
Carolina
(10-6)
Owen J.
Hoover 05/09/1930
No
hearing
05/19/1930 Reported 05/20/1930 Confirmed

10
11
Roberts of
held
favorably
Pennsylvania
Benjamin N.
Hoover 02/15/1932
02/19/1932
02/23/1932
Reported
02/24/1932 Confirmed
4
8
9
Cardozo of
favorably
New York
CRS-32

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
Hugo L. Black
F.
08/12/1937 No
hearing 08/16/1937 Reported
Mo

tion to recommit rejected,
— 4 5
of Alabama
Roosevelt
held
favorably
08/17/1937
(13-4)
(15-66)
08/17/1937 Confirmed

(63-16)
Stanley F. Reed
F.
01/15/1938 01/20/1938 01/24/1938 Reported 01/25/1938 Confirmed
5
9
10
of Kentucky
Roosevelt
favorably
Felix
F.
01/05/1939 01/10/1939 01/16/1939 Reported 01/17/1939 Confirmed
5
11
12
Frankfurter of
Roosevelt
01/11/1939
favorably
Massachusetts
01/12/1939
William O.
F.
03/20/1939 03/24/1939 03/27/1939 Reported 04/04/1939 Confirmed

4 7 15
Douglas of
Roosevelt
favorably
(62-4)
Connecticut
Frank Murphy
F.
01/04/1940 01/11/1940 01/15/1940 Reported 01/16/1940 Confirmed
8
11
12
of Michigan
Roosevelt
favorably
Harlan F. Stone
F.
06/12/1941 06/21/1941 06/23/1941 Reported 06/27/1941 Confirmed
9
11
15
of New York
Roosevelt
favorably
(C. J.)
James F. Byrnes F.
06/12/1941
06/12/1941 Confirmed


0
of South
Roosevelt
Nomination was not referred to Judiciary
Carolina
Committee.
Robert H.
F.
06/12/1941 06/21/1941 06/30/1941 Reported 07/07/1941 Confirmed
9
18
25
Jackson of New Roosevelt
06/231941
favorably
York
06/27/1941
06/30/1941
Wiley B.
F.
01/11/1943 01/22/1943 02/01/1943 Reported 02/08/1943 Confirmed
11
21
28
Rutledge of
Roosevelt
favorably
Iowa
CRS-33

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
Harold H.
Truman 09/18/1945
No
hearing
09/19/1945 Reported 09/19/1945 Confirmed

1
1
Burton of Ohio
held
favorably
Fred M. Vinson
Truman 06/06/1946
06/14/1946
06/19/1946
Reported
06/20/1946 Confirmed
8
13
14
of Kentucky
favorably
(C. J.)
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
Truman 09/15/1949
09/27/1949
10/03/1949
Reported
Motion to
12 18 19
Minton of
favorably
recommit rejected, 10/04/1949
Indiana
(9-2)
(21-45)
10/04/1949 Confirmed

(48-16)
Earl Warren of
Eisenhower
Recess Appointment, 10/02/1953
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
Eisenhower 11/09/1954 No
hearing Referred to Judiciary Committee on 11/09/1954. No record of
— — —
II of New York
held
committee vote or Senate action.
John M. Harlan
Eisenhower 01/10/1955 02/25/1955g 03/10/1955 Reported 03/16/1955 Confirmed
45 59 65
II of New York
favorably
(71-11)
(10-4)
William J.
Eisenhower
Recess Appointment, 10/15/1956
Brennan Jr. 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.
Eisenhower 03/02/1957 03/18/1957 03/18/1957 Reported 03/19/1957 Confirmed
16
16
17
Whittaker of
favorably
Missouri
CRS-34

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
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.
Kennedy 08/31/1962
09/11/1962
09/25/1962 Reported 09/25/1962 Confirmed
11
25
25
Goldberg of
09/13/1962
favorably
Illinois
Abe Fortas of
L. Johnson
07/28/1965
08/05/1965
08/10/1965
Reported
08/11/1965 Confirmed
8
13
14
Tennessee
favorably
Thurgood
L. Johnson
06/13/1967
07/13/1967
08/03/1967 Reported 08/30/1967 Confirmed
30 51 78
Marshall of
07/14/1967
favorably
(69-11)
New York
07/18/1967
(11-5)
07/19/1967
07/24/1967
Abe Fortas of
L. Johnson
06/26/1968
07/11/1968
09/17/1968 Reported Cloture motion rejected,
15 83 100
Tennessee
07/12/1968
favorably
10/01/1968
(C. J.)
07/16/1968
(11-6)
(45-43)h
07/17/1968
07/18/1968
10/04/1968 Withdrawn
07/19/1968
07/20/1968
07/22/1968
07/23/1968
09/13/1968
09/16/1968
CRS-35

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
Homer
L. Johnson
06/26/1968
07/11/1968
Referred to Judiciary
10/04/1968 Withdrawn
15

100
Thornberry of
07/12/1968
Committee, 06/26/1968.
Texas
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.
Nixon 05/23/1969
06/03/1969
06/03/1969
Reported
06/09/1969 Confirmed
11 11 17
Burger of
favorably
(74-3)
Virginia (C. J.)
Clement F.
Nixon 08/21/1969
09/16/1969
10/09/1969 Reported 11/21/1969 Rejected
26 49 92
Haynsworth Jr.
09/17/1969
favorably
(45-55)
of South
09/18/1969
(10-7)
Carolina
09/19/1969
09/23/1969
09/24/1969
09/25/1969
09/26/1969
George
Nixon 01/19/1970
01/27/1970
02/16/1970 Reported 04/08/1970 Rejected

8 28 79
Harrold
01/28/1970
favorably
(45-51)
Carswell of
01/29/1970
(13-4)
Florida
02/02/1970
02/03/1970
Harry A.
Nixon 04/15/1970
04/29/1970
05/06/1970
Reported
05/12/1970 Confirmed
14 21 27
Blackmun of
favorably
(94-0)
Minnesota
(17-0)
CRS-36

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
Lewis F. Powell Nixon 10/22/1971
11/03/1971
11/23/1971 Reported 12/06/1971 Confirmed
12 32 45
Jr. of Virginia
11/04/1971
favorably
(89-1)
11/08/1971
(16-0)
11/09/1971
11/10/1971
William H.
Nixon 10/22/1971
11/03/1971
11/23/1971 Reported Cloture motion rejected,
12 32 49
Rehnquist of
11/04/1971
favorably
12/10/1971
Arizona
11/08/1971
(12-4)
(52-42)i
11/09/1971
Motion to postpone until
11/10/1971
01/18/1972 rejected,
12/10/1971
(22-70)
12/10/1971 Confirmed

(68-26)
John Paul
Ford 12/01/1975
12/08/1975
12/11/1975 Reported 12/17/1975 Confirmed

7 10 16
Stevens of
12/09/1975
favorably
(98-0)
Illinois
(Nom. Date
12/10/1975
(13-0)
11/28/1975)
Sandra Day
Reagan 08/19/1981
09/09/1981
09/15/1981 Reported 09/21/1981 Confirmed
21 27 33
O’Connor of
09/10/1981
favorably
(99-0)
Arizona
09/11/1981
(17-1)
William H.
Reagan 06/20/1986
07/29/1986
08/14/1986 Reported Cloture invoked, 09/17/1986
39 55 89
Rehnquist of
07/30/1986
favorably
(68-31)j
Arizona (C. J.)
07/31/1986
(13-5)
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)
CRS-37

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
Robert H. Bork Reagan 07/07/1987
09/15/1987
Mot
ion 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
10/06/1987 Reported
09/21/1987
unfavorably
09/22/1987
(9-5)
09/23/1987
09/25/1987
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.
Reagan 11/30/1987
12/14/1987
01/27/1988 Reported 02/03/1988 Confirmed
14 58 65
Kennedy of
12/15/1987
favorably
(97-0)
California
12/16/1987
(14-0)
David H.
G. H. W.
07/25/1990 09/13/1990 09/27/1990 Reported 10/02/1990 Confirmed
50 64 69
Souter of New
Bush
09/14/1990
favorably
(90-9)
Hampshire
09/17/1990
(13-1)
09/18/1990
09/19/1990
Clarence
G. H. W.
07/08/1991
09/10/1991
Motion to report favorably
UC agreement reached,
64 81 99
Thomas of
Bush
09/11/1991
failed, 09/27/1991
10/08/1991, to reschedule vote
Virginia
09/12/1991
(7-7)k
on confirmation from
09/13/1991
10/08/1991 to 10/15/991, to
09/16/1991
allow for additional hearings
09/17/1991
09/19/1991
09/27/1991 Reported 10/15/1991 Confirmed

09/20/1991
without
(52-48)
10/11/1991
recommen-
10/12/1991
dation
10/13/1991
(13-1)
CRS-38

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
Ruth Bader
Clinton 06/22/1993
07/20/1993
07/29/1993 Reported 08/03/1993 Confirmed
28 37 42
Ginsburg of
07/21/1993
favorably
(96-3)
New York
07/22/1993
(18-0)
07/23/1993
Stephen G.
Clinton 05/17/1994
07/12/1994
07/19/1994 Reported 07/29/1994 Confirmed
56 63 73
Breyer of
07/13/1994
favorably
(87-9)
Massachusetts
07/14/1994
(18-0)
07/15/1994
John G.
G. W. Bush
07/29/2005
Referred to Judiciary Committee,
09/06/2005 Withdrawn


39
Roberts Jr. of
07/29/2005. No hearing held and no
Maryland
committee vote taken.
John G.
G. W. Bush
09/06/2005
09/12/2005
09/22/2005 Reported 09/29/2005 Confirmed

6 16 23
Roberts Jr. of
09/13/2005
favorably
(78-22)
Maryland
09/14/2005
(13-5)
(C. J.)
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.
Samuel A. Alito G. W. Bush
11/10/2005
01/09/2006
01/24/2006 Reported
Cloture invoked,
60 75 82
Jr. of New
01/10/2006
favorably
01/30/2006
Jersey
01/11/2006
(10-8)
(72-25)
01/12/2006
01/13/2006
01/31/2006 Confirmed

(58-42)
CRS-39

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Days from date received in Senate
to:
Final action by Senate or
Senate committee actions
President
First
Final
Date
Public
public
Committee
action by
received in
hearing
Final vote
hearing
final vote
Senate or
Nominee President Senatea
date(s)
dateb Final
vote Date Final
actionc
date
date
President
Sonia
Obama 06/01/2009
07/13/2009
07/28/2009 Reported 08/06/2009 Confirmed

42 57 66
Sotomayor of
07/14/2009
favorably
(68-31)
New York
07/15/2009
(13-6)
07/16/2009

Elena Kagan of
Obama 05/10/2010
06/28/2010
07/20/2010 Reported 08/05/2010 Confirmed

49 71 87
Massachusetts
06/29/2010
favorably
(63-37)
06/30/2010
(13-6)
07/01/2010


Median number of days from date received in Senate, 1789-2010
14 11 10
Median number of days from date received in Senate, 1789-1966
10 9 7
Median number of days from date received in Senate, 1967-2010
26 51 69
Sources: U.S. Congress, Senate, Journal of the Executive Proceedings of the Senate of the United States of America (hereafter, Senate Executive Journal), various editions from the
1st Congress through the 110th Congress; Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Legislative and Executive Calendar, various editions from the 77th Congress through the 103rd
Congress; various newspaper accounts accessed on-line through ProQuest Historical Newspapers (the primary source for recorded vote tallies in committee prior to the
1980s); CRS Report RL31171, Supreme Court Nominations Not Confirmed, 1789-August 2010, by Henry B. Hogue; and “Nominations” database in the Legislative Information
System, available at http://www.congress.gov/nomis/.
Acknowledgments: Extensive preliminary research for this table was performed by Mitchel A. Sollenberger, former CRS Analyst. Calculations in this table, of median
number of days for time intervals at different time periods, were performed by Susan Navarro Smelcer, CRS Aanalyst on the Federal Judiciary.
a. Usually the date on which the President formally makes a nomination, by signing a nomination message, is the same as the date on which the nomination is received,
and these two dates are the same for any given nomination when only one date is shown in the “Date received in Senate” column. However, for the occasional
nomination made by a President on a date prior to the nomination’s receipt by the Senate, the earlier presidential nomination date (“Nom. date”) is distinguished, in
parentheses, from the date when the nomination was received by the Senate.
b. For nominations prior to 1873 that were referred to committee, the “Final vote date” is the date recorded in the Senate Executive Journal on which the committee’s
chairman or other member reported the nomination to the Senate. For nominations from 1873 to 2005, the “Final vote date” is the date on which the Judiciary
Committee voted to report a nomination or, in one instance (on Feb. 14 1881, involving the first Stanley Matthews nomination), voted to postpone taking taking
action.
c. “Final action,” for purposes of this table, covers the following mutually exclusive outcomes: confirmation by the Senate (“Confirmed”), withdrawal of a nomination by
the President (“Withdrawn”) and Senate rejection by a vote disapproving a nomination (“Rejected”). In other instances, when none of the preceding three outcomes
CRS-40

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

occurred, the last procedural action taken by the Senate on a nomination is indicated. On certain nominations, as indicated in the table, the last procedural outcome
entailed tabling a nomination (“Tabled”), postponing consideration (“Postponed”), or rejecting a motion to proceed to consideration (“Motion to proceed rejected”).
Final Senate actions taken by roll-call votes are shown in parentheses. Final Senate actions without roll-call votes shown in parentheses were reached by voice vote or
unanimous consent. For roll-cal 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 tal y 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 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 rol cal 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 rol cal 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 Tel s
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 fel 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 fel short of the super-majority required under Senate rules—then two-thirds of Senators present and voting.
Although the cloture motion failed, the Senate later that day (Dec. 10, 1971) agreed, without a procedural vote, to close debate and then voted to confirm Rehnquist
68-26.
j.
The 68 votes in favor of the motion to close debate, by invoking cloture, exceeded the majority required under Senate rules—then, and currently, three-fifths of the
Senate’s full membership.
k. Motions to gain approval in Senate committees require a majority vote in favor and thus fail if there is a tie vote.
CRS-41

Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 - 2010

Table 2. Senate Votes on Whether to Confirm Supreme Court Nominations:
Number Made by Voice Vote/Unanimous Consent (UC) or by Roll-Call Vote
Years
By voice vote or UC
By roll-call vote (votes to
(all to confirm)
reject in parentheses)
Totals
1789-1829 24
4
(2) 28
1830-1889 15
21
(3) 36
1890-1965 34
16
(3) 50
1966-2010 0
21
(3) 21
Totals
73
62 (11)
135 (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 110th Congress; also, “Nominations” database in the
Legislative Information System, available at http://www.congress.gov/nomis/.

Author Contact Information

Denis Steven Rutkus
Maureen Bearden
Specialist on the Federal Judiciary
Information Research Specialist
drutkus@crs.loc.gov, 7-7162
mbearden@crs.loc.gov, 7-8955


Congressional Research Service
42