282 PART ThRee • InsTITuTIons of AmeRIcAn GoveRnmenT
Senatorial Courtesy
In federal district court
judgeship nominations,
a tradition allowing a
senator to veto a judicial
appointment in her or
his state.There are currently 874 federal judicial posts at all levels, although at any given time
many of these positions are vacant. Once appointed to a federal judgeship, a person holds
that job for life. Judges serve until they resign, retire voluntarily, or die. Federal judges who
engage in blatantly illegal conduct may be removed through impeachment, although such
action is rare. In contrast to federal judges, many state judges—including the judges who
sit on state supreme courts—are chosen by the voters in elections. Inevitably, judicial can-
didates must raise campaign funds. What arguments favor the election of judges? What
problems can such a system create? We examine such questions in the At Issue feature on
the facing page.Judicial Appointments
Candidates for federal judgeships are suggested to the president by the Department of
Justice, senators, other judges, the candidates themselves, and lawyers’ associations and
other interest groups. In selecting a candidate to nominate for a judgeship, the president
considers not only the person’s competence but also other factors, including the person’s
political philosophy (as will be discussed shortly), ethnicity, and gender.
The nomination process—no matter how the nominees are obtained—always works
the same way. The president makes the actual nomination, submitting the name to the
Senate. To reach a conclusion, the Senate Judiciary Committee (operating through sub-
committees) invites testimony, both written and oral, at its various hearings. The Senate
then either confirms or rejects the nomination.
federal district court Judgeship nominations. Although the president officially
nominates federal judges, in the past the nomination of federal district court judges actu-
ally originated with a senator or senators of the president’s party from the state in which
there was a vacancy (if such a senator existed). In effect, judicial appointments were a
form of political patronage. President Jimmy Carter (1977–1981) ended this tradition by
establishing independent commissions to oversee the initial nomination process. President
Ronald Reagan (1981–1989) abolished Carter’s nominating commissions and established
complete presidential control of nominations.
A practice used in the Senate, called senatorial courtesy, is a constraint on the
president’s freedom to appoint federal district judges. Senatorial courtesy allows a senator
of the president’s political party to veto a judicial appointment in her or his state. During
much of American history, senators from the “opposition” party (the party to which the
president does not belong) have also enjoyed the right of senatorial courtesy, although
their veto power has varied over time.
In 2000, Orrin Hatch, Republican chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, announced
that the opposition party (at that point, the Democrats) would no longer be allowed to
invoke senatorial courtesy. When the Democrats took over the Senate following the elec-
tions of 2006, Senator Patrick J. Leahy (D., Vt.), chair of the Judiciary Committee, let it
be known that the old bipartisan system of senatorial courtesy would return. Of course,
the Republicans, who were now in the minority, were unlikely to object to a nomination
submitted by Republican president George W. Bush, and the old practices did not become
truly effective until Democratic president Barack Obama took office.
federal courts of Appeals Appointments. There are many fewer federal courts of
appeals appointments than federal district court appointments, but they are more influ-
ential. Federal appellate judges handle more important matters, and therefore presidents
take a keener interest in the nomination process for such judgeships. Also, the U.S. courts
of appeals have become “stepping-stones” to the Supreme Court.9781285436388_12_ch12_271-296.indd 282 10/29/13 11:01 AM
Copyright 2014 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.