Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Explainer: Is there enough time to confirm a Supreme Court nominee before the election?
Explainer: Is there enough time to confirm a Supreme Court nominee before the election?
May 6, 2025 4:45 AM

The prospect of appointing a Supreme Court justice so close to a presidential election has roiled political discourse. Is such a move unprecedented? Is it even possible? Here are the facts you need to know.

Background

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died on September 18, just 46 days before the presidential election on November 3. President Donald Trump has said he will fill the vacancy, “most likely” with a female, naming his nominee at a press conference on Saturday at 5 p.m. EDT.

Who will President Donald Trump nominate to the Supreme Court?

The leading candidates are Amy Coney Barrett and Barbara Lagoa, with Allison Jones Rushing as a darkhorse candidate. Other women on President Trump’s 2020 list of potential Supreme Court nominees include Sarah Pitlyk, Joan Larsen, Martha Pacold, Britt Grant, Allison Eid, Kate Todd, Margaret Ryan, and Bridget Bade.

Is it possible to confirm a Supreme Court nominee in so little time?

The timeline is short but not unprecedented. The Senate confirmed Ruth Bader Ginsburg 42 days after her nomination by President Bill Clinton. The Senate gave Ginsburg near-unanimous support after four days of confirmation hearings, which featured the expert testimony of Kay Coles James (now the president of the Heritage Foundation) describing RBG’s “philosophy of judicial activism, most notably with regard to abortion” – a description that proved apt.

How long does the Senate usually deliberate before voting for a Supreme Court justice’s confirmation?

Since the court’s more contentious era began with Robert Bork’s nomination in 1987, the average time between the first day of Senate confirmation hearings and the Senate confirmation vote is 30 days. (These are calendar days, not Senate working days; congressional recesses prolonged certain nominations. The third column includes the number of calendar days between formal nomination and confirmation/rejection.)

Here are the raw data:

Nominee Days of Senate deliberation Total days
Robert Bork 39 days of Senate deliberation 106 days total
Anthony Kennedy 52 days of Senate deliberation 66 days total
David Souter 41 days of Senate deliberation 69 days total
Clarence Thomas 36 days of Senate deliberation 100 days total
Ruth Bader Ginsburg 15 days of Senate deliberation 43 days total
Stephen Breyer 18 days of Senate deliberation 74 days total
John Roberts 17 days of Senate deliberation 63 days total
Samuel Alito 23 days of Senate deliberation 83 days total
Sonia Sotomayor 25 days of Senate deliberation 67 days total
Elena Kagan 39 days of Senate deliberation 88 days total
Neil Gorsuch 91 days of Senate deliberation 66 days total
Brett Kavanaugh 33 days of Senate deliberation 89 days total

A 2020 Supreme Court nomination could take place under this time line.

To provide greater specificity:

Robert Bork was nominated by President Ronald Reagan on July 7, 1987, to replace Justice Lewis Powell Jr. The Senate held 12 days of confirmation hearings for Bork from September 15-30, 1987. The Senate denied Bork a seat on the Supreme Court by a vote of 58-42 on October 23, 1987. The phrase “Borking” entered the political lexicon, as the public square devolved to the new norm of demonizing Supreme Court nominees.

Anthony Kennedy was nominated by President Ronald Reagan on November 30, 1987, to replace Justice Lewis Powell Jr. The Senate held three days of confirmation hearings for Kennedy from December 14-16, 1987, before adjourning for the holiday recess. The Senate confirmed Kennedy by a vote of 97-0 on February 2, 1988. As of this writing, Kennedy is the last justice to be confirmed unanimously, 32 years ago.

David Souter was nominated by President George H.W. Bush on July 25, 1990, to fill the seat of Justice William Brennan. The Senate held five days of confirmation hearings for Souter from September 13-19, 1990. The Senate confirmed Souter by a vote of 90-9 on October 2, 1990.

Clarence Thomas was nominated by President George H.W. Bush on July 8, 1991, to fill the seat of Justice Thurgood Marshall. The Senate held five days of confirmation hearings for Thomas from September 10-16, 1991. However, sexual harassment allegations by Anita Hill touched off a second set of confirmation hearings from October 11-13. The Senate confirmed him by a vote of 53-48 on October 15, 1991.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg was nominated by President Bill Clinton on June 22, 1993, to fill the seat of Justice Byron “Whizzer” White. The Senate held four days of confirmation hearings for Ginsburg from July 20-23, 1993. The Senate confirmed Ginsburg by a vote of 96-3 on August 3, 1993.

Stephen Breyer was nominated by President Bill Clinton on May 17, 1994, to fill the seat of Justice Harry Blackmun. The Senate held four days of confirmation hearings for Breyer from July 12-15, 1994. The Senate confirmed Breyer by a vote of 87-9 on July 29, 1994. As of this writing, Breyer is the last justice to have been confirmed with less than 10 votes cast in opposition, 26 years ago.

Chief Justice John Roberts was nominated to fill the seat of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor on July 29, 2005, but President George W. Bush withdrew his nomination on September 6, 2005; the same day, Bush named Roberts to succeed Chief Justice William Rehnquist. The Senate held four days of confirmation hearings for Roberts from September 12-15, 2005. The Senate confirmed Roberts by a vote of 78-22 on September 29, 2005.

Samuel Alito was nominated by President George W. Bush on November 10, 2005, to fill the seat of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. After the intervening holiday recess, the Senate held five days of confirmation hearings for Alito from January 9, 2006. The Senate confirmed Alito by a vote of 58-42 on January 31, 2006.

Sonia Sotomayor was nominated by President Barack Obama on June 1, 2009, to fill the seat of Justice David Souter. The Senate held four days of confirmation hearings for from July 13-16, 2009. The Senate confirmed Sotomayor by a vote of 68-31 on August 6, 2009.

Elena Kagan was nominated by President Barack Obama on May 10, 2010, to fill the seat of Justice John Paul Stevens. The Senate held four days of confirmation hearings for Kagan from June 28-July 1, 2010. The Senate confirmed Kagan by a vote of 63-37 on August 5, 2010.

Neil Gorsuch was nominated by President Donald Trump on February 1, 2017, to fill the seat of Justice Antonin Scalia. The Senate held four days of confirmation hearings for Gorsuch from March 20-23, 2017. The Senate confirmed Gorsuch by a vote of 54-45 on April 7, 2017.

Brett Kavanaugh was nominated by President Donald Trump on July 10, 2018, to fill the seat of Justice Anthony Kennedy. The Senate held four days of confirmation hearings for Kavanaugh from September 4-7, 2018. The Senate convened another one-day hearing on September 27 to discuss allegations that Kavanaugh engaged in sexual misconduct against Christine Blasey Ford when he was a minor. Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., demanded an additional one-week delay for the FBI to investigate Kavanaugh. The Senate confirmed Kavanaugh by a vote of 50-48 on October 2, 2018.

es to a total of 357 calendar days of Senate deliberations between the confirmation hearings and the vote for 12 nominees, or an average of 29.75 days per nominee.

How does pare to the 2020 election?

There are 39 days between Monday, September 28 and election day 2020.

Has any part of the confirmation process changed during this time?

The confirmation process has e streamlined since 2017. In November 2013, then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid effectively eliminated the filibuster for judicial nominees except Supreme Court nominees. This lowered the vote necessary to end debate and proceed to a vote, known as cloture, from 60 votes to 51. In 2017, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell applied that rules to Supreme Court justices beginning in April 2017. One would expect confirmations to take less time as a result.

Bottom line: Beginning the Senate confirmation hearings expeditiously would give senators the same amount of time to deliberate about the nominee’s answers as usual – longer than some, including the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

domain.)

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
The annotated inbox
A round-up of diverse items of interest, in no particular order: “Iraq to open consulate in San Diego,” (and Detroit). Facing difficulties in reaching the populations of Iraqis in the US, Iraq is planning to open consulates in San Diego and Detroit. “The Bush administration set a goal of admitting 12,000 Iraqi refugees this year.” This rather meager es years after the invasion and after hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have had to flee to other countries for safety. Too...
Sir John Marks Templeton (1912-2008)
Sir John Templeton, the great entrepreneur and philanthropist, passed away on July 8, 2008. Fr. Robert Sirico, president of the Acton Institute, marks his passing with this tribute: It was with great sadness that I learned today of the passing from this life of one of the twentieth-century’s great stalwarts in the struggle for faith and liberty. Rising from a humble background in Tennessee, John Templeton graduated from Yale and Oxford universities, the latter of which he attended as a...
Canada’s common sense
An update on my post about “Canada’s Faltering Freedom” a few weeks ago: Common sense seems to have prevailed up north, as Canada’s human mission dismissed plaint against journalist Mark Steyn ments made about Islam, while the same body cleared a Catholic magazine of wrongdoing for ments about homosexuality. Rightfully, religious leaders in Canada are not relaxing in the wake of these minor victories. Citing other abuses by provincial human rights panels, Calgary’s Bishop Frederick Henry is leading a charge...
Essay on professionalism
The Armed Forces Journal has a noteworthy essay on professionalism titled, “In Praise of Mavericks.” The author, Michael Wyly, is a retired Marine Colonel who served bat tours in Vietnam. The central theme of Wyly’s piece is that true professionals choose to do something rather than be someone. The essay discusses the importance of character, service, and moral integrity over career advancement fort. Wyly notes: Courage is a virtue. In the military profession, courage tops the list of virtues required...
CRC Sea to Sea tour week 2
The second week of the CRC’s Sea to Sea bike tour is in the books. The second leg of the journey took the bikers from Kennewick to Boise, a total distance of 321 miles. There’s a basic theme in the daily prayers from the “Shifting Gears” devotional. There is a fundamentally environmental focus, and by that I mean not just the natural environment, but the economic, political, and social environment of the areas through which the bikers progress. For instance,...
Christian America?
mentary from last week (“Christianity and the History of Freedom”) elicited a thoughtful response from a blogger named Jonathan Rowe, who subsequently invited me to join his blog, American Creation. Rowe and his colleagues debate the concept of a “Christian America,” especially focusing on the question of religion and the Founding. If you’re interested in the issues raised by mentary and by Acton’s film, The Birth of Freedom, you might enjoy American Creation. My first post is a direct rejoinder...
The professional bureaucratic manager
I’ve noted this quote on the blog before, but Ray’s post on professionalism sparked recall of another kind of professional, the professional bureaucratic manager: Government insists more and more that its civil servants themselves have the kind of education that will qualify them as experts. It more and more recruits those who claim to be experts into its civil service. And it characteristically recruits too the heirs of the nineteenth-century reformers. Government itself es a hierarchy of bureaucratic managers, and...
Federalism and the faith-based initiative
One aspect of the recent discussion over the faith-based initiative, focused anew because of Barack Obama’s pledge to expand the executive effort, is the importance of the White House office as a model and catalyst for similar efforts at the state and local levels. In the Spring 2006 issue of the Journal of Markets & Morality, we published a Symposium with papers based on a discussion titled, “The Ethics of Faith-Based Policy,” sponsored by the Center for Political Studies at...
The devil is in the details II
Cleaner skies explain surprise rate of warming ...
Good intentions and the faith-based initiative
Yesterday I was a guest on “The Jesse Lee Peterson Radio Show,” a production of BOND (Brotherhood Organization of a New Destiny), to discuss the presidential election and the faith-based initiative, with a special focus on the proposals laid out by Democratic candidate Barack Obama. A streamlined version of the interview is available for download. After the July 1 speech in Zanesville, Ohio, where Obama called his plan for a new Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships “a critical part”...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved