Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Explainer: The Supreme Court confirmation process
Explainer: The Supreme Court confirmation process
Jan 8, 2026 7:49 PM

Today, the Senate Judiciary Committee is hearing allegations against Supreme Court nomineeJudge Brett Kavanaugh. This is likely to be the final stage in the process the will either approve or disapprove his appointment to the Court. Here is what you should know about the confirmation process.

What does Supreme Court confirmation entail?

According to the U.S. Constitution, federal judges—including Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court—are appointed by the president with the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate.

Although the process is not outlined in the Constitution, the determination of whether the judicial nominee is accepted by the Senate iscarried out by the Senate Judiciary Committee. mittee assumes the principal responsibility for investigating the background and qualifications of each Supreme Court nominee.

Since the late 1960s, the Judiciary Committee’s consideration of a Supreme Court nominee almost always has consisted of three distinct stages—(1) a pre-hearing investigative stage, followed by (2) public hearings, and concluding with (3) mittee decision on what mendation to make to the full Senate.

What happens during the a pre-hearing investigative stage?

During the pre-hearing investigative stage, the nominee responds to a detailed Judiciary Committeequestionnaire for the nominee. The FBI also investigates the nominee and provides mittee with confidential reports related to its investigation. During this time, the American Bar Association also evaluates the professional qualifications of the nominee, rating the nominee as “well qualified,” “qualified,” or “not qualified.” (Kavanaugh was rated “well qualified.”) Prior to mittee hearings, the nominee may also meet with any or all individual Senators. After the investigation, the Judiciary Committee holds its public hearings.

What happens during the public hearings?

Since 1955, Court nomineestestify in person before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

After opening remarks by the chair of the Judiciary Committee, other members follow with opening statements, and a panel of “presenters” introduces the nominee to mittee. The nominee is given the opportunity to make an opening statement and then begins taking questions.

Typically, the chair begins the questioning, followed by the ranking minority Member and then the rest of mittee in descending order of seniority, alternating between majority and minority members, with a uniform time limit for each Senator during each round. When the first round of questioning has pleted, mittee begins a second round, which may be followed by more rounds, at the discretion of mittee chair

What types of questions can be asked during the hearing?

The Senate can generally ask whatever they want, though thequestions are usually aboutthe nominee’s background and qualifications, judicial philosophy, past decisions as a judge, or views on current controversies.

A nominee can’t pelled to answer, and many refuse ment on issues that e up during their tenure on the Court.

How long does the hearing last?

For the most recent Supreme Court nominees, the hearings have lasted for four or five days. The longest hearing in the past 50 years was the failed nomination of Judge Robert Bork, which lasted 11 days.

What happens after the hearing?

After hearing the testimony of the nominee, the Judiciary Committee meets in open session to determine what mendation to report to the full Senate. mittee may (1) report the nomination favorably, (2) report it negatively, or (3) make no mendation at all on the nomination. A report with a negative mendation or no mendation permits a nomination to go forward, while alerting the Senate that a substantial number mittee members have reservations about the nomination.

The full Senate then votes on whether to accept or reject the nominee. Ifthe nominee is rejected, the President selects a new nominee and the process begins anew.

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
Acton On Tap: Art, Patrimony, and Cultural Investment
If you couldn’t make it to Derby Station in East Grand Rapids last night, there are a couple of things you should know. First of all, you missed a great event and some good conversation. Secondly, you need not worry: we recorded it, and you can listen to David Michael Phelps’ presentation on Art, Patrimony, and Cultural Investment via the audio player below. The bad news is that I was planning to post a little video clip for your enjoyment,...
Radio Free Acton: The Stewardship of Art, Part 2
Last week, we posted part 1 of our podcast on the proper Christian stewardship of art; for those who have been waiting for the conclusion, we’re happy to present part 2. David Michael Phelps continues to lead the discussion between Professors Nathan Jacobs and Calvin Seerveld, who previously debated this topic in the Controversy section of our Journal of Markets & Morality. The first portion of that exchange is available at the link for part 1; the remainder of the...
Work as if It Mattered
The conversations over the last few weeks here on work have raised a couple of questions. In the context of criticisms on the perspectives on work articulated by Lester DeKoster and defended by menter John E. asks, “…what is it that you hope readers will change in their lives, and why?” I want to change people’s view of their work. I want them to see how it has value not simply as a means to some other end, but in...
Samuel Gregg: Benedict’s Creative Minority
This week’s mentary from Research Director Samuel Gregg. Sign up for Acton News & Commentary here. +++++++++ Benedict’s Creative Minority By Samuel Gregg In the wake of Benedict XVI’s recent trip to Britain, we have witnessed—yet again—most journalists’ inability to read this pontificate accurately. Whether it was Queen Elizabeth’s gracious ing address, Prime Minister David Cameron’s sensible reflections, or the tens of thousands of happy faces of all ages and colors who came to see Benedict in Scotland and England...
The Daily Show Takes on a Union
The Daily Show exposes some union hypocrisy (HT). In the words of the union local head, es down to greed”: ...
Explaining the New Democratic Logo
“The new Democratic logo is so bad that the intellectual rot in the official announcement went largely unnoticed.” The rest of my piece is here at The American Spectator. ...
Mandating Monolithic Medicine
Among the warnings sounded as the Democratic health care reform bill was being debated was that the federal insurance mandate included in the bill—even though not national health care per se—would essentially give the federal government control of the insurance industry. The reason: If everyone is forced to buy insurance, then the government must deem what sort of insurance qualifies as adequate to meet the mandate. This piece of Obamacare promises to turn every medical procedure into a major political...
Rev. Sirico: Respect others’ rights, but also their values
A new column by Rev. Robert A. Sirico, president and co-founder of the Acton Institute, was published today in the Detroit News. This column will also be linked in tomorrow’s Acton News & Commentary. Sign up for the free weekly Acton newsletter here. +++++++++ Faith and policy: Respect others’ rights, but also their values FATHER ROBERT SIRICO If such an award were to be given for the Most Contentious Religious Story of 2010, the two main contenders would undoubtedly be...
Trailer: Doing the Right Thing
The Colson Center for Christian Worldview is preparing to release a new study DVD this fall titled, Doing the Right Thing: A Six-Part Exploration of Ethics. The DVD is designed as a resource for small-group studies and features leading thinkers who explore the need for ethical behavior in the marketplace, public square, political life and other areas. Hosts Brit Hume, Chuck Colson, Dr. Robert George and a distinguished panel — including Acton’s Rev. Robert Sirico and Michael Miller — undertake...
The Politics of Crony Unionism
Last week’s Acton Commentary and blog post focused on my claims about “crony unionism” and how the intimate relationship between Big Labor and Big Government corrupt both. Here’s another instance of the kinds of gross conflicts of interest produced by this relationship: It’s hard to see this as anything but partisan pandering on the part of the largest public sector union, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). Meanwhile, the Washington Post asks, “Was politics behind the...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved