Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Explainer: The Supreme Court confirmation process
Explainer: The Supreme Court confirmation process
Dec 8, 2025 1:49 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
Booth: This reform would improve the ecological, and human, environment
To be good citizens, faithful people must examine policies’ results, not just their intentions.One overly intrusive environmentalist policy alone has prevented the poor from accessing adequate housing and, ironically, reduced the diversity of the environment. If excluding the vulnerable from the economy is evil, as Pope Francis has written, then new approaches are needed, writesPhilip Booth,a distinguished British professor of finance in a new essay forReligion & Liberty Transatlantic. He begins by opening an earnest dialogue with the pontiff’s social...
Czeslaw Milosz: Poet Laureate of Freedom
[A review of Milosz: A Biography by Andrzej Franasszek, edited and translated by Aleksandra and Michael Parker, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge University, 2017, 526 pp., $35] “What is poetry which does not save/Nations or people?” – Czeslaw Milosz (“Dedication”) In the 1970s – the last full decade before Poland finally freed itself from the shackles munist control –Lech Walesa, the leader of Solidarity, the Soviet bloc’s first trade union, was arrested on more than one occasion....
Rev. Robert Sirico praises President Trump’s recent remarks about Venezuela
President and Co-Founder of the Acton Institute, Rev. Robert Sirico is quoted in an article published at Crux, praising President Trump for his remarks concerning Venezuela’s current social and economic state of chaos. “The problem in Venezuela is not that socialism has been poorly implemented, but that socialism has been faithfully implemented,” said Trump on Tuesday in his first address to the General Assembly of the United Nations. Sirico tells Crux that he was “relieved and encouraged to hear President...
Why we should reject the erroneous idea that ‘error has no rights’
A recent poll revealed that a near majority of Americans believe free speech should not be extended to extremist groups. Another poll found that a large number of citizens favor permitting the courts to fine news media outlets for publishing or broadcasting stories that are biased or inaccurate. (Almost half of Republicans (45 percent) would favor such a policy, and 35 percent say they simply haven’t heard enough to say.) And in Russia, the government has banned the religious group...
The connection between property rights and religious freedom
According to Founding Father James Madison, “the rights of persons and the rights of property” constituted the “two cardinal objects of government.” And the “most sacred form of property,” according to Madison, was an individual’s conscience since “other property depending in part on positive law, the exercise of that, being a natural and inalienable right . . .” Both property and conscience (religious freedom) have been considered foundational rights. But what exactly do they have mon? More than we may...
Radio Free Acton: Mollie Ziegler Hemingway on fake news; Upstream on Fleet Foxes and R.E.M.
In this newest edition of Radio Free Acton, Mollie Ziegler Hemingway, senior editor at The Federalist, talks with Sarah Stanley, managing editor at the Acton Institute. Mollie explains how distrust for news in the media has grown and how integrity in journalism can be reclaimed. Mollie’s conversation with Sarah is a sampling of an ing Acton lecture series event taking place on September 28th. Bruce Edward Walker then speaks with writer and musician, Robert Dean Lurie about the newest Fleet...
Samuel Gregg: ‘First Things,’ R.R. Reno, and the market economy
The role of free market economics in the West should not be off-limits for debate among religious conservatives. As Samuel Gregg writes in a new essay, that standard should “provide philosophical and theological guidance about how to ground free economies—and liberal institutions more generally—upon more solid foundations than the peculiar mixes of utilitarianism, autonomy-for-autonomy’s sake, and pseudo-evolutionary theory advocated by some liberal thinkers.” In a new article, First Things editor R. R. Reno makes claims about the market economy and...
The $15 minimum wage is most likely to hurt ‘economically weaker’ areas
The scenario is familiar: Ontario has passed legislation to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour, and a new report warns that could increase unemployment. Significant evidence reinforces concerns that this well-intentioned change will harm the poor. Premier Kathleen Wynne announced the minimum wage would rise from $11.40 to $15 an hour across Canada’s most populous province by 2019. That boosts the minimum by nearly one-third. A new report from the Fraser Institute warns such a steep hike leads...
The costs and benefits of monopoly
Note: This is post #49 in a weekly video series on basic microeconomics. What would happen if we eliminated patents for industries with high R&D costs, such as the pharmaceutical industry? Eliminating patents in this case may result in less innovation and, specifically, fewer new drugs being created, explains economist Alex Tabarrok. In this video by Marginal Revolution University he considers some of the tradeoffs of patents and looks at alternative ways to reward research and development such as patent...
How much does crime pay?
The claim that “crime doesn’t pay” was an early slogan of the FBI. But while the claim may be a truism in the long run, in the short-term criminal activity can produce an parable to the earnings of a middle-class worker. At least that’s the finding of a new paper published in the journal Criminology. Holly Nguyen of Pennsylvania State University and Thomas Loughran of the University of Maryland-College Park attempt to gauge how much money people earn through criminal...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved