A Way to End the Confirmation Gridlock

Warren Belmar July 27, 2017

This is a letter to the editors of the Wall Street Journal by Federalist Society expert, Warren Belmar. He has graciously contributed the article to our blog.

To the Editors:

Your recent editorial (Running the Schumer Blockade, July 11, 2017) summarized the problems the Trump Administration is having in bringing on board President Trump’s nominees for senior Administration positions requiring the advice and consent of the Senate. In so doing, you called for the GOP to stop Senator Schumer’s orchestration of Democratic abuse of the Senate rules to delay and obstruct confirmation of almost all of President Trump’s nominees, and to consider Senator Langford’s proposal to reinstate the Senate rule which allowed former Senate Majority Leader Reid to limit post-cloture debate for most nominations to eight hours.

  [Read More]


Supreme Court Columns

Size Doesn’t Matter: Why Shrinking the Supreme Court Won’t Promote Constitutionally Limited Government

Evan Bernick October 26, 2016

The Supreme Court needs to be cut down to size. So argues Professor Michael Stokes Paulsen in an article on National Review Online, responding to Senator John McCain’s recent statement that Senate Republicans might be justified in refusing to confirm any judge nominated to the Court by a President Hillary Clinton. According to Paulsen, McCain “does not go far enough.” In light of what he regards as the Court’s “judicial activism,” as well as the political vitriol associated with Court appointments, Paulsen calls for congressional measures that would prevent the confirmation of any judges nominated to the Court by any president until the Court is shrunk to six members. This, he contends, will lead to less activism and make the appointment process less controversial. [Read More]