Channels, Fall 2019

Page 2 Wilt • It Wasn’t Supposed to be Easy However, Majority Leader McConnell calculated the political risks and kept the seat open for 293 days (Bravin). In the end, the Senate full-body and even the Senate Judiciary never official considered Judge Garland for the Supreme Court vacancy (Elving). Per Senate procedure, when the 114th Congress’ term expired on 3 January 2017, so did Garland’s nomination. President Donald Trump announced Judge Neil Gorsuch, 49, to serve as the next Supreme Court Justice on January 31, 2017. Judge Gorsuch received an introduction from his home-state Senators of Colorado —Michael Bennet (D) and Cory Gardner (R) — and continued to meet with Senators individually before and during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings. Judge Gorsuch’s supporters praised his record as bipartisan and steady and cited his record of 97% voting in unanimous decisions (Killough and Barrett). Republicans in the Senate were distraught that Democrats strongly opposed the nomination. Ultimately, attempts were made to clear the 60- vote threshold of avoiding filibusters and to garner a smooth, traditional confirmation. However, Senate Majority Leader McConnell announced that the senate would utilize the “nuclear option” to confirm Judge Gorsuch’s nomination. The then-Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) originally used the “nuclear option” in 2013 to confirm lower judicial nominees and executive nominees by requiring simple-majority passage (Killough and Barrett). Many worried that lowering the threshold for votes would result in more ideological nominees to the highest court and a less bipartisan reaction to the confirmation process as a whole (Killough and Barrett). Though senators lamented the use of the nuclear option, many still supported Judge Gorsuch’s nomination, resulting in a 54-45 final confirmation (Killough and Barrett). Most recently, President Trump nominated Judge Brett Kavanaugh of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to replace retiring-Justice Anthony Kennedy on July 9, 2018 (Bowden). After Judge Kavanaugh had been the nominee for twenty days, Christine Blasey Ford accused Judge Kavanaugh of sexual assault back in college in the 1980s (Bowden). After two grueling weeks of intense FBI investigations, the FBI produced an inconclusive report on the allegations. The Senate voted on cloture for the motion to vote on Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination. The final vote was 50-48 (Bowden). These four confirmation processes to the Supreme Court, all within a five-year timespan, are completely divergent of each other, leading many Americans to question the reliability of the Supreme Court confirmation process — and even the legitimacy of the judiciary. On the one hand, blatant partisanship and polarization has hindered the political process in dramatic, dysfunctional, and unnecessary fashion. On the other hand, complacency in a more subtle way negatively harms the process as a rubber-stamp for the President. There is a definite disconnect in what the American people perceive the Senate’s advice and consent function to be in comparison to what the Founders originally intended for the Senate. The terminology of advice and consent is vague and inconclusive, unless in proper context. A lack of understanding on what the Framers’ originally intended for the Senate’s advice and consent role has major implications for the health and well-being of the constitutional republic. It affects the process in selecting capable, qualified, and willing justices to the country’s highest Court, and the understanding of the role checks and balances play within the constitutionally designed federal framework. The Founders authored the Appointments Clause in a particular manner for a particular reason. The Framers took painstakingly lengthy amounts of time in crafting the