Is There Really A Separation Of Powers When The Legislative & Executive....

[onenote]

9. So when did things change? And why?

Going back to the Nixon era, after Haynsworth and Carswell, who were rejected as much for their lack of stature and qualifications as anything, four of the next five nominees sailed through with virtually no opposition. The only exception was Rehnquist -- 26 votes were cast against his initial nomination and 33 against his subsequent nomination as Chief Justice. But just a few days after Rehnquist's confirmation, Scalia, who was every bit as conservative or more than Rehnquist, was confirmed 98-0. After that, things sailed along as before until you get to Bork, who was "qualified" in one sense but out of the mainstream. He was rejected. And things again settled in with nominees getting confirmed with little or no opposition. Until Clarence Thomas, who barely squeaked by. After that, Ginsburg was easily confirmed as was Breyer. Roberts was opposed by over 20 Senators and after that every nomination seems to have been contentious -- 30 or more no votes for Alito (42), Sotomayor (31), Kagan (37), and Gorsuch (45).

Point being that for some time now it has been a combination of factors -- temperament, politics, experience, that have been in play, with politics probably playing the biggest role.