Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

onenote

(46,135 posts)
14. An overwhelming majority of Biden's nominees are confirmed with some republican support.
Thu Apr 20, 2023, 01:59 PM
Apr 2023

Last edited Thu Apr 20, 2023, 04:59 PM - Edit history (1)

It may come as a shock to some, but the vast majority of Biden's judicial nominees have been confirmed with at least some, often multiple, republican votes on the Senate floor. Specifically, out of 118 confirmed judges, only ten were confirmed only with the votes of Democratic senators.

In the committee, this also has usually been the case -- it is hardly unusual for one or more republicans to vote for advancing a Biden judicial nominee. As the votes above indicate, this is the case even when most, and often all, other republicans on the committee vote against the nominee. Here's another example -- on February 2, 2023, with Feinstein in attendance but Peter Welch absent, leaving the committee with an 10-10 split, 12 of Biden's nominees were advanced by the Judiciary Committee. Ten of the twelve were advanced by an 11-9 vote, meaning a single Republican voted to advance the nomination. Who was it? Lindsay Graham, of all people. Should we now treat all of those nominees as somehow suspect because they received one Republican vote?

With respect to those 118 confirmations, the Republicans who have supported Biden's nominees have most often been Romney, Graham, Collins and Murkowski. Why? It isn't because the judges they are confirming are ones they would choose if it was up to them, but because they are to a relative degree, still institutionalists who think a president should be given a certain amount of latitude in making appointments.

I certainly hope that DUers aren't about throw more than 100 Biden judicial nominees (and by extension, Biden) under the bus because they happened to get some republican votes.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

She could only vote by proxy if not the determining vote ColinC Apr 2023 #1
Yes. But it worked, didn't it? mcar Apr 2023 #2
There were far more that couldn't be appointed because she is out ColinC Apr 2023 #3
They weren't "appointed". They were advanced out of committee. lapucelle Apr 2023 #5
Not sure why you think the semantics of this matter ColinC Apr 2023 #8
Not sure why anyone would every deny that there are many Hortensis Apr 2023 #25
.. ColinC Apr 2023 #26
Debatable. They had bipartisan support. It seems they were going to In It to Win It Apr 2023 #4
An overwhelming majority of Biden's nominees are confirmed with some republican support. onenote Apr 2023 #14
I hope the same In It to Win It Apr 2023 #18
There does seem to be a purity test, any Republican votes must mean nominees are bad and right-wing. betsuni Apr 2023 #33
It seems to have gone from "No Biden nominees are being advanced!" lapucelle Apr 2023 #6
Yep mcar Apr 2023 #7
The narrative matches it is reality In It to Win It Apr 2023 #16
Uh...there were 11 nominations set up for committee consideration in March. onenote Apr 2023 #19
This mcar Apr 2023 #20
And even if DiFi were to resign, Democrats would still have to go through the same process lapucelle Apr 2023 #29
I've read that Republicans could block the new person's appointment mcar Apr 2023 #30
They absolutely would In It to Win It Apr 2023 #31
I agree mcar Apr 2023 #38
Not a blockade, but I expect a slowdown In It to Win It Apr 2023 #23
As reflected in the most recent vote and the overall history of Biden's nominees onenote Apr 2023 #32
Putting the vote aside, because I'm not saying she's completely blocking the process In It to Win It Apr 2023 #43
There have been 18 nominations, approved b efore Feinstein became ill onenote Apr 2023 #45
Yes, it's a narrative. N/T lapucelle Apr 2023 #21
Then, I guess I'm misunderstanding the narrative that In It to Win It Apr 2023 #24
As of today, there is a backlog of 25 judicial nominees who have advanced out of committee, but lapucelle Apr 2023 #27
They would have been advanced anyways. It is not actually a big deal ColinC Apr 2023 #9
As of today there is a backlog of 25 judicial nominees waiting for a vote from the full Senate. lapucelle Apr 2023 #28
So that covers 25/77 vacancies for federal judgeships ColinC Apr 2023 #35
Senator Fetterman is back, so that should help. lapucelle Apr 2023 #41
Definitely. And as another poster pointed out, the next election will be crucial ColinC Apr 2023 #42
LOL.. Wishing Sen Feinstein Cha Apr 2023 #15
Exactly inthewind21 Apr 2023 #36
... mcar Apr 2023 #39
What rule says she could only vote by proxy if she wasn't the deciding vote? onenote Apr 2023 #10
Here are the committee rules In It to Win It Apr 2023 #13
So they have voted on no judges since February when she could vote for proxy? Autumn Apr 2023 #11
This message was self-deleted by its author In It to Win It Apr 2023 #12
There were three meetings scheduled for March. onenote Apr 2023 #17
No. lapucelle Apr 2023 #22
K&R betsuni Apr 2023 #34
So she's not a witch and we can't burn her? ripcord Apr 2023 #37
Guess not mcar Apr 2023 #40
+1 betsuni Apr 2023 #46
Yippee! UTUSN Apr 2023 #44
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»7 judges were voted out o...»Reply #14