Washington — Without naming names or casting blame, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. called on Republicans and Democrats Friday to put aside their differences and move more quickly to approve qualified nominees to be federal judges.
Currently, about 110 judgeships — about one in eight in the federal judiciary — are vacant, and the Senate approved only 60 of President Barack Obama’s court nominees in the past two years. That was the lowest total for a new president in four decades.
In Roberts’ year-end report on the federal courts, he said this “persistent problem has developed … over many years,” and both parties have played a role.
“Each political party has found it easy to turn on a dime from decrying to defending the blocking of judicial nominations, depending on their changing political fortunes,” he said. “This has created acute difficulties for some judicial districts.”
Although the Senate confirmed 19 judicial nominees in December’s lame-duck session, it let another 19 nominations die, even though most of them had been approved overwhelmingly by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
More than a decade ago, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist drew wide attention when he faulted Senate Republicans for blocking President Bill Clinton’s court nominees. Roberts, however, made no mention of Obama and did not blame Republicans for the recent delays.
“The judiciary relies on the president’s nominations and the Senate’s confirmation process to fill judicial vacancies; we do not comment on the merits of individual nominees. That is as it should be,” Roberts wrote. “There remains, however, an urgent need for the political branches to find a long-term solution to this recurring problem.”
Roberts himself has some familiarity with partisan stalling over court nominees. In 1992, President George H. W. Bush nominated him to be a judge on the U.S. court of appeals in Washington, but his nomination went nowhere and died when Clinton took office.
In 2001, President George W. Bush again nominated Roberts to the U.S. court of appeals, and although he faced little opposition, he was not confirmed until 2003. Two years later, Bush chose him for the Supreme Court.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., chairman of the Judiciary Committee, issued a statement taking note of Roberts’ comments, but pointedly blamed the GOP for the high vacancy rate on the federal bench.
“Regrettably, in this Congress, Republicans compounded the vacancy crisis by turning away from the Senate’s long-held tradition of promptly considering non-controversial nominees, even those supported by Republican home-state senators,” he said. “Democrats stand ready to address the needs of the federal judiciary. I hope the Republicans will join us.”
For their part, Senate Republicans noted that Obama’s Justice Department was slow in making nominations to the federal bench. Even if all of Obama’s nominees had been approved, he would still have had fewer confirmed judges in his first two years than Clinton or Bush.
Obama did succeed in adding two justices to the Supreme Court: Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
Roberts devoted most of his report to the need to hold down spending because of the bad economy and the growing federal deficit. Unlike in years past, he did not press Congress to raise salaries for federal judges.
“The Supreme Court itself is doing its part,” he said. “The court expects to voluntarily reduce its fiscal year 2012 appropriations request to less than its fiscal year 2011 request.”
(Savage works in the Washington Bureau of the Tribune Company.)
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.