5 ms·
This wasn't always the case, here's an excerpt from the wiki on recent changes making this the case: "Senate cloture rules historically required a two-thirds af
by nscalf 6y ago
This wasn't always the case, here's an excerpt from the wiki on recent changes making this the case:
"Senate cloture rules historically required a two-thirds affirmative vote to advance nominations to a vote; this was changed to a three-fifths supermajority in 1975. In November 2013, the then-Democratic Senate majority eliminated the filibuster for executive branch nominees and judicial nominees except for Supreme Court nominees by invoking the so-called nuclear option. In April 2017, the Republican Senate majority applied the nuclear option to Supreme Court nominations as well,[2] enabling the nominations of Trump nominees Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh to proceed to a vote.[3][4] "
- jlawson 6y agoInteresting, so if Trump can nominate and pass another judge, it'll be by using the rule that the Democrats changed in 2013 to benefit themselves.
- nscalf 6y agoTo be fair, they passed the ruling for non-supreme court justices. Republicans extended it to include them in 2017. Still, an example of terrible governance and foresight on both sides.
- rootusrootus 6y agoThat would be incorrect, unless you are talking about a regular federal judge and not a Supreme Court justice. In the latter case, it was a rule the Republicans changed in 2017 to benefit themselves.
- ghufran_syed 6y agoThe filibuster has always seemed anti-democratic - it’s not in the constitution, and I’m pretty sure that historically it was a way to make give the minority senators more power at the expense of the people.
- shajznnckfke 6y agoThat’s just the Senate deciding internally what its procedures are. Either way, the Senate is making the choice.