Individual Scrutiny or Politics as Usual? Senatorial Assessment of U.S. District Court Nominees

@article{Dancey2014IndividualSO,
  title={Individual Scrutiny or Politics as Usual? Senatorial Assessment of U.S. District Court Nominees},
  author={Logan Dancey and Kjersten R. Nelson and Eve M. Ringsmuth},
  journal={American Politics Research},
  year={2014},
  volume={42},
  pages={784 - 814}
}
Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings offer senators a public opportunity to exercise their “advice and consent” privilege and scrutinize presidential nominees. In this article, we examine the purpose and functioning of confirmation hearings for federal district court nominees, which make up the majority of presidential selections to federal courts. Using transcripts from all hearings between 1993 and 2008, we find the characteristics of individual nominees have little effect on the… Expand
2 Citations

Figures and Tables from this paper

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 41 REFERENCES
To Advise and Consent: The Senate and Lower Federal Court Nominations, 1977-1998
  • 94
  • Highly Influential
Judicial Selection: Politics, Biases, and Constituency Demands
  • 24
  • PDF
Scoring Points: Politicians, Activists, and the Lower Federal Court Appointment Process
  • J. Nash
  • Political Science
  • Perspectives on Politics
  • 2006
  • 33
  • Highly Influential
Advice and Consent: Senate Responses to Executive Branch Nominations 1885- 1996
  • 156
Partisan Politics
  • 35
  • PDF
Senatorial Discourtesy: The Senate's Use of Delay to Shape the Federal Judiciary
  • 64
Battle over the Bench: Senators, Interest Groups, and Lower Court Confirmations
  • 32
  • Highly Influential
Female and Minority Judicial Nominees: President's Delight and Senators' Dismay?
  • 33
Picking Federal Judges: A Note on Policy and Partisan Selection Agendas
  • 297
...
1
2
3
4
5
...