Advice and Consent: Exploring the Role of Nominee Qualifications in the U.S. Senate Confirmation Process for Circuit Courts of Appeals Judges Between the 107th and 117th Congresses
Open Access
Author:
Roth, Jacob
Area of Honors:
Political Science
Degree:
Bachelor of Arts
Document Type:
Thesis
Thesis Supervisors:
Michael J Nelson, Thesis Supervisor Gretchen G Casper, Thesis Honors Advisor
Keywords:
Judges United States Senate U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals Nominations Qualifications
Abstract:
Why are certain successful U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals nominations confirmed more favorably by the U.S. Senate than other successful nominations? Existing studies argue that political factors and nominees’ personal characteristics – including race and gender – largely influence senators’ behavior. In contrast, I argue that nominees’ qualifications – in the form of academic credentials and professional experiences – are the chief determinants of confirmation outcomes. Using data from 198 successfully-confirmed U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals judges between 2001 and 2022, I test this theory. The results suggest that while nominees’ advocacy organization affiliations are significant predictors of confirmation outcomes, other academic and professional attributes are not; political and personal factors – age, race, party control of government, a filibuster requirement, and ideology – are indeed significant predictors of senators’ behavior. These results have implications for our understanding of how and why senators utilize their constitutional advice and consent power to shape the federal judiciary.
