WEBVTT - How Often Have Supreme Court Nominees Been Rejected?

0:00:02.000 --> 0:00:07.000
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to brain Stuff from How Stuff Works, Hey, brain Stuff,

0:00:07.040 --> 0:00:10.240
<v Speaker 1>Lauren voglebam here. When a U. S President nominates someone

0:00:10.240 --> 0:00:12.559
<v Speaker 1>to take over a seat on the Supreme Court, things

0:00:12.600 --> 0:00:15.360
<v Speaker 1>don't always turn as contentious as they do these days.

0:00:15.960 --> 0:00:19.240
<v Speaker 1>Since the Supreme Court was established in sevent nine, presidents

0:00:19.239 --> 0:00:21.119
<v Speaker 1>have sent a hundred and sixty three names to the

0:00:21.120 --> 0:00:24.119
<v Speaker 1>Senate for approval. The Senate has so far approved a

0:00:24.160 --> 0:00:26.560
<v Speaker 1>hundred and twenty six of them. That's about seventy seven,

0:00:27.200 --> 0:00:31.120
<v Speaker 1>although seven have also turned down the appointment. Some of

0:00:31.160 --> 0:00:33.480
<v Speaker 1>the nominees have faced a tougher road than others. Of course,

0:00:34.000 --> 0:00:36.960
<v Speaker 1>roughly twenty three don't make it. Some of those were

0:00:37.000 --> 0:00:40.360
<v Speaker 1>outright rejected. Some nominees take their names out of consideration.

0:00:40.960 --> 0:00:42.800
<v Speaker 1>The Senate didn't even bother to vote on ten of

0:00:42.800 --> 0:00:46.199
<v Speaker 1>the president's recommendations, most notably that of Merrick Garland, who

0:00:46.240 --> 0:00:49.120
<v Speaker 1>was nominated by President Barack Obama in twenty six toward

0:00:49.159 --> 0:00:52.560
<v Speaker 1>the end of his second term. Often, though the chosen

0:00:52.560 --> 0:00:56.320
<v Speaker 1>ones breathe through the process. Current Associate Justice Ruth Bader

0:00:56.320 --> 0:01:00.280
<v Speaker 1>Ginsburg want a Senate vote of ninety six to three three.

0:01:01.000 --> 0:01:03.760
<v Speaker 1>In the nineteen eighties, President Ronald Reagan nominated three judges

0:01:03.800 --> 0:01:07.080
<v Speaker 1>who were voted onto the bench unanimously, Sandra Day O'Connor,

0:01:07.120 --> 0:01:09.759
<v Speaker 1>the first woman to serve on the court, anton In Scalia,

0:01:09.880 --> 0:01:13.920
<v Speaker 1>and Anthony Kennedy. We spoke with John Michaels, a professor

0:01:13.959 --> 0:01:16.440
<v Speaker 1>at the u c l A School of Law. He said,

0:01:16.760 --> 0:01:19.320
<v Speaker 1>it's supposed to be a kind of collaboration. There's an

0:01:19.360 --> 0:01:22.840
<v Speaker 1>understanding that there's deference paid to the president's nominee, so

0:01:22.920 --> 0:01:25.280
<v Speaker 1>there has to be something problematic about that nominee to

0:01:25.280 --> 0:01:30.480
<v Speaker 1>not go forward, but welcome to Now these days, in

0:01:30.520 --> 0:01:34.520
<v Speaker 1>a politically fractured nation, things aren't nearly as easy. Something

0:01:34.560 --> 0:01:38.080
<v Speaker 1>problematic is always on hand. Collaboration is a dirty word.

0:01:39.200 --> 0:01:42.560
<v Speaker 1>A Republican led Senate, at odds with President Obama sixteen

0:01:42.840 --> 0:01:46.080
<v Speaker 1>sat on Garland's domination, refusing to even hold a hearing

0:01:46.720 --> 0:01:50.080
<v Speaker 1>when President Donald Trump took office in January seventeen and

0:01:50.160 --> 0:01:53.240
<v Speaker 1>nominated Neil Gorstch to the bench instead. The Gorsetch passed

0:01:53.240 --> 0:01:56.279
<v Speaker 1>the Republican led Senate, but just barely, with a fifty

0:01:56.320 --> 0:01:59.560
<v Speaker 1>four to forty five vote, and only after Republicans changed

0:01:59.600 --> 0:02:03.320
<v Speaker 1>Senate rules to prevent a Democratic filibuster. Even getting to

0:02:03.320 --> 0:02:06.040
<v Speaker 1>the Senate vote is sometimes tricky, as U. S. Circuit

0:02:06.040 --> 0:02:08.480
<v Speaker 1>Court Judge Brett Covna found out in the late summer

0:02:08.520 --> 0:02:12.040
<v Speaker 1>of eighteen, Kavanaugh was nominated by Trump to take over

0:02:12.040 --> 0:02:15.360
<v Speaker 1>the seat of retiring Supreme Court Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy,

0:02:15.600 --> 0:02:20.040
<v Speaker 1>and things turned ugly quickly. Democrats, stinging from the Garland

0:02:20.080 --> 0:02:22.920
<v Speaker 1>snub and the way the Senate pushed through Gorset, and

0:02:23.000 --> 0:02:25.920
<v Speaker 1>fearing a conservative turn that could impact Supreme Court decisions

0:02:25.919 --> 0:02:30.560
<v Speaker 1>for decades, hounded Covenaugh's nomination, and when several women days

0:02:30.600 --> 0:02:34.120
<v Speaker 1>before the Judiciary Committee vote accused Covena of sexual assault,

0:02:34.320 --> 0:02:37.600
<v Speaker 1>Democrats and a key Republican or too called to reopen

0:02:37.639 --> 0:02:42.280
<v Speaker 1>the FBI background investigation into the nominees past and angry tiry,

0:02:42.320 --> 0:02:44.600
<v Speaker 1>Covena was forced to defend himself in front of a

0:02:44.720 --> 0:02:48.240
<v Speaker 1>very public hearing of the committee. But Kavanaugh is not

0:02:48.320 --> 0:02:51.800
<v Speaker 1>the first to be put through the nomination ringer. The

0:02:51.880 --> 0:02:54.200
<v Speaker 1>very first nominee to the Supreme Court to be rejected

0:02:54.240 --> 0:02:57.600
<v Speaker 1>was John Rutledge in s Rutledge had been one of

0:02:57.639 --> 0:03:01.000
<v Speaker 1>the original Associate Justices, but resigned before hearing a case

0:03:01.040 --> 0:03:04.480
<v Speaker 1>to return to South Carolina. When George Washington tapped him

0:03:04.480 --> 0:03:07.440
<v Speaker 1>again to serve as Chief Justice during a Senate recess,

0:03:07.480 --> 0:03:11.600
<v Speaker 1>he returned. During his brief tenure, Rutledge criticized the administration,

0:03:11.840 --> 0:03:14.600
<v Speaker 1>and rumors of mental illness and alcohol abuse spurred on

0:03:14.639 --> 0:03:17.840
<v Speaker 1>by the opposing party press, were rampant. When the Senate

0:03:17.840 --> 0:03:20.120
<v Speaker 1>convened and had a chance to vote, it rejected him

0:03:20.120 --> 0:03:23.720
<v Speaker 1>fourteen to ten. He's the only recess appointed judge that

0:03:23.840 --> 0:03:28.480
<v Speaker 1>didn't later earn a Senate nod. And here are and

0:03:28.720 --> 0:03:32.520
<v Speaker 1>skipping ahead, here are the most recent. Harriet Myers, the

0:03:32.639 --> 0:03:35.600
<v Speaker 1>former Council to President George W. Bush, was nominated to

0:03:35.600 --> 0:03:39.000
<v Speaker 1>replace retiring Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor in October of

0:03:39.000 --> 0:03:41.760
<v Speaker 1>two thousand five. It was a surprising choice in that

0:03:41.840 --> 0:03:44.320
<v Speaker 1>Myers had never been a judge. She also had been

0:03:44.360 --> 0:03:46.920
<v Speaker 1>Bush's personal lawyer for many years, going back to his

0:03:46.960 --> 0:03:49.760
<v Speaker 1>time in Texas, which raised flags that the appointment might

0:03:49.800 --> 0:03:54.200
<v Speaker 1>be too political. Meyers struggled with constitutional questions posed to

0:03:54.240 --> 0:03:57.200
<v Speaker 1>her by the Senate Judiciary Committee too. In the end,

0:03:57.280 --> 0:03:59.440
<v Speaker 1>with strong signs that she would not be approved, she

0:03:59.520 --> 0:04:04.680
<v Speaker 1>withdrew from consideration. Clarence Thomas, meanwhile, was a George H. W.

0:04:04.840 --> 0:04:09.000
<v Speaker 1>Bush nominee, A staunchly conservative Thomas went through tense hearings

0:04:09.040 --> 0:04:12.840
<v Speaker 1>in front of the Judiciary Committee in and then Anita Hill,

0:04:13.080 --> 0:04:15.600
<v Speaker 1>a former employee of Thomas's, showed up with charges that

0:04:15.640 --> 0:04:19.640
<v Speaker 1>Thomas had sexually assaulted her. Michael's spoke about those hearings.

0:04:20.200 --> 0:04:22.279
<v Speaker 1>He said, if you go back and watch some of

0:04:22.279 --> 0:04:24.839
<v Speaker 1>the ways that senators were questioning Unita Hill, it's not

0:04:24.920 --> 0:04:27.080
<v Speaker 1>even whether we believe them or not. We weren't really

0:04:27.200 --> 0:04:31.400
<v Speaker 1>understanding what the problems were. Thomas would end up passing

0:04:31.400 --> 0:04:36.000
<v Speaker 1>fifty eight. He still serves on the Court. Robert Bourke

0:04:36.080 --> 0:04:38.680
<v Speaker 1>is the most recent nominee rejected by the full Senate.

0:04:38.920 --> 0:04:42.599
<v Speaker 1>Reagan put his name in in Bourke was voted down

0:04:42.600 --> 0:04:45.080
<v Speaker 1>by the Judiciary Committee, but refused to withdraw his name

0:04:45.120 --> 0:04:48.640
<v Speaker 1>from consideration, making the Senate vote on him. The conservative

0:04:48.680 --> 0:04:51.560
<v Speaker 1>Bork scared many with his views on privacy, civil rights,

0:04:51.600 --> 0:04:54.120
<v Speaker 1>women's rights, and his belief that the Constitution should be

0:04:54.120 --> 0:04:56.960
<v Speaker 1>interpreted through the eyes of those who framed it. His

0:04:57.040 --> 0:05:00.679
<v Speaker 1>contentious hearings led to the verb borking from Ariam Webster

0:05:01.120 --> 0:05:03.960
<v Speaker 1>to attack or defeat a nominee or candidate for public

0:05:04.000 --> 0:05:07.880
<v Speaker 1>office unfairly through an organized campaign of harsh public criticism.

0:05:07.960 --> 0:05:12.640
<v Speaker 1>Or vilification, and there have been others. President Richard Nixon

0:05:12.680 --> 0:05:15.960
<v Speaker 1>had two Supreme Court nominees rejected, Clement Haynesworth, Jr. In

0:05:16.080 --> 0:05:19.760
<v Speaker 1>nineteen seventy and g. Herald Carswell in nineteen sixty nine.

0:05:20.279 --> 0:05:22.080
<v Speaker 1>Cars Well was the first at the time to be

0:05:22.200 --> 0:05:25.279
<v Speaker 1>voted down since nineteen thirty. Both were shot down for

0:05:25.320 --> 0:05:29.640
<v Speaker 1>their past views on civil rights and racial equality. We'd

0:05:29.680 --> 0:05:31.880
<v Speaker 1>like to think that the Supreme Court, being the last

0:05:31.920 --> 0:05:33.920
<v Speaker 1>stop on the road to justice, would be able to

0:05:33.960 --> 0:05:37.000
<v Speaker 1>put aside partisanship in politics to make well reasoned judgments

0:05:37.000 --> 0:05:39.719
<v Speaker 1>on what is best for the country. But justices have

0:05:39.800 --> 0:05:42.200
<v Speaker 1>views too, and they are appointed by presidents who have

0:05:42.320 --> 0:05:45.000
<v Speaker 1>their own views and voted on by representatives who have

0:05:45.160 --> 0:05:48.520
<v Speaker 1>yet their own. It's not surprising, then, that these nominees

0:05:48.520 --> 0:05:51.440
<v Speaker 1>are put through a ringer by opposing parties. As much

0:05:51.480 --> 0:05:53.440
<v Speaker 1>as we may hate to see a nominee's life turned

0:05:53.520 --> 0:05:56.080
<v Speaker 1>upside down by the process, it's not just their lives

0:05:56.080 --> 0:05:59.320
<v Speaker 1>on the line, it's the fate of the country. Michael's

0:05:59.320 --> 0:06:01.800
<v Speaker 1>explained it this way. It is a little weird to

0:06:01.839 --> 0:06:04.320
<v Speaker 1>have a system so dependent on a very partisan choice

0:06:04.320 --> 0:06:07.440
<v Speaker 1>by president when the choice just depends on when people die.

0:06:07.880 --> 0:06:10.800
<v Speaker 1>You can just get lucky or unlucky. It would be

0:06:10.880 --> 0:06:13.560
<v Speaker 1>nice in a perfect world if presidents and senators did

0:06:13.560 --> 0:06:15.880
<v Speaker 1>not play power politics with the courts, but that would

0:06:15.880 --> 0:06:18.840
<v Speaker 1>be naive, especially since the court plays a central role

0:06:18.880 --> 0:06:27.600
<v Speaker 1>in American political, social, and economic life. Today's episode was

0:06:27.640 --> 0:06:30.440
<v Speaker 1>written by John Donovan and produced by Tyler. Playing. For

0:06:30.520 --> 0:06:33.400
<v Speaker 1>more illness and lots of other vigorously approved topics, visit

0:06:33.440 --> 0:06:46.800
<v Speaker 1>our home planet, how stuff works dot com.