Abstract

Gerhardt closely follows the Supreme Court confirmation hearings and procedure of Justice Clarence Thomas, appointed to the Supreme Court by President George H.W. Bush in 1991. The paper asserts that the existing process for Supreme Court nominations could be improved with minor changes in focus on the nominee’s record, putting the burden of persuasion on the President or nominee, opposing nominees who are ideological appointments only, and having a speedy process with hearings shortly after nomination. First, Gerhardt discusses the general history of Supreme Court nominations and process, outlining the prior emphasis on finding a nominee with experience, reason, and intellect. Then the paper uses the Thomas nomination and confirmation as a case study, highlighting racial politics and the division behind his nomination, particularly through the Pin Point strategy he used during Senate hearings that emphasized his upbringing rather than his judicial and legal accomplishments. That is followed by suggestions for the Senate and the President moving forward in nominations and hearings, promoting nominating judges with substantial experience in the law, and putting the burden of proof upon the nominee or President to show how qualified the candidate is.

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

1992

Publication Information

60 George Washington Law Review 969-996 (1992)

Download

Share

COinS