Going Nuclear: Federalist Society Affiliated Judicial Nominees’ Prospects and a New Era of Confirmation Politics1

• Author: Christine C. Bird,Zachary A. McGee
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X221109534
• Published date: 01 January 2023
• Date: 01 January 2023

Article

AmericanPoliticsResearch

2023,Vol.51(1)37–56

©TheAuthor(s)2022

Articlereuseguidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI:10.1177/1532673X221109534

journals.sagepub.com/home/apr

GoingNuclear:FederalistSocietyAffiliated

JudicialNominees’ProspectsandaNewEraof

ConfirmationPolitics

1

ChristineC.Bird

1

andZacharyA.McGee

2



Abstract

Significantchangestothefederaljudicialconfirmationprocesshavemanifestedoverthepastdecade,includingmultiple

proceduralreformsintheUnitedStatesSenate.Wearguethe“nuclearoption,”thereductionofthevote-thresholdrequiredto

proceedtoafinalconfirmationvoteonjudicialnominees(i.e.,toinvokecloture)fromthree-fifthstoasimplemajority,

contributedtoarenewedescalationofpartisanconfirmationbattlesonwhichtheFederalistSocietycapitalized.Punditsand

politiciansalikeshowgrowingconcernabouttheroleofinterestgroups,especiallythoseassociatedwiththeconservativelegal

movement,injudicialnominations.Theintersectionofthesetwosetsofchangesraisesquestionsaboutthecontemporary

judicialnominationsprocess.UtilizinganoveldatasetofFederalistSociety(FedSoc)affiliatesdrawnfromeventlistings(1993–

2020),weanalyzetheinteractiveroleofFedSocaffiliationwithSenateproceduralchangestothejudicialconfirmationprocess.

WefindaffiliationwiththeFederalistSociety,aftertheinitialnuclearoptionwasimplemented,increasestheprobabilityofa

circuitcourtnominee’sconfirmationbyapproximately20%.

Keywords

judicialnominations,nuclearoption,federalistsociety,originalism,conservatism,congress,senate

Judicialnominationstodayfacedifferentpoliticalcircum-

stancesandstakesthanthoseofeven15yearsagointhe

UnitedStatesSenateaspartisansracetosecureseatsonthe

federalbenchforthe“right”kindofjudges(Crowe,2012;

Scherer,2005;Silverstein,2007;Whitington,2017).Pundits

andpoliticiansalikeattributethischange,atleastpartially,to

theemergenceoftheFederalistSocietyforLawandPublic

PolicyStudies(FedSoc

2

)andchangesinSenateprocedure,

especiallyimplementationofthenuclearoption.Sinceits

inceptionintheearly1980s,theFederalistSocietygrewinto

itsroleasakeyinterestgroupintheconservativelegal

movement.BylookingatthenatureoftheeventsFedSoc

organizesandthewritingsofitstensofthousandsof

members,wecanclearlyseetheinfluenceofFedSocon

disseminatingthelegalinterpretationmethodknownas

“originalism”throughouttheprofessionallegalcommunityin

theUnitedStates(Hollis-Brusky,2015;Teles,2008).The

FederalistSocietywasalsoasourceofcontroversyinthelast

threehigh-profileSupremeCourtnominationbattlesforNeil

Gorsuch,BrettKavanaugh,andAmyConeyBarrettaswell

asindebatesaboutthefateofthelowerlevelsofthefederal

judiciary(Stabenowetal.,2020).Ofcourse,theFedSocalone

isnotresponsibleforthechangingjudicialnominations

politics.Judicialnominationshavebecomeincreasingly

politicizedoverthepastfewdecadesandtheprocesses

governingthemtodayhavebeenreshapedinmanyways

includinghowmanysenatorsarerequiredfordebateona

nomineetoterminate,howlongsenatorscandebatea

nominee,andhowmuchdeferenceisgiventohome-state

senators(Baetal.,2020;Binder&Maltzman,2002;Black

etal.,2011;Collins&Ringhand,2013;King&Ostrander,

2020;Primoetal.,2008;Rhode&Shepsle,2007).

Selectingpotentialnomineesreliesheavilyonprofes-

sionalnetworks,especiallythoseconnectedtoexecutive-

branchofficialsinchargeofhelpingthepresidentselect

qualifiednominees(Nemacheck,2008;Scherer&Miller,

2009;Teles,2008).DuringAmyConeyBarrett’snomination

hearing,journalistMarciaCoylestated,“Thesenominees,

whoevertheyare,dobecomenomineesbecausetheyhave

madecontactsovertheyears,theyhavementorsthatmaybe

politicallyconnected,andthat’showtheycometothe

1

DepartmentofPoliticalScience,SUNYAlbany-DowntownCampus,

Albany,NY,USA

2

DepartmentofGovernment,St.LawrenceUniversity,Canton,NY,USA

CorrespondingAuthor:

ZacharyA.McGee,DepartmentofGovernment,St.LawrenceUniversity,

23RomodaDr.Canton,NY13617,USA.

Email:zmcgee@stlawu.edu

attentionofaWhiteHouse”.

3

Notably,theFederalistSociety

is–atleastinpart–anorganizationthatsocializesitsmembers

intellectuallyandprofessionally(especiallyinWashington,

D.C.‘smoreliberalsocialcircles)(Hollis-Brusky,2015).

WhiletheFedSocisfrequentlyaccusedofinfluencingwhoa

presidentnominates,thosedecisionsarenotablymade

behind-closed-doors.Yet,theconnectionstothosedecision-

makersarecarefullycultivated.

Receivingthenominationisonlyhalfofthebattle.Oncea

juristreceivesanofficialnominationfromthepresidentitis

uptotheSenatetoprovideadviceandconsent.Overthelast

severaldecades,alargeshiftoccurredfromwherefederal

judicialnominationswerecommonlypartypatronageposi-

tionstoanewbattlebetweenthepartiestopickthe“right”

kindofjudgethatfitstheparties’variouspolitical,ideo-

logical,andpolicygoals.Individualsenatorsalsousejudicial

nominationsasanopportunitytoattractattentionandsupport

frompartyeliteswithaneyetowardreelection(Bell,2002;

Cameronetal.,1990;Epstein&Segal,2005;Mayhew,1974;

Scherer,2005).Senatorsopposingajudicialnomineeare

mostlikelytoengageindelaytactics,includingusingthe

filibuster,designedtogetthenomineetowithdraworto

hamstringtheappointingpresident’spolicyagendarather

thanattemptingtodefeatanomineeduringarollcallvote

(Shipan&Shannon,2003;Steigerwalt,2010).In2013Senate

Democratschangedthethresholdforinvokingcloturetoend

debateonanomineeandkillanychanceofafilibuster;in

practice,theyreducedthethresholdformovingajudicial

nominationthroughtheSenatefromthree-fifthssupporttoa

simplemajority–achangewhichSenateRepublicanscapi-

talizeduponwhentheytookbackthemajorityinthefol-

lowingcongress(Baetal.,2020).Takentogether,changesto

Senateprocedureandtheallegedinfluenceofgroupslikethe

FederalistSocietysuggestthecontemporaryjudicialnomi-

nationsprocessmaybesignificantlydifferentfromthe

processalittleoveradecadeago.Moreover,itispuzzlingthat

scholarsstillknowverylittleaboutwhataffiliatingwiththe

FederalistSocietydoesforajudicialnomineegiventhe

widespreadhand-wringingabouttheirinfluencefromthe

media,scholars,andevensenatorsthemselves.Inthisarticle

weaskhowinfluentialisaffiliationwiththeFederalistSo-

cietyattheconfirmationstageinahyperpolarizedpost-

nuclear-optionpoliticalenvironmentintheSenate?

WearguethataffiliationwiththeFederalistSocietyhas

becomeanimportantconsiderationforevaluatingajudicial

nominee’sideologicalleaningandtheirbroaderpolitical

network.Inmakingthisargumentweexplorethegrowing

impactofajudicialnominee’sFedSocaffiliationonconfir-

mationoddsaswellastheextenttowhichthepolitical

environmentwasalteredbySenateproceduralchanges.We

employanewdatasetcompiledfrompublicinformationon

eventsheldbytheFederalistSocietyfrom1993to2020

directlyfromtheorganization’swebsite.Ourfindingsreveal

thatfewerFederalistSocietyaffiliateshavebeennominated

tothefederaljudiciarythanmanyinthepublichavebeenled

tobelieve,buttheaffiliatesthatobtainanominationtoa

circuitcourtpositiongetahelpfulboostintheirprospectsof

joiningthebench.Forexample,PresidentTrumpreliedmost

heavilyontheFederalistSocietyandstillonly50%ofhis

nomineeswereFedSocaffiliatesinhisfirst2yearsinoffice.

Inhisfinal2yearsthatnumberdropstojustabove40%.

4

PresidentGeorgeW.Bush,forcomparison,peaksatabout

25%ofhisnomineesbeingFedSocaffiliates.Wefindafter

theSenatereducedthethresholdofinvokingcloturefrom

three-fifthstoasimplemajority,FederalistSocietyaffiliates

nominatedtoacircuitcourtsawtheirconfirmationchances

increasebyabout20%.OurfindingssuggesttheFederalist

SocietyandacooperatingRepublicanPartycapitalizedon

changestoSenateproceduretoconfirmmoreofthe“right

kind”ofideologicallyconseravtivejudgesthaninanyother

erasincetheFedSoc’sinceptionin1982.Whilewefind

evidencethatFedSocaffiliatednomineesareincreasingly

moresuccessfulintheirconfirmationbidstocircuitcourts,

statementsaboutthenumberofFedSocaffiliatesshouldbe

qualified.

Next,wereviewtheevolutionofjudicialnominations

politicsandSenateprocedureoverthepastfewdecades.We

thenintroducetheFederalistSociety,itsmotivations,andits

politicalreputation.Then,wedetailtheimpactofFedSoc’s

influenceonsenatorsandjudicialnomineesalikewhilein-

troducingournoveldatasetanddetailingourmethodological

approach.Finally,wepresentourfindingsandoutlineour

futureplansforresearchutilizingourFedSocaffiliatedataset.

TheEvolvingPoliticsofJudicialNominations

TheU.S.Constitution,ArticleII,empowersthepresident

tonominatefederaljudicialcandidateswiththeadviceand

consentoftheSenate.Thepathtofillafederaljudicial

vacancyismarkedwithseveralstrategicvetopoints.The

presidentexpendsvaluableresourcestoidentifyandveta

nominee.Interestgroupsadvocatefororagainstacan-

didate(Holmes,2007;Schereretal.,2008).TheSenate

JudiciaryCommitteeholdsnominationhearingsandthen

thenominationmaylanguishincommitteeorgotothefull

Senateforconsideration.Inthissection,wewillbriefly

reviewtheliteraturedocumentingthepoliticizationofthe

judicialconfirmationprocessateachlevelofthejudiciary.

Agreatdealofscholarshipexaminesthegrowingpolitical

polarizationofthecontemporaryconfirmationprocesstofill

judicialvacanciesontheSupremeCourt–aphenomenonwith

itsfoundationsintheReaganadministration(Goldman,

1997).Mostnotably,in1987,onlyoneyearafterconser-

vativejuristAntoninScalia’sunanimousconfirmationvote,

Reagan-appointeeRobertBork’snominationmarkedanew

eraofcontentiousjudicialnominations(Bartels2015;Binder

&Maltzman,2009;Caldeira,1989;Epsteinetal.,2006;

Ogundele&Keith,1999).ScaliaandBork’spoliticaland

professionalprofileswerevirtuallyindistinguishable.Court

watchersandjournalistspointtoRobertBork,Clarence

38AmericanPoliticsResearch51(1)