Skip to main content
University of Michigan Press Ebook Collection

University of Michigan Press
Ebook Collection

Browse Books Help
Get access to more books. Log in with your institution.

Your use of this Platform is subject to the Fulcrum Terms of Service.

Share the story of what Open Access means to you

a graphic of a lock that is open, the universal logo for open access

University of Michigan needs your feedback to better understand how readers are using openly available ebooks. You can help by taking a short, privacy-friendly survey.

  1. Home
  2. Books
  3. It's Not Personal: Politics and Policy in Lower Court Confirmation Hearings

It's Not Personal: Politics and Policy in Lower Court Confirmation Hearings

Logan Dancey, Kjersten R. Nelson, and Eve M. Ringsmuth
Restricted You don't have access to this book. Please try to log in with your institution. Log in
Read Book Buy Book
  • Overview

  • Contents

In order to be confirmed to a lifetime appointment on the federal bench, all district and circuit court nominees must appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee for a confirmation hearing. Despite their relatively low profile, these lower court judges make up 99 percent of permanent federal judgeships and decide cases that relate to a wide variety of policy areas. To uncover why senators hold confirmation hearings for lower federal court nominees and the value of these proceedings more generally, the authors analyzed transcripts for all district and circuit court confirmation hearings between 1993 and 2012, the largest systematic analysis of lower court confirmation hearings to date. The book finds that the time-consuming practice of confirmation hearings for district and circuit court nominees provides an important venue for senators to advocate on behalf of their policy preferences and bolster their chances of being re-elected. The wide variation in lower court nominees' experiences before the Judiciary Committee exists because senators pursue these goals in different ways, depending on the level of controversy surrounding a nominee. Ultimately, the findings inform a (re)assessment of the role hearings play in ensuring quality judges, providing advice and consent, and advancing the democratic values of transparency and accountability.
  • Cover
  • Title Page
  • Copyright Page
  • Dedication
  • Contents
  • Acknowledgments
  • One. Introduction
  • Two. Confirmation Hearings
  • Three. An Overview of Confirmation Hearings, 1993–2012
  • Four. Why Do Senators Hold Confirmation Hearings?
  • Five. In Pursuit of Policy Goals
  • Six. Hearings as a Venue for Pursuing Electoral Goals
  • Seven. The Content and Consequences of Hearings for Controversial Nominees
  • Eight. The Value of Lower Court Confirmation Hearings
  • Appendixes
  • Notes
  • References
  • Index
Citable Link
Published: 2020
Publisher: University of Michigan Press
ISBN(s)
  • 978-0-472-12656-9 (ebook)
  • 978-0-472-13183-9 (hardcover)
Series
  • Legislative Politics and Policy Making
Subject
  • Political Science:American Politics
  • Political Science:Governance

Resources

Search and Filter Resources

Filter search results by

Section

  • Chapter 7
Filter search results by

Keyword

  • circuit court2
  • nomination hearings2
  • opposed circuit2
  • Senate Judiciary Committee2
  • Decision making questions1
  • more Keyword »
Filter search results by

Creator

  • Dancey, Logan2
  • Nelson, Kjersten2
  • Ringsmuthm, Eve2
Filter search results by

Format

  • chart2
Your search has returned 2 resources attached to It's Not Personal: Politics and Policy in Lower Court Confirmation Hearings

Search Constraints

Filtering by: Section Chapter 7 Remove constraint Section: Chapter 7
Start Over

Not finding what you are looking for? Help improve Fulcrum's search and share your feedback.

1 - 2 of 2
  • First Appearance
  • Section (Earliest First)
  • Section (Last First)
  • Format (A-Z)
  • Format (Z-A)
  • Year (Oldest First)
  • Year (Newest First)
Number of results to display per page
  • 10 per page
  • 20 per page
  • 50 per page
  • 100 per page
View results as:
List Gallery

Search Results

For controversial circuit nominees, 17 percent of their questions will be qualifications questions, compared to 25 percent for noncontroversial circuit nominees. This difference is not statistically significant at the p less than .05 level. For controversial circuit nominees, 38 percent of their questions will be Issues questions, compared to 24 percent for noncontroversial circuit nominees. This difference is statistically significant at the p less than .05 level. For controversial circuit nominees, 26 percent of their questions will be Judicial decision-making questions, compared to 40 percent for noncontroversial circuit nominees. This difference is statistically significant at the p less than .05 level.

Proportion of Questions in Major Categories by Level of Controversy

From Chapter 7

Fig. 7.1. Proportion of Questions in Major Categories; by Level of Controversy

The figure shows the average number of questions for controversial and noncontroversial circuit nominees, based on whether the nominee was confirmed or not. Noncontroversial circuit nominees who were not confirmed receive 20.3 questions on average, compared to 11.3 for noncontroversial circuit nominees who were confirmed. Controversial circuit nominees who were not confirmed received 111.1 questions on average, compared to 69.8 for controversial circuit nominees who were confirmed.

Average Number of Questions Posed to Circuit Nominees by Confirmation Status and Type of Nominee

From Chapter 7

Fig. 7.2. Average Number of Questions Posed to Circuit Nominees; by Confirmation Status and Type of Nominee

University of Michigan Press Contact Us

UMP EBC

  • Browse and Search
  • About UMP EBC
  • Impact and Usage

Follow Us

  • UMP EBC Newsletter
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • YouTube

Quicklinks

  • Help/FAQ
  • Title List
  • MARC Records
  • KBART Records
  • Usage Stats
© 2023, Regents of the University of Michigan · Accessibility · Preservation · Privacy · Terms of Service
Powered by Fulcrum logo · Log In
x This site requires cookies to function correctly.