Following the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia on February 13th, 2016, the Republican controlled Senate and leading Republican presidential candidates stated that a Supreme Court vacancy that occurs during a lame duck presidency should be left vacant until the newly elected President can make a nomination. However, the Democratic Senators at the time argued that no Supreme Court nominee sent to the Judiciary Committee by a sitting President in the last 100 years had been denied a hearing. Senate Republicans argued that Democrats were on record in the past as having supported the idea of not holding hearings on potential candidates nominated by President George Bush in the last year of his term in 1992, though President Bush was running for reelection at the time.

Is a refusal to conduct confirmation hearings during a lame duck presidency a violation of the Senate’s Constitutional Responsibility to Provide “Advice and Consent?” Should a Lame Duck President be allowed to make a lifetime appointment in the final months of his administration?

Objectives and Outcomes

• Students will be able to identify the major constitutional obligations of the President and the Senate concerning judicial nomination and “Advice and Consent” powers.
  
  
• Students will be able to summarize arguments for and against the Senate’s responsibility to provide confirmation hearings during a lame duck presidency.