Abstract
Judges are, without question, vital to our justice system. They interpret, adapt, and apply the law. They resolve disputes for the parties to the case at issue and provide guidance to others in analogous situations. They are the gears that keep the wheels of justice moving. Unfortunately, in the case of our federal courts, many of these gears are missing. Eighty-three of our 874 federal judgeships are vacant, including thirty-four that have been declared “judicial emergencies.” Our Constitution vests the President with the power to nominate federal judges and the Senate with the power to confirm or reject them, and Senate rules give the Judiciary Committee the power to hold hearings on each judicial nominee. Additionally, every individual senator has the ability to extend debate indefinitely (also known as the filibuster). As anybody who follows politics knows, this can lead to contentious debates and lengthy confirmation processes that keep getting lengthier.
Recommended Citation
Jeremy Garson,
Comment,
Fill the Bench and Empty the Docket: Filibuster Reform for District Court Nominations,
46
U. Mich. J. L. Reform Caveat
91
(2012).
Available at:
https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjlr_caveat/vol46/iss1/18
Citation Note
This Comment was originally cited as Volume 2 of the University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Online. Volumes 1, 2, and 3 of MJLR Online have been renumbered 45, 46, and 47 respectively. These updated Volume numbers correspond to their companion print Volumes. Additionally, the University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Online was renamed Caveat in 2015.