Abstract

I examine presidential use of public appeals on behalf of nominees to the U.S. courts of appeals from 1977 to 2005. Presidents Clinton and W. Bush have utilized this strategy far more regularly than did their predecessors. I find that presidents go public more often and more quickly on behalf of nominees facing a difficult confirmation climate, as well as on behalf of those who would diversify the bench. However, nominees who received more presidential support were not more likely to be confirmed by the Senate and appeared to be less likely to be confirmed. These findings indicate an important shift in presidential strategy concerning appointments to the courts of appeals in the newly politicized confirmation climate. These findings also provide evidence that presidents may be motivated by factors beyond confirmation success when determining how to expend public support on behalf of individuals nominated to these important courts.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.