The number of federal judicial vacancies has grown so large that Republican-nominated judges have taken to begging Congress to confirm more judicial nominees. The situation is so dire that even conservative Chief Justice John Roberts chastised the Senate for not moving forward on judicial nominations.
As Jamelle Bouie writes, this isn't just a matter of Republican obstruction -- it's also a result of the White House not putting forth enough nominees. Still, Sens. Mark Udall, Jeff Merkely, and Tom Harkin's filibuster reform package may offer an opportunity to break the gridlock on judicial nominations.
The proposal would eliminate secret holds, would make it easier to bring nominations to the floor for a vote. "This would give the press and the public some ammunition to push back against that hold if they don’t agree with the decision," explains Mimi Marziani with the Brennan Center's Democracy Program. Senators would still be allowed to filibuster the cloture vote, but following a failure to get 60 votes, senators would actually have to remain on the floor.
The key question is whether once a Senator leaves and is not followed by another filibustering Senator, whether cloture would automatically be invoked and grant nominees an up-or-down vote. It's not clear to me that happens under the current proposal. If that's the case it would allow significant progress in an area liberals haven't taken as seriously as they should. If another cloture vote needs to be taken with a 60-vote threshold, I'm not sure all that much has changed.
(chart via Jamelle Bouie.)
UPDATE: Brian Beutler helpfully pointed me to the text of the rule resolution rather than the one pager, which makes it clear that if "the period of continuous debate shall have ended and cloture shall be considered invoked." That's a huge deal.
