Senate votes change in filibuster rules

The Senate invoked the “nuclear option” Nov. 21 and voted 52-48 to change Senate rules to provide that a simple majority of 51 votes, rather the current 60, will be required to invoke cloture to end filibusters of executive and judicial nominees, with the exception of nominees to the Supreme Court.

Normally, 67 votes are required to change the Senate rules, but the nuclear option allows the majority party to propose rule changes that may be approved by a simple majority vote. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), frustrated with the Senate’s inability to garner the 60 votes to end debate and bring several of President Obama’s nominations up for a vote, said of the change: “It is time to get the Senate working.”

Immediately after the rule change was adopted, cloture was invoked to cut off debate by a vote of 55-43 on a motion to reconsider the nomination of Patricia Millett to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Millett is one of three nominees for that circuit whose nominations have been stalled because of Republican filibusters this past month (see article, page 5). Her confirmation vote is scheduled for Dec. 9 after the Senate returns from its Thanksgiving recess.

President Obama offered his support for the Senate’s action in a statement from the White House.               

 “All too often we’ve seen a single senator or a handful of senators choose to abuse arcane procedural tactics to unilaterally block bipartisan compromises or to prevent well-qualified, patriotic Americans from filling critical positions of public service in our system of government,” he said, emphasizing that “neither party has been blameless for these tactics.”

Obama said the obstruction is even worse for judicial nominations than for the executive branch. He pointed out that his judicial nominees have waited nearly two and a half times longer to receive yes or no votes on the Senate floor than those of his predecessor. Those who do get a vote are confirmed with little if any dissent, he said.

 “So this isn’t obstruction on substance, on qualifications. It’s just to gum up the works,” he said. “And this gridlock has not served the cause of justice. In fact, it’s undermined it,” he concluded.

 

Back to the November 2013 Washington Letter

Advertisement

ABA Washington Letter

The ABA Washington Letter is a monthly publication produced by the Governmental Affairs Office to report and analyze congressional and executive branch action on legislative issues of interest to the ABA and the legal profession. The newsletter highlights ABA involvement in the federal legislative process and focuses on the association's legislative and governmental priorities and other issues on which the ABA has policy.

ABA Washington Letter Archive

Contact: Rhonda J. McMillion Editor, 202-662-1017

 

ABA Washington Summary 

The ABA Washington Summary is a daily online publication providing up-to-date information on congressional and executive branch activity with regard to legislative issues of interest to the organized bar. Sources include the Congressional Record and Federal Register. The contents of this publication do not necessarily represent the positions of the American Bar Association.

Current ABA Washington Summary

ABA Washington Summary Archive

Contact: Deanna Falcone Editor, 202-662-1016