Reexamining the Impact of the Bork Nomination to the Supreme Court

Datos Bibliográficos

ID6340901
AutoresAyo Ogundele (University of North Texas), Linda Camp Keith (University of North Texas, Denton)
Año1999
Volumen52
Número2
Páginas403-420
Fecha de publicación1999-06-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaPolitical Research Quarterly (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1065-9129 • E-ISSN: 1938-274X
EditorialSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/106591299905200208
OpenAlexW2041151214
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas7
Referencias citadas14

This research note expands on the work of Guliuzza, Reagan, and Barrett (1994) by reexamining the impact of the Bork nomination on the confirmation criteria that the Senate Judiciary Committee applies to Supreme Court nominees. In a multivariate analysis we examine empirically whether the Bork nomination did, in fact, mark a change in the level of constitutional questions to which the nominees are subjected. Contrary to Guliuzza et al., we find that the Bork nomination did produce a substantively and statistically significant impact on the Committee's probe of the nominee's constitutional views. However, further study suggests that the extra focus on the judicial philosophies of Supreme Court nominees by the Judiciary Committee began earlier, with the first Rehnquist nomination, and that the Bork nomination simply continued this process. Additionally, we find that the level of constitutional questioning is significantly affected by the individual characteristics of the nominees (qualification and political closeness to the President) and one element of the political environment the President's fourth year in office

Closeness · Nomination · Political science · Politics · Supreme court · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems · Legal and Constitutional Studies