Advice and Consent: Exploring the Role of Nominee Qualifications in the U.S. Senate Confirmation Process for Circuit Courts of Appeals Judges Between the 107th and 117th Congresses

My research question is: why are certain successful U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals nominations confirmed more favorably by the U.S. Senate than other successful nominations? I am interested in explaining the outcome of the U.S. Senate judicial confirmation process, which varies across nominees to the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals. I expect that the variation in confirmation outcomes results from perceived nominee qualifications, senators’ ideology, party control of the U.S. Senate and presidency, and the presence – or lack thereof – of a filibuster requirement, especially qualifications, which also vary across nominees. I expect to observe this relationship because a nominee’s qualifications are utilized by senators to evaluate that individual’s fitness for the bench. Therefore, those qualifications have the ability to influence a senator as to whether or not he or she will vote in support of a nominee. This creates the potential for a pattern of senators’ strong or weak support for a range of nominees based on those nominees’ qualifications.