特朗普总统和司法提名的政治

IF 0.7 4区社会学 Q3 Social Sciences

Justice System Journal Pub Date : 2022-10-02 DOI:10.1080/0098261X.2022.2124897

J. M. King, Peter McAndrews, Ian Ostrander

{"title":"特朗普总统和司法提名的政治","authors":"J. M. King, Peter McAndrews, Ian Ostrander","doi":"10.1080/0098261X.2022.2124897","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract President Trump brought judicial appointments to the pinnacle of political salience while campaigning and in office. He was also the first president to inherit Senate rules making it easier to confirm judicial appointments while past partisan obstruction provided his administration with a backlog of vacancies. How then, did President Trump’s ability to gain Senate confirmation for judicial nominees compare to recent presidents? We find that he was indeed able to fill an historic number of vacancies. However, the administration was not universally successful as key nominations had to be prioritized at the expense of others. Our findings assess Trump’s legacy on judicial appointments and demonstrate the practical tradeoffs newly emerging in appointment politics.","PeriodicalId":45509,"journal":{"name":"Justice System Journal","volume":"8 1","pages":"524 - 543"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"President Trump and the Politics of Judicial Nominations\",\"authors\":\"J. M. King, Peter McAndrews, Ian Ostrander\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0098261X.2022.2124897\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract President Trump brought judicial appointments to the pinnacle of political salience while campaigning and in office. He was also the first president to inherit Senate rules making it easier to confirm judicial appointments while past partisan obstruction provided his administration with a backlog of vacancies. How then, did President Trump’s ability to gain Senate confirmation for judicial nominees compare to recent presidents? We find that he was indeed able to fill an historic number of vacancies. However, the administration was not universally successful as key nominations had to be prioritized at the expense of others. Our findings assess Trump’s legacy on judicial appointments and demonstrate the practical tradeoffs newly emerging in appointment politics.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45509,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Justice System Journal\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"524 - 543\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Justice System Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0098261X.2022.2124897\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Justice System Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0098261X.2022.2124897","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

特朗普总统在竞选和执政期间将司法任命推向了政治巅峰。他也是第一位继承参议院规则的总统，该规则使确认司法任命更容易，而过去的党派阻挠使他的政府积压了大量空缺。那么，与最近几任总统相比，特朗普总统获得参议院批准司法提名的能力如何呢?我们发现，他确实能够填补历史性数量的空缺。然而，奥巴马政府并不都是成功的，因为关键的提名必须以牺牲其他提名为代价来优先考虑。我们的研究结果评估了特朗普对司法任命的影响，并展示了任命政治中新出现的实际权衡。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

President Trump and the Politics of Judicial Nominations

Abstract President Trump brought judicial appointments to the pinnacle of political salience while campaigning and in office. He was also the first president to inherit Senate rules making it easier to confirm judicial appointments while past partisan obstruction provided his administration with a backlog of vacancies. How then, did President Trump’s ability to gain Senate confirmation for judicial nominees compare to recent presidents? We find that he was indeed able to fill an historic number of vacancies. However, the administration was not universally successful as key nominations had to be prioritized at the expense of others. Our findings assess Trump’s legacy on judicial appointments and demonstrate the practical tradeoffs newly emerging in appointment politics.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Justice System Journal LAW-

CiteScore

0.90

自引率

14.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Justice System Journal is an interdisciplinary journal that publishes original research articles on all aspects of law, courts, court administration, judicial behavior, and the impact of all of these on public and social policy. Open as to methodological approaches, The Justice System Journal aims to use the latest in advanced social science research and analysis to bridge the gap between practicing and academic law, courts and politics communities. The Justice System Journal invites submission of original articles and research notes that are likely to be of interest to scholars and practitioners in the field of law, courts, and judicial administration, broadly defined. Articles may draw on a variety of research approaches in the social sciences. The journal does not publish articles devoted to extended analysis of legal doctrine such as a law review might publish, although short manuscripts analyzing cases or legal issues are welcome and will be considered for the Legal Notes section. The Justice System Journal was created in 1974 by the Institute for Court Management and is published under the auspices of the National Center for State Courts. The Justice System Journal features peer-reviewed research articles as well as reviews of important books in law and courts, and analytical research notes on some of the leading cases from state and federal courts. The journal periodically produces special issues that provide analysis of fundamental and timely issues on law and courts from both national and international perspectives.