Trump published his list of possible Supreme Court nominees during the campaign. There didn’t seem to be any Republican objections then and I doubt there will be if he sticks to that list.
What’s more, even if Democrats could tie up a nominee through filibusters, the Republican-controlled Senate and Trump could simply agree to adjourn the Eenate for sufficient time for the President to make recess appointments.
I’m of the opinion that filibusters on Supreme Court nominees won’t be sustained, though, except in extraordinary cases. Like if Sheriff Joe Arpaio were to be proposed for the next open seat.
What if it is a dispute between states? The Supreme Court is the original court, so there is no lower court to use, iirc
Brian
Recess appointments still have to be confirmed by the Senate when it goes back into session. They have to be finalized by the end of that Congress.
It’s use has been pretty rare since it was first threatened in 1917 to get rules changes, although they didn’t call it the nuclear option then.
Changing the overall rules for short term benefit on a single issue is perilous. If nothing else the ease of Senate confirmations for Trump’s appointments is a reminder to the 52 Republican Senators how quickly things can change. I’d be surprised if Republicans could muster a majority to nuke the rules with that example of “fallout” right in their faces.
Such an appointment serves until the end of the next session of Congress, if memory serves. That means a recess appointment could serve for up to two years.
While this obviously is not a permanent appointment, it not only allows any President to appoint justices that would impact how the Supreme Court decides cases during the limited time of the appointment, but also avoid any problem of the Court lacking a quorum.
I posited a Senate that strongly agrees on the nominees – in opposition. That same Senate might also strongly agree that the work of the court should continue with their existing slate. Hence, the Congress could change the quorum requirement.
The Senate can hold pro forma sessions so it never goes into a long enough recess for the president to make a recess appointment. See NLRB v. Noel Canning: NLRB v. NOEL CANNING | Supreme Court | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
But as I said in my first post, the Republican Senate and President Trump could agree on a congressional recess in order to allow for a recess appointment to subvert Democratic obstruction on a nomination.
Keeping the Senate in pro forma recesses is a tactic that is generally employed when the Senate is in different party hands than the White House.
I believe you are likely right given today’s president and the makeup of today’s Senate. I was answering more hypothetically what would happen if the Senate and the president seemed to disagree on nominees to the court. I don’t actually think anything like that will happen today. I expect that our current president will have no trouble getting his nominees confirmed by the Senate which obviates the OP’s question entirely. I tried to answer factually under scenarios where plausibly the court could be hollowed out.