Electing Justice: Fixing the Supreme Court Nomination Process

It is hard to think of a more opportune time to read this new book on the strengths and weaknesses of the current Supreme Court nomination process. With the upcoming expected retirement of the Chief Justice, and the current foolishness occuring in the Senate over judicial filibusters, the solid and unemotional analysis offered by Professor Richard Davis is welcome to say the least. The author is very good in explaining how we have gotten into the current nomination mess: the role of the press in shaping nominee images; the incredible importance of interest groups and their energy in driving the process; the public expectation that nomination consideration will occur as much as possible in the open and not behind closed doors as in the past; and the role of nominations in reaffirming pertinent constitutencies for the groups, parties, and the pertinent president. In short, the process is no longer one conducted by the Senate in accordance with its own practices--instead each nomination (and the author does discuss particular examples such as Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter, and of course Robert Bork) has become a major public event and battleground as the various players maneuver for advantage. What we have lost as a result of this "take no prisoners" approach to nominations is all too evident. While the author does not unleash any startling new insights, the book stands as perhaps the best introduction for anyone interested in gaining an understanding of how the process currently functions. The final chapter is devoted to "Reforming the Process," and the author examines a number of thoughtful proposals for mitigating the current mess. Alas, given the current political malaise floating over Washington, one can only reply: "dream on, Professor."