On the recordApril 4, 2017
After a brief time in the majority, Senate Democrats were back in the minority in 2003--so approximately 2 years after they had this strategy. It was at that time the Senate Democrats began an unprecedented and systemic filibuster of President George W. Bush's circuit court nominees. Then the tables turned. President Obama was elected, and Republicans held the Senate minority. At that time, even though many of us did not like the idea of using the filibuster on judicial nominees, we also recognized that we could not have two sets of rules--one for Republican Presidents and one for Democratic Presidents. Our party defeated two nominees for the lower courts by filibuster and denied cloture to three of President Obama's nominees to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. But the other side did not appreciate being subject to the rules that they first established and started using in 2003 to filibuster judges. So at that point, in 2013, they decided to change the rules of the Senate. By the way, they changed the rules by breaking the rules. I say that because the rules of the Senate say it takes a two-thirds vote to change the rules of the Senate, but they changed it by a majority vote. Now at that time, as we all know, Majority Leader Reid changed the rules for all Cabinet nominations and lower court nominees. To say that my colleagues and I were disappointed is a gross understatement. The majority claimed that they left intact the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees.…





