On the recordDecember 13, 2014
I rise to correct the Record on the claim that we typically confirm judges during a lameduck session. However, we do confirm judges during a lameduck if those judges were reported to the floor before the election. What we typically don't do is report judges out of committee during a lameduck and then also confirm them that same year, and that is what the majority is attempting to do here, and, of course, I object. We need to follow precedent on these nominees. I will use 12 years as an example to illustrate what really happened. In 2002, 20 judges were confirmed during the lameduck, but 18 of those judges had been reported out of committee before the midterm election. Only two of those judges were reported during the lameduck, and that was because these two judges waited for more than a year for a hearing. In 2004, four judges were confirmed during the lameduck session, but none were reported out during that lameduck session. In 2006, one judge was confirmed, but again, that judge was not reported out of committee during the lameduck session. In 2008, there were no confirmations in the lameduck session. In 2010, again, no judges were confirmed, but that year 15 judges were reported out of committee during the lameduck and every one of those 15 judges was returned to the White House. Finally, in 2012, no judges were confirmed. That year, again, five judges were reported out of committee during the lameduck, but all five were returned to the White House.…
