John Sarbanes: “There is no way with a nominee having been sent to the Senate by the President, that an argument for not approving the…”

“There is no way with a nominee having been sent to the Senate by the President, that an argument for not approving the nominee based on not needing the judgeship can be made without it carrying with it an ad hominem argument against the nominee. If people are really serious about reducing vacancies on the courts, they need to scrub down the number of places before the nominees are submitted, by legislation. Once the nominees come here, you cannot divorce the attack on the individual from the attack on the need for the seat on the bench. We have the chief judge of the fourth circuit coming in against filling spots when nominees are pending. Now, how can that position be taken and considered separate from opposition to the nominee? They say, 'Well, I am not against this nominee, but I just do not think this spot ought to be filled.' Of course, that is small comfort to the nominee whose nomination is pending and has been put forward in order to fill the vacancy. Now, Judge Ervin, in his testimony, sets forth, I think, a very persuasive case why the fourth circuit needs to have those vacancies filled. I commend that statement to my colleagues.”