Watson Coleman: “this morning the distinguished Senator from New York made some statements about the Senate's constitutional advice and…”

“this morning the distinguished Senator from New York made some statements about the Senate's constitutional advice and consent responsibility. I would like now to respond to those statements because some of her views of the Senate's appropriate role in judicial nominations are different from mine. I speak as a former solicitor general of the State of Minnesota. I had an opportunity to argue on many occasions before the highest courts in my State. I have a great love and appreciation for our Constitution and its history. In its enumeration of the President's powers, the Constitution has provided a role for the Senate in the appointment of various Federal officials, including Federal judges. The relevant text, which is set forth in article II, section 2, of the Constitution, reads: The President . . . shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint . . . Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law[.] As one scholar has noted: a reasonable reading of the text suggests that because the Senate's role in the appointments process is outlined in Article II enumeration of presidential powers, rather than described in the Article I enumeration of congressional powers, the Senate plays a more limited role in the appointment of judges.”