I would apologize for the lack of judicial nominations on the Executive Calendar but for the fact that is has been the refusal of Republicans to cooperate this year in reporting out nominations that has lead to the current circumstance. The fact is that we concluded last session by confirming each and every judicial nomination that was reported out of the Judiciary Committee. None were carried over into this new year. And despite my efforts in February, when the Judiciary Committee held two hearings for seven judicial nominees, including a circuit nominee, Republican members of the Judiciary Committee effectively boycotted our business meetings in February and obstructed our ability to report judicial nominations and high-ranking Justice Department nominations. I adjourned both our February 14 and February 28 meetings for lack of a quorum. At the first meeting only one Republican Senator was present. At the latter, the ranking member chose to leave. Despite the partisan posturing by the President and Senate Republicans, I have continued to move forward and sought to make progress but, I must admit, my patience is wearing thin.
Editor's note · Context
Addressing the lack of judicial nominations and Republican obstruction in the Judiciary Committee.
Share
More from Patrick Leahy
I have been a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee for 48 years, since I was elected in 1974. I have helped to write nine farm bills, and I have overseen the creation of programs that have helped farmers, food systems, and consumers…
throughout my 48 years in the Senate, I worked to uphold the American tradition of a humane immigration policy and fought to advance comprehensive immigration reform. As an advocate for refugees and asylum seekers fleeing violence and…
a continuing resolution to March 10 is short-sighted and wholly unnecessary. It imperils our national security, and it ignores the real pain and consequences of inflation. Without funding from a full-year omnibus appropriations bill, the…
I can say with absolute certainty that the proposed rules directly conflict with the legislation on a variety of matters, especially on provisions that limit access to the PTAB.





