Seeking Justices
The Judging of Supreme Court Nominees
Michael Comiskey
October 2004
256 pages, 6 x 9
Cloth ISBN 978-0-7006-1346-5, $40.00 (unjacketed)
Paper ISBN 978-0-7006-1347-2, $17.95
In
the long shadows cast by the Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas nominations,
Supreme Court confirmations remain highly contentious and controversial.
This is due in part to the Senates increasing reliance upon
a much lengthier, much more public, and occasionally raucous confirmation
processin an effort to curb the potential excesses of executive
power created by presidents seeking greater control over the Courts
ideological composition. Michael Comiskey offers the most comprehensive,
systematic, and optimistic analysis of that process to date.
Arguing that the process works well and therefore should not be
significantly altered, Comiskey convincingly counters those critics
who view highly contentious confirmation proceedings as the norm.
Senators have every right and a real obligation, he contends, to
scrutinize the nominees constitutional philosophies. He further
argues that the media coverage of the Senates deliberations
has worked to improve the level of such scrutiny and that recent
presidents have neither exerted excessive influence on the appointment
process nor created a politically extreme Court. He also examines
the ongoing concern over presidential efforts to pack the court,
concluding that stacking the ideological deck is unlikely.
As an exception to the rule, Comiskey analyzes in depth the Thomas
confirmation to explain why it was an aberration, offering the most
detailed account yet of Thomass pre-judicial professional
and political activities. He argues that the Senate Judiciary Committee
abdicated its responsibilities out of deference to Thomass
race.
Another of the books unique features is Comiskeys reassessment
of the reputations of twentieth-century Supreme Court justices.
Based on a survey of nearly 300 scholars in constitutional law and
politics, it shows that the modern confirmation process continues
to fill Court vacancies with jurists as capable as those of earlier
eras.
We have now seen the longest period without a turnover on the Court
since the early nineteenth century, making inevitable the appointment
of several new justices following the 2004 presidential election.
Thus, the timing of the publication of Seeking Justices could
not be more propitious.
A timely and important analysis that will interest all
concerned with how and why the confirmation process has been transformed
by federal judgeships becoming symbols and instruments of presidential
power and by the increasing polarization of American politics.--David
M. OBrien, author of Storm Center: The Supreme Court
in American Politics
The most thoroughgoing analysis of the confirmation process
in the post-Bork era. A stunning exposition of and refreshing
counterpoint to legalist and political
arguments.--Tinsley Yarbrough, author of The Rehnquist
Court and the Constitution
An important book on a vitally important subject.--Sheldon
Goldman, author of Picking Federal Judges
MICHAEL COMISKEY is associate professor of political science
at the Penn State Fayette Campus.
|