Humanities desk
< October 7	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 9 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 8

US Senate traditions regarding SCOTUS confirmation

Mitch McConnell recently claimed that the tradition in the Senate since 1880 has been that a SCOTUS vacancy is not filled by a president in an election year, if the Senate is controlled by the opposing party [1]. This was in regard to the Republican controlled senate's refusal to consider confirmation of Merrick Garland in 2016, but leaves open the possibility for a Republican controlled senate to confirm SCOTUS nominees in 2020 before the POTUS election that year. Is his contention that this is the tradition of the senate accurate? I certainly don't remember anyone alleging that Obama was violating norms of the process by nominating Garland in 2016. Most of the commentary seemed to be around McConnell violating the norms of the process by failing to consider confirmation. Handschuh-^{talk to me} 06:51, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here is an article listing six justices confirmed in presidential election years since 1912 and the presidents who nominated them. It should be easy enough to search for which party controlled the Senate during those years.--William Thweatt ^Talk^Contribs 07:02, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The examples listed there are Mahlon Pitney#Judicial career by William Howard Taft in 1912. According to the Party divisions of United States Congresses#Party divisions by Congress and 62nd United States Congress, the Senate had a Republican majority and William Taft was a Republic. John Hessin Clarke#Associate Justice and Louis Brandeis#Nominated to the Supreme Court by Woodrow Wilson both in 1916. The 64th United States Congress Senate had a Democractic majority and Woodrow Wilson was a Democrat. (Our article on the justice claims it was the first time the judiciary committee held hearings on a nominee.) Benjamin N. Cardozo#United States Supreme Court by Herbert Hoover in 1932. Herbert Hoover was a Republican and the Republican controlled the senate 72nd United States Congress although it seems to have been complex at times. (Republicans had 48 to 47 Democratic senators, with one Farmer-Labor.) Frank Murphy#1940–49: Supreme Court by Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1940. Franklin D. Roosevelt was from the Democractic party and the senate was controlled by the Democractic party 76th United States Congress. I did not look into Anthony Kennedy as he was nominated before the election year but it does appear it may not have happened. An interesting question is how much, if at all, this was tested. The source at the top mentions a few examples where nominations happened and the controversy surrounding them. But it's not clear if these were the only cases or there were other cases where a vacancy arose in an election year but wasn't fulfilled because the nomination was held pending the presidential election. (I.E. Regardless of whether it's true that the Senate has never consider the nomination of a Supreme Court justice with the surname beginning with G by a president with their surname beginning with O, it's probably a bit of a stretch to call it a tradition.) Nil Einne (talk) 08:32, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Last-minute stays of execution

There have been cases in U.S. history as late as this year when the stay of execution was issued and delivered dangerously close to the X hour or even too late.

So, were there any sucessful or unsuccessful attempts in modern U.S. history to introduce a protocol ensuring timely delivery of death penalty stays (including electronic delivery) that are notable enough to supplement the Stay of execution or Execution warrant article? --Синкретик (talk) 20:01, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On the other side, there's Sharon Keller, who ensured that someone would be executed through her picayune interpretations of bureaucratic technicalities, and notoriously (among those who pay attention to Texas politics) refused to ever apologize or say she would have done anything differently... AnonMoos (talk) 07:46, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]