In the abstract, the process of confirming executive branch nominees seems relatively straightforward. The White House chooses prospective officials; senators evaluate them on the merits; and those who earn majority support are confirmed. About a decade ago, filibusters on such nominees were eliminated, making the process even simpler.
But this is the U.S. Senate we’re talking about, which means there’s a catch: “Holds” still exist, and members are only too pleased to occasionally abuse the informal power.
Republican Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama, for example, has imposed a blockade against U.S. military promotions, as part of a tantrum over abortion policy. Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia is standing in the way of EPA nominees, because he’s upset about how a bill he helped write is being implemented.
And as NBC News reported, the list is growing.
Sen. JD Vance announced Tuesday that he will be putting a procedural hold on Department of Justice nominees in response to the prosecution of former President Donald Trump for allegedly mishandling national defense information.
The Ohio Republican, just six months into his career in public office, has said he’ll make exceptions for U.S. Marshal Service nominees, which he’ll graciously allow his colleagues to consider. How generous of him. (The holds will apply, however, to federal prosecutors.)
“I’ve announced today that I will be holding all Department of Justice nominees that Merrick Garland will use, if confirmed, not to enforce the law impartially, which is his duty, but clearly to harass his political opponents,” Vance said in a video posted to Twitter. “I think that we have to grind this department to a halt until Merrick Garland promises to do his job and stop going after his political opponents.”
The rookie senator added that he feels justified imposing these holds because, as Vance sees it, the attorney general “wants to use [federal law enforcement] officials to harass Joe Biden’s political opponents.”
It’s worth noting that in the Senate, over the course of many years, it’s not unusual for members to impose holds in pursuit of specific goals. If a senator is frustrated that the Department of the Commerce, for example, hasn’t provided him or her with a sought-after report, a member might temporarily delay departmental nominees until the document is sent to Capitol Hill.
The practice, in other words, tends to be goal-oriented.
Vance, on the other hand, appears to be engaged in a partisan tantrum with no real purpose. The Ohioan wants the attorney general to “promise to do his job and stop going after his political opponents,” but Garland is already doing his job, and he isn’t going after anyone’s political opponents. Whether Vance realizes this or not, governing-by-myth is a recipe for failure. To be sure, I’m not in a position to say with any confidence whether the Republican actually believes the myth, or whether he’s exploiting it for partisan political purposes. If/when Vance’s political operation uses this as the basis for his next fundraising appeal, we’ll probably be able to better answer the question. In the meantime, such tactics don’t benefit the public. In terms of procedure, a single senator cannot permanently derail an entire group of nominees, but Vance can dramatically slow down the process of putting would-be DOJ officials in their positions. In the process, he can also help generate a conversation about whether Senate leaders should take this opportunity to reassess whether such holds should continue to exist in the face of routine abuses.
Steve Benen is a producer for "The Rachel Maddow Show," the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He's also the bestselling author of "Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans' War on the Recent Past."
Latest Post
Recommended
