bushel of flip-flops on approving judicial nominees

Here’s a sampling of the back and forth. After reading through the various quotes, one cannot be surprised why Americans so often hate politics.

Republican president, Democratic-controlled Senate

“It is my view that if a Supreme Court Justice resigns tomorrow, or within the next several weeks, or resigns at the end of the summer, President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not — and not — name a nominee until after the November election is completed. The Senate, too, Mr. President, must consider how it would respond to a Supreme Court vacancy that would occur in the full throes of an election year. It is my view that if the President goes the way of Presidents Fillmore and Johnson and presses an election-year nomination, the Senate Judiciary Committee should seriously consider not scheduling confirmation hearings on the nomination until after the political campaign season is over. …Others may fret that this approach would leave the Court with only eight members for some time, but as I see it, Mr. President, the cost of such a result, the need to reargue three or four cases that will divide the Justices four to four are quite minor compared to the cost that a nominee, the President, the Senate, and the nation would have to pay for what would assuredly be a bitter fight, no matter how good a person is nominated by the President, if that nomination were to take place in the next several weeks.”
-Then-Sen. Joe Biden, statement on the floor of the Senate, June 25, 1992 (an election year)

“Senator Biden has argued that the nominee would become a victim of a power struggle over control of the Supreme Court. Also, Senator Biden fears that because there are issues of paramount importance facing the Court, a nominee at this time would be unwise. Now, Mr. President, unfortunately, we do not have the luxury of coordinating vacancies on the Supreme Court with times when there are mundane and nonjusticible matters before the Nation. The Senate should not shrink from its responsibility to act on a Supreme Court nominee simply because once confirmed as an Associate Justice there will be tough decisions to make. Article II of the Constitution sets out the powers of the President as head of the executive branch. Section 2 of this article grants the President power to nominate persons to fill judicial vacancies and further appoint them following the advice and consent of the Senate. As I read the Constitution, this is a two-step process. The President first nominates an individual to fill a vacancy and then the Senate approves before the official appointment.”
-Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.), floor statement in response to Biden, June 25, 1992 (Note that apparently Thurmond himself did not believe in the “Thurmond rule”)

“I would say there has been talk about invoking the so-called Thurmond Rule. The Thurmond Rule could sort of be, if you want it to be, an excuse for slow-walking nominees and not approving the nominees who ought to be approved just because there is a Presidential election on the horizon. Majority Leader Harry Reid mentioned last night that the so-called rule would be invoked in June. Senator [Patrick] Leahy has mentioned before he would invoke it in the second half of this year. Let me say this about the Thurmond Rule. It is a myth. It does not exist. There is no reason for stopping the confirmation of judicial nominees in the second half of a year in which there is a presidential election.”
-Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), floor statement, April 16, 2008 (election year)

“I am glad that we are going to be hearing testimony today about the so-called ‘Thurmond Rule’ and that the Congressional Research Service has looked into it. We really need to set the record straight on this, because the Democrats are using the ‘Thurmond Rule’ to justify grinding the judicial nomination confirmation process to a halt. Well, I have been on the Judiciary Committee for over 25 years, but I am sorry to say that claims by my fellow Democrats that this slowdown of judicial nominees is justified and that we are now past the time of the ‘Thurmond Rule’ are just bunk. The reality is that the Senate has never stopped confirming judicial nominees during the last few months of a President’s term.”
-Sen. Charles Grassley, remarks at a forum hosted by the Senate Republican Conference on “the importance of removing politics from the judicial nomination process,” July 14, 2008