Speed of Presidential and Senate Actions on Supreme Court Nominations, 1900-2006

^Pr^ep^ar^{ed f}^o^r^M^e^m^b^ers^an^d^Com^mⁱ^t^t^ees^of^C^ong^r^e^ss

The speed with which appointments to the Supreme Court move through various stages in the
nomination-and-confirmation process is often of great interest not only to all parties directly
involved, but, as well, to the nation as a whole. Shortly after his October 31, 2005, nomination of
Samuel A. Alito Jr. to fill the Associate Justice seat being vacated by Sandra Day O’Connor,
President Bush called on the Senate to “act promptly on this important nomination so that an up
or down vote is held before the end of this year.” On November 3, 2005, Judiciary Committee
Chairman Arlen Specter and Ranking Member Patrick Leahy announced that hearings on the
Alito nomination would begin on January 9, 2006, with final Senate action scheduled for January
20, 2006. Judiciary Committee hearings on the Alito nomination began and concluded as
scheduled. Although the schedule announced in November 2005 called for a committee vote on
the nomination on January 17, the committee vote was postponed until January 24, 2006. The full
Senate confirmed Judge Alito by a vote of 58-42 on January 31, 2006, making him the nation’s ^th

110 Supreme Court Justice.

This report provides information on the amount of time taken to act on all Supreme Court
nominations occurring between 1900 and the present. It focuses on the actual amounts of time
that Presidents and the Senate have taken to act (as opposed to the elapsed time between official
points in the process). For example, rather than starting the nomination clock with the official
notification of the President of a forthcoming vacancy (e.g., via receipt of a formal retirement
letter), this report focuses on when the President first learned of a Justice’s intention to leave the
Court (e.g., via a private conversation with the outgoing Justice), or received word that a sitting
Justice had died. Likewise, rather than starting the confirmation clock with the transmission of the
official nomination to the Senate, this report focuses on when the Senate became aware of the
President’s selection (e.g., via a public announcement by the President).
The data indicate that the entire nomination-and-confirmation process (from when the President
first learned of a vacancy to final Senate action) has generally taken almost twice as long for
nominees after 1980 than for nominees in the previous 80 years. From 1900 to 1980, the entire
process took a median of 59 days; from 1981 through 2006, the process took a median of 113
days. Although Presidents after 1980 have moved more quickly than their predecessors in
announcing nominees after learning of vacancies (a median of 12 days compared with 34 days
before 1980), the Senate portion of the process (i.e., from the nomination announcement to final
Senate action) now appears to take much longer than before (a median of 84 days from 1981
through 2006, compared with 17 days from 1900 through 1980). Most notably, the amount of
time between the nomination announcement and first Judiciary Committee hearing has more than
tripled—from a median of 12.5 days (1900-1980) to 52 days.
This report will be updated as additional historical information becomes available or another
Supreme Court vacancy is announced.

Introduc tion ..................................................................................................................................... 1
Recent Nominations........................................................................................................................1
The Roberts Nomination...........................................................................................................2
The Miers Nomination..............................................................................................................3
The Alito Nomination...............................................................................................................4
Measuring the Pace of Supreme Court Appointments.....................................................................4
Official and Unofficial Timetables............................................................................................5
Objectives of This Report.........................................................................................................6
How Supreme Court Vacancies Occur............................................................................................7
Death of a Sitting Justice...........................................................................................................7
Retirement or Resignation of a Sitting Justice..........................................................................7
Nomination of a Sitting Justice to Another Position.................................................................8
Controversial, Withdrawn, and Rejected Nominations.............................................................9
Data Presentation.............................................................................................................................9
Date of Actual or Prospective Vacancy...................................................................................10
Announcement-of-Nominee Date............................................................................................11
Use of Medians to Summarize Intervals............................................................................11
The Duration of the Nomination-and-Confirmation Process..................................................12
Changes Since 1981..........................................................................................................12
Factors Influencing the Speed of the Process..........................................................................14
How the Vacancy Occurs..................................................................................................14
The Senate’s Schedule......................................................................................................15
Committee Involvement and Institutional Customs..........................................................16
Controversial Nominations...............................................................................................18
Discussion and Conclusions....................................................................................................18
Figure 1. Speed in Days of Intervals Surrounding Supreme Court Nominations and
Confir ma tions ............................................................................................................................. 13
Table 1. Major Events in the Supreme Court Nomination-and-Confirmation Process,
1900-2006................................................................................................................................... 20
Table 2. Duration in Days Between Major Events in the Supreme Court Nomination-and-
Confirmation Process, 1900-2006..............................................................................................30
Table 3. Median Duration in Days Between Major Events in the Supreme Court
Nomination-and-Confirmation Process, 1900-2006..................................................................42

Author Contact Information..........................................................................................................44

The nomination and confirmation of a Chief Justice or an Associate Justice to the U.S. Supreme
Court is an infrequent event of major significance in American public life. To receive what may
be lifetime appointment to the Court, a candidate must first be nominated by the President and
then confirmed by the Senate. Midway in the appointment process, intensive hearings on a
Supreme Court nomination, often taking at least three or four days, are routinely held by the
Senate Judiciary Committee, which then can vote on whether to report the nomination to the
Senate with a favorable recommendation.
Nominating and confirming Supreme Court Justices is an interdependent process. Neither the
President nor the Senate acts alone. The decisions that each branch makes determine how quickly
nominations are made and considered, and whether the nomination is successful. This report
provides information on the pace of all Supreme Court nominations and confirmations since
1900, focusing on the actual amounts of time that Presidents and the Senate have taken to act (as
opposed to the elapsed time between official points in the process). Events during 2005 and early

2006 underscored concerns about the speed with which the President makes Supreme Court ¹

nominations and the Senate acts on those nominations.

Late 2005 and early 2006 marked a period of transition among Supreme Court Justices. Associate
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s July 2005 retirement announcement marked the first pending
Court vacancy since 1994. Within a few months, however, the Senate considered three
nominations. As is discussed below, Judge John G. Roberts was initially nominated to replace
O’Connor, but that nomination was withdrawn when Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist died in
early September. The Roberts nomination was withdrawn and re-submitted for the Chief Justice
vacancy. The Senate confirmed Roberts in September 2005. Then-White House Counsel Harriet
Miers was initially nominated to fill the again-pending O’Connor vacancy, but the Miers
nomination was eventually withdrawn. Judge Samuel Alito was confirmed to the O’Connor seat
in January 2006.
As is noted throughout this report, media accounts and other research suggest that when these and
other Court vacancies arise, the President, members of the Senate, and their staffs, can begin
work on nominations immediately, even if official nominations are days or weeks away.
Particularly when multiple vacancies occur in close succession or simultaneously, as they did in
2005, the President and the Senate might have different preferences about how quickly new
nominees should be considered. Until 1980, the President often took longer to announce a
nominee than the Senate did to take final action on nominees. By contrast, since 1981, Presidents
have been quicker to announce nominations than the Senate has been to confirm or reject those
nominations. The President and members of the Senate (especially the Judiciary Committee) each
proposed their own timetables regarding the Roberts, Miers, and Alito nominations. The
following discussion provides additional details.

¹^F^o^{r a}^dⁱ^scu^ssion^o^f^of^fic^ial^a^c^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^f^o^r^a^{ll Supr}^e^m^e^C^our^t^nom^ina^tions^sⁱ^nc^e¹⁷^89,^s^e^e^C^R^S^R^e^por^t^R^L³³²²^5,^Su^pr^e^m^e
^C^our^{t N}^o^mⁱⁿ^a^tio^ns^,¹⁷⁸⁹^-²⁰⁰⁶^:^Ac^tions^by^the^Seⁿ^a^te^{, t}^h^e^J^udicⁱ^a^r^y^C^o^m^m^itte^e^,^an^{d t}^h^e^Pr^e^s^ideⁿ^t^,^by^D^e^nis^Ste^v^eⁿ
^Ru^t^k^u^s^an^{d M}^a^u^r^een^Beard^e^n.

On July 1, 2005, Associate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor surprised many in official Washington,
and possibly President George W. Bush, with a one-paragraph letter announcing her retirement ²
from the Supreme Court, effective upon the confirmation of her successor. Her announcement
created the first vacancy on the Court in 11 years. The Court had just concluded its 2004-2005
term, and the opening session of the Court’s next term, on October 3, 2005, was three months
away. Finding a new Associate Justice took on added urgency, given the failing health of then-
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist. Departure of the Chief Justice as well as Justice O’Connor
could result in the need for two Court appointments, and create the possibility of at least one
vacancy on the Court when it reconvened in October—unless the new appointments were made
expeditiously.
Hours after Justice O’Connor announced her retirement, a senior aide to Senate Majority Leader
Bill Frist told reporters that, “Our goal is to have the court back at full strength by the first
Monday in October.” Senate Judiciary Committee staff were reportedly “poised to begin ³
reviewing background materials” on potential nominees. Nevertheless, appointment of a new
Justice in time for the Court’s opening session seemed like a challenging goal. In recent years, the
Senate Judiciary Committee, and the full Senate as well, had been embroiled in controversies
over some of the President’s nominations to the lower federal courts. Continued controversy
seemed likely surrounding any future nominations to the Supreme Court.
On July 19, 2005, 18 days after receiving Justice O’Connor’s retirement letter, President Bush
announced his selection of John G. Roberts, Jr., a federal appellate judge, to be the next Associate
Justice. Ten days later, on July 29, the President formally nominated Judge Roberts to the Court,
with the nomination document immediately transmitted to the Senate, where it was referred to the
Senate Judiciary Committee. Hearings on this nomination were scheduled to begin September 6,
but those hearings would never take place.
When Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist died on September 3, Judge Roberts became the first
Supreme Court nominee to be withdrawn by the President for one seat on the Court and re-
nominated for another. The Senate Judiciary Committee quickly cancelled its Associate Justice
hearings, and began Roberts’s Chief Justice hearings on September 12, 2005. After receiving a
favorable 13-5 vote by the Judiciary Committee on September 22, the nomination of Judge
Roberts to be Chief Justice was confirmed by the Senate on the morning of September 29, 2005,
by a 78-22 vote. Later that day, the confirmed nominee took both his constitutional and judicial ⁴
oaths of office at the White House.
Due to the speed with which Judge Roberts was nominated to be Chief Justice and considered by
the Senate Judiciary Committee and the full Senate, his appointment was completed in time for
the Court to be at full strength at the start of its 2005-2006 term. With the start of that term,

²^Justic^e^O’Con^{nor’s re}^tire^m^eⁿ^{t le}^tte^{r is a}^v^a^ila^bl^e^a^t^http^://w^ww^.^s^upre^m^e^c^ourtus.g^o^v^/^pu^blic^inf^o^/^p^re^ss/
^oc^on^nor⁰⁷⁰¹^05.^pdf^.
³^“S^en^at^{e G}^O^P^L^ead^{ers S}^{eek Qu}ⁱ^c^{k Act}ⁱ^oⁿ^on^No^mⁱⁿ^{ee t}^o^Repl^{ace Ju}^stⁱ^{ce O’Co}ⁿⁿ^o^r^,^”^Dai^l^y^R^e^po^rt^f^o^{r E}^xecu^tⁱ^ves^,
^J^u^ly^{5, 20}^05,^p.^A^-^33.
⁴^T^h^e^judicⁱ^a^l^oa^{th is}^re^quire^{d by}^the^J^udicⁱ^a^r^y^A^c^{t of}¹⁷⁸⁹^{, a}ⁿ^{d t}^h^e^c^ons^titu^tio^na^{l oa}^t^h^(w^hic^h^is^a^d^mⁱ^nis^t^e^r^e^d^to
^Me^m^b^e^r^s^o^f^C^ong^r^e^s^s^a^{nd a}^{ll e}^x^e^c^u^tiv^e^a^{nd j}^udicⁱ^a^l^of^fⁱ^ce^r^s⁾^is^r^e^quir^e^d^by^A^r^tic^le^VI^of^the^C^o^ns^tit^utioⁿ^of^the^Uⁿ^ite^d
^S^t^at^es.

Justice O’Connor remained on the Court, in keeping with the intention stated in her retirement
letter of stepping down only upon the confirmation of her successor. For his part, President Bush
had declined to name a replacement for John Roberts to succeed Sandra Day O’Connor prior to
the Senate vote on September 29 confirming Judge Roberts as Chief Justice.
On October 3, 2005, President Bush announced his nomination of White House Counsel Harriet
E. Miers to succeed Sandra Day O’Connor as Associate Justice on the Supreme Court. The
President said that the Senate had shown during the confirmation of Chief Justice Roberts that it
could act promptly, and called upon the Senate to “review [Miers’s] qualifications thoroughly and ⁵
fairly and to vote on her nomination promptly.” At a press conference the next day, the President
said that he expected the Senate “to hold an up-or-down vote on Harriet’s nomination by ⁶
Thanksgiving” (i.e., by November 24, 2005). Similarly, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist called
on his colleagues to move “expeditiously but carefully,” and encouraged a floor vote “by ⁷
Thanksgiving.” Several news reports suggested that confirmation hearings could begin as early
as November 7, 2005. Senator Arlen Specter, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, ⁸
reportedly told reporters that he hoped the committee would complete hearings by Thanksgiving,
but also reportedly emphasized that “thoroughness will be the objective,” as opposed to meeting a ⁹
particular timetable. He also reportedly said that the timing of hearings on the nomination would
in part be up to Miers, who would have to study “so that she would have the grasp of these very ¹⁰
complex decisions.”
On October 27, 2005, Miers delivered a letter to the President withdrawing her nomination as ¹¹
Associate Justice, and the President “reluctantly accepted” her withdrawal. Both Miers and the
President indicated that the action was precipitated by the Senate’s request for documents about
her service in the White House. However, others suggested that other factors may have been ¹²
involved. In his statement accepting the withdrawal, the President said that he expected to fill
the vacancy “in a timely manner.”

⁵^Se^e^htt^p^://w^w^w^.^w^hite^hous^e^.^g^o^v^/^ne^w^s^/^r^e^l^e^a^s^e^s^/²⁰⁰^5/^10/²⁰⁰⁵¹⁰^03.^htm^l^f^o^{r the}^P^r^e^sⁱ^d^eⁿ^t’s^nom^ina^{tion s}^t^a^t^e^m^eⁿ^{t a}^nd
^Mⁱ^{ers’s re}^m^a^rks.
⁶^Se^e^htt^p^://w^w^w^.^w^hite^hous^e^.^g^o^v^/^ne^w^s^/^r^e^l^e^a^s^e^s^/²⁰⁰^5/^10/²⁰⁰⁵¹⁰⁰⁴^-1.htm^{l f}^o^{r the}^te^x^t^of^this^pre^s^s^c^onf^e^r^eⁿ^c^e^.
⁷^{See h}^t^t^p^://f^rist.sen^ate.g^o^v^/in^d^e^x^.^cf^m?Fu^seActioⁿ⁼^Sp^eech^es.Deta^il&Sp^eech^_ⁱ^d⁼²⁹³^f^o^{r a co}^p^y^o^f^Sen^a^to^{r Fr}^ist’s
^st^at^e^m^en^t^.
⁸^Ki^m^b^erl^y^He^ff^lⁱⁿ^g,^“S^p^ect^{er Dec}^rⁱ^e^{s Bu}^sh^‘^P^u^m^m^e^lⁱⁿ^{g’ o}ⁿ^Mⁱ^ers,^”^Wa^shⁱⁿ^gt^on^Po^st^,^Oct^.¹¹^,²⁰⁰⁵
^http:^//w^w^w^.^w^a^s^hing^tonp^os^t.c^o^m^/^w^p^-^d^yⁿ^/c^onteⁿ^t/^a^r^tic^le^/20^05/^10/¹¹^/^A^R²⁰⁰⁵¹⁰¹¹⁰¹³¹^0.^htm^l^.
⁹^Jo^hn^S^t^ant^oⁿ^,^“L^ead^{ers S}^eekiⁿ^g^T^o^P^l^{ace M}ⁱ^{ers On Cou}^r^t^By^T^h^aⁿ^ksgi^viⁿ^g^,^”^C^ongr^e^s^s^D^aily^PM^{, O}^c^{t. 3,}²⁰⁰⁵^.
¹⁰^She^r^y^l^G^a^y^Stolbe^r^g^{, “}^S^om^e^Lⁱ^b^e^r^a^ls^a^{nd C}^o^ns^e^r^v^a^tiv^e^s^{Find T}^h^e^m^s^e^lv^es^{in A}^w^kw^a^r^{d Spots}^,^”^Ne^w^Yor^k^Tim^e^s^{, O}^c^t.
⁴^,²⁰⁰⁵^,^p^.^A²^3.
¹¹^For^a^c^o^py^of^the^P^r^e^sⁱ^d^eⁿ^t’^s^s^t^a^t^em^eⁿ^{t, s}^e^e^http:/^/w^w^w^.^w^hite^hous^e^.^g^o^v^/^ne^w^s^/r^e^l^e^a^s^e^s^/²⁰⁰⁵^/^10/²⁰⁰⁵¹⁰²⁷^-²^.^h^tm^l.
¹²^F^o^{r exam}^p^l^e,^f^o^r^m^{er S}^eⁿ^a^t^o^{r Dan}ⁱ^el^R.^C^o^at^s,^w^h^o^sh^eph^e^rd^{ed M}ⁱ^{ers i}ⁿ^t^h^e^S^eⁿ^a^t^e^,^sai^d^“It^w^a^{s n}^o^t^al^l^ab^o^u^t^t^h^e
^d^o^c^u^m^en^t^s^.^It^w^a^{s a cu}^m^u^l^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^of^t^hⁱⁿ^gs.^”^S^{ee Kei}^t^h^P^e^riⁿ^e^and^S^e^t^h^S^t^erⁿ^,^“Bu^s^h^F^{aces Di}^l^e^mma^Wⁱ^t^h^New^Pⁱ^ck,^”
^{CQ To}^d^a^y^{, O}^c^t.^27,²⁰⁰⁵^{. Se}^e^htt^p^://w^w^w^.^c^q.c^o^m^/^dis^p^la^y^.^do?^doc^k^e^y⁼^/^c^qonl^ine^/^prod^/^d^a^t^a^/^doc^s^/^htm^l^/ne^w^s^/¹⁰^9/
^ne^w^s^109-⁰⁰⁰⁰⁰¹⁹³⁶⁰³²^.htm^l@^a^llne^w^s^&^m^e^ta^pub=^C^Q^-^N^EW^S&^s^e^a^r^c^h^I^nde^x⁼^0&^s^e^qN^um⁼¹^.

Four days after Harriet Miers’s withdrawal, on October 31, 2005, President George W. Bush
announced his nomination of Samuel A. Alito, Jr., a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Third Circuit, to replace Justice O’Connor. President Bush called on the Senate to “act promptly ¹³
on this important nomination so that an up or down vote is held before the end of this year.”
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist also predicted a relatively quick timetable for Senate ¹⁴
consideration, but other Senators, including Minority Leader Harry Reid, suggested that Senate ¹⁵
consideration of the nomination could last into the new year.
On November 3, 2005, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter and Ranking
Minority Member Patrick Leahy announced that confirmation hearings on Judge Alito’s
nomination would not begin until January 9, 2006, with a vote by the committee scheduled for
January 17, 2006, after five days of hearings. They said that the full Senate would vote on the ¹⁶
nomination on January 20, 2006. Judiciary Committee hearings on the Alito nomination began
and concluded as scheduled, although a targeted January 17 committee vote was postponed until
January 24, 2006. A final floor vote was anticipated before President George W. Bush’s January ¹⁷
31, 2006, State of the Union address. After Senators Specter and Leahy reportedly reached
agreement on the revised committee schedule over the January 14-16 weekend, Majority Leader
Bill Frist announced that “as soon as the Judiciary Committee reports the nomination, the full
Senate will begin debate on Judge Alito the next day and move swiftly to a fair up-or-down ¹⁸
vote.” Voting mainly along party lines (10-8), the Senate Judiciary Committee reported Alito’s
nomination to the full Senate on January 24, which confirmed Alito (58-42) on January 31, 2006.

For many Supreme Court appointments, the timing of individual events is determined by the
decisions of various key players—by sitting Justices planning to leave the Court; by the
President, who selects nominees to fill Court vacancies; and by Senate committee and party
leaders, who respectively schedule committee and floor action on Supreme Court nominations.
First, Justices who retire or resign from the Court must decide whether to provide the President

¹³^For^Pre^s^ideⁿ^{t G}^e^org^e^W^.^{Bush’s nom}^ina^tion^re^m^a^r^k^{s a}^{nd Judg}^e^A^l^{ito’s re}^spoⁿ^se^{, se}^e^htt^p^://w^ww^.^w^h^ite^ho^use^.^g^o^v^/
^ne^w^s^/^r^e^l^e^a^s^e^s^/²⁰⁰^5/^10/^pr^int^/²⁰⁰⁵¹⁰³^1.^htm^l^.
¹⁴^{For a}^c^o^py^of^Se^na^{tor Frist’s}^pre^{ss re}^le^a^s^e^,^se^e^http://f^rist.seⁿ^a^t^e^.^g^o^v^/
^inde^x^.^c^f^m^?^Fus^e^A^c^tion=^P^r^e^s^s^R^e^l^e^a^s^e^s^.D^e^t^a^il&^P^r^e^s^s^R^e^l^e^a^s^e^_id=²¹^44&^Mo^nt^h=^10&^Y^e^a^r⁼²⁰⁰^5.
¹⁵^Se^e^T^h^e^Assocⁱ^a^t^e^d^P^r^e^{ss, “}^R^e^a^c^tion^to^the^A^{lito Nom}ⁱ^na^tio^n,”^W^a^s^hⁱⁿ^gt^{on Pos}^t^,^O^c^{t. 3}¹^,²⁰^05,^a^v^a^ila^ble^a^t
^http:^//w^w^w^.ne^x^is^.c^o^m^/^r^e^s^e^a^r^c^h^/hom^e^?^k^e^y⁼¹¹³⁰⁷⁸⁶⁰⁹^5&^_s^e^s^sⁱ^on⁼⁹^e^e^f^720a^-⁴^a^42-¹¹^da^-⁹³^94-
⁰⁰⁰^08a^0c⁵⁹^3e^.1^.3³⁰⁸²³⁸⁸⁹^5.2⁹⁶¹⁸⁸^.%²⁰^.0.⁰^&^_^s^t^a^t^e⁼^&^w^c^hp=^dG^L^b^Vtb-
^z^S^k^B^l&^_^m^d5=^93f^06c^0f^e¹^c^37f^bd^5b4c^52f^e⁴⁵¹^9b^bb^b.
¹⁶^Se^e^“^S^eⁿ^a^t^e^Judicⁱ^a^r^y^W^{ill Be}^gⁱⁿ^A^{lito He}^a^r^ing^s^Ja^{n. 9,}^Vote^Ja^n.^17;^Flo^o^r^V^o^te^Se^{t Ja}^n.²⁰^{, “}^Dail^y^Re^{port f}^o^r
^E^xecu^tⁱ^ves^{, Nov}^.^4,²⁰^05,^a^v^a^ila^ble^a^t^htt^p^://i^pp^ubs.^bna^.c^om^/ip/^B^NA^/^D^ER.NSF/
⁹³¹^1b^d4^29c^19a⁷⁹⁴⁸⁵²⁵⁶^b⁵⁷⁰⁰⁵^a^c^e^13/81^9c^3d^1e^4c^a⁷³⁴^da⁸⁵²⁵⁷⁰^a^f⁰⁰¹⁰^aeaf^?^O^p^eⁿ^D^o^c^u^m^en^t^]^.^F^o^r^{a t}^r^an^scri^p^t^o^f
^Se^na^{tors S}^p^e^c^t^e^r^a^{nd L}^e^a^h^y^’^{s re}^m^a^rk^{s, se}^e^http://w^ww^.c^q.c^o^m^/^displa^y^.^do?^doc^id=¹⁹⁴⁸¹⁵⁷^.
¹⁷^Am^y^G^o^ldsteⁱ^{n, “}^S^eⁿ^a^t^e^P^a^ne^l’s^V^o^te^on^A^{lito De}^la^y^e^{d Until Ne}^x^t^W^e^e^k^,”^W^a^s^h^ingt^{on Pos}^t^,^J^a^n.¹⁷^{, 2}⁰⁰⁶^,^{p. A}³^.
¹⁸^F^o^{r a cop}^y^o^f^S^eⁿ^a^t^o^{r F}^rⁱ^s^t^’^{s Jan}^.¹⁶^,²⁰⁰⁶^,^p^r^{ess rel}^ease,^{see h}^t^t^p^:^/^/^f^ri^st^.^s^en^at^e.^go^v/
^inde^x^.^c^f^m^?^Fus^e^A^c^tion=^P^r^e^s^s^R^e^l^e^a^s^e^s^.D^e^t^a^il&^P^r^e^s^s^R^e^l^e^a^s^e^_id=²²^21&^Mo^nt^h=^1&^Y^e^a^r⁼²⁰⁰⁶^.

with advance notice of that decision. For example, Justice Harry A. Blackmun told President
William J. Clinton of his decision to retire in 1994, more than four months before the decision ¹⁹
became public on April 6 of that year. Justice O’Connor, on the other hand, did not appear to
have given President George W. Bush any advance notice when she resigned on July 1, 2005.
Also, the mode of presidential notification varies. While President Clinton learned of Justice
Blackmun’s plans to retire through an informal conversation, Justice O’Connor apparently
notified President Bush of her decision through a formal letter.
Once the President chooses a nominee, he alerts the Senate—by public announcement as well as
by formal transmission of a written nomination to the Senate. Frequently, the President will
announce and formally nominate his Supreme Court choice on the same day, or take both actions
within a few days of each other. Less commonly, Presidents announce their intention to nominate
a candidate, then make the official nomination a week or more later. The most extreme case of the
latter involved President Ronald Reagan in 1981. On July 7 of that year, President Reagan
announced he would send the nomination of Sandra Day O’Connor, then an Arizona state appeals
court judge, to the Senate “upon completion of all the necessary checks by the Federal Bureau of ²⁰
Investigation.” However, it was not until almost six weeks later, on August 19, that Judge ²¹
O’Connor was officially nominated. As noted above, after the Senate receives a Supreme Court
nomination, the Judiciary Committee normally holds hearings, followed by final committee
action, and consideration before the full chamber.
The measurement of how long the President and the Senate take to execute their official duties
surrounding Supreme Court nominations necessarily focuses on official dates of action taken. The
most important of these action dates include those on which (1) an outgoing Justice officially
informs the President of the intention to step down from the Court (or, alternatively, the date on
which a Court seat is vacated due to the death of a Justice), (2) a President formally nominates
someone to the Court, the Senate receives the President’s nomination, and the nomination is ²²
referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee (almost always all on the same date), (3) the Senate
Judiciary Committee holds hearings on the nomination, (4) the committee votes on the
nomination, and (5) the Senate votes on whether to confirm, or chooses to take no action.
In addition to these dates, however, the President and the Senate usually consider Supreme Court
nominations outside official timetables. Just as the President can begin considering a new
nominee as soon as he knows a vacancy will arise, the Senate can begin preparing to consider a
nominee as soon as the President announces his choice, even if the receipt of the formal
nomination is still days or weeks away. Fundamentally, nominations and confirmations to the
Supreme Court involve both formal and informal decisions. While formal decisions are easily

¹⁹^U^.^{S. N}^a^tio^na^{l A}^r^c^h^iv^e^s^a^{nd R}^e^c^o^r^d^s^A^d^mⁱ^nis^t^r^a^{tion, O}^f^fⁱ^ce^of^the^Fe^de^r^a^{l R}^e^gⁱ^s^t^e^r^,^Public^Pa^pe^{rs o}^f^the^Pre^s^ideⁿ^ts
^{of t}^h^e^Unite^d^St^ate^s^{: W}^{illiam J}^.^C^linto^n,¹⁹⁹³^,^v^o^l.^{1 (}^W^a^s^hing^to^n:^G^P^O^,¹⁹⁹⁴⁾^{, p}^.⁵⁹⁷^.
²⁰^U^.^{S. N}^a^tio^na^{l A}^r^c^h^iv^e^s^a^{nd R}^e^c^o^r^d^s^A^d^mⁱ^nis^t^r^a^{tion, O}^f^fⁱ^ce^of^the^Fe^de^r^a^{l R}^e^gⁱ^s^t^e^r^,^Public^Pa^pe^{rs o}^f^the^Pre^s^ideⁿ^ts
^{of t}^h^e^Uⁿ^ite^d^St^ate^s^:^Ro^na^{ld Re}^ag^an,¹⁹⁸¹⁽^W^a^s^hing^ton:^G^P^O^,¹⁹⁸²⁾^,^{p. 59}^6.
²¹^U^.^{S. C}^ong^re^s^s^,^Se^na^te^,^Jou^r^na^l^o^f^t^h^{e E}^xecu^tⁱ^{ve P}^r^o^ceedⁱⁿ^g^s^o^f^t^h^{e S}^e^na^t^e^o^f^t^h^{e U}ⁿⁱ^t^e^d^S^t^a^t^{es o}^f^A^m^eri^c^a^{, 97}^th
^C^ong^{., 1}^st^s^e^s^s^{., A}^u^g^.^19,¹⁹⁸¹⁽^W^a^s^hing^{ton: G}^P^O^,¹⁹⁸²⁾^{, p}^.⁶⁴⁴^.
²²^A^lthoug^{h t}^h^e^s^e^thr^e^e^e^v^eⁿ^ts^us^ua^lly^oc^c^u^r^{on t}^h^e^s^a^m^e^day^,^a^nom^ina^tio^{n s}^o^m^e^ti^m^e^s^,^{on r}^a^r^e^o^ccasi^oⁿ^s^,ⁱ^s^recei^ved
^by^the^Se^na^te^{on a}^da^y^a^f^te^{r it wa}^{s sig}ⁿ^e^d^by^the^P^r^e^s^ideⁿ^t,^or^{is re}^fe^rre^{d to t}^h^e^Ju^dicⁱ^a^r^y^Co^m^m^itte^e^{on a}^da^y^a^f^te^{r its}
^recei^p^t^b^y^t^h^{e S}^eⁿ^a^t^e^.

accessible in historical records, informal decisions—sparsely mentioned in the formal record, or
not mentioned at all—might, in many cases, provide better insight into how long the process truly
takes.
This report explores the speed of presidential and Senate decision-making surrounding
nominations to the Supreme Court from 1900 to the present. During this period, there were a total ²³
of 60 vacancies and 66 nominees to the Court. The analysis concentrates on the period 1900-

2006 for two primary reasons: (1) relevant historical data for this period are much more readily ²⁴

available and reliable than for earlier Court appointments, and (2) public confirmation hearings
for Supreme Court nominations before the Senate Judiciary Committee—an important phase in
the Supreme Court appointment process, and one of particular interest to this report—were ^th²⁵
unheard of before the 20 century.
Although research on Supreme Court nominations often focuses on either presidential or Senate
decision-making, this analysis considers the time both institutions take to make decisions about,
and act on, nominees. The report also takes a unique approach in discussing—as well as can be
determined—how long Presidents actually take to decide who their nominees will be, and how
long the Senate actually takes to act on nominations. For example, rather than starting the
nomination clock with the official notification of the President of a forthcoming vacancy (e.g., the
receipt of a formal retirement letter), this analysis focuses on when the President first learned of
the vacancy (e.g., a private conversation with the outgoing Justice). Likewise, rather than starting
the confirmation clock with the transmission the official nomination to the Senate, this analysis
focuses on when the Senate became aware of the President’s selection ( e.g., by a public
announcement by the President).
In many cases, establishing precisely when a President knew that he would have the opportunity
to make a Supreme Court nomination is impossible. Such information might never have been
recorded or known by anyone except the President and his inner circle. However, historical
research reveals several instances when a President had advance knowledge of an impending
vacancy, well before the public announcement of a Justice’s intention to leave the Court. Data
sources used to determine when Presidents first knew of vacancies included historical
newspapers, official documents such as public presidential papers (which contain Justices’ ²⁶
retirement letters to various Presidents), and CRS consultations with presidential libraries. Dates

²³^F^o^{r a}ⁿ^an^al^y^sⁱ^s^o^f^al^l^uⁿ^s^u^ccess^f^u^l^S^u^p^r^em^{e Co}^u^r^t^no^mⁱⁿ^ees,^see^CRS^Rep^o^r^t^RL³¹¹⁷¹^,^S^upr^e^m^e^C^our^t^N^o^mⁱⁿ^a^tio^ns
^N^o^t^C^oⁿ^fⁱ^r^med^,¹⁷⁸⁹^-^A^ug^u^s^t²⁰⁰⁶^{, b}^y^Hen^r^y^{B. Ho}^g^u^{e. In}^ad^d^itioⁿ^to^th^e^uⁿ^s^u^ccess^f^u^lⁿ^o^mⁱⁿ^atioⁿ^s^listedⁱⁿ^t^h^{at rep}^o^r^t
^f^o^{r t}^h^{e 1}⁹⁰⁰^-²⁰⁰⁶^p^e^ri^o^d^,^t^h^e^p^r^esen^t^rep^o^r^tⁱⁿ^cl^u^d^e^{s Jud}^g^{e Do}^u^g^l^a^{s H.}^Gⁱⁿ^s^b^u^r^{g as a an}^un^su^ccessf^u^l^“n^o^mⁱⁿ^{ee” si}ⁿ^ce
^oⁿ^e^p^a^rt^o^f^t^h^{e repo}^rt^{’s f}^o^cu^{s i}^s^on^p^r^esi^d^eⁿ^tⁱ^a^l^ann^o^uⁿ^cem^en^t^s^o^fⁿ^o^mⁱⁿ^ees.^P^r^esi^d^en^t^Reagan^an^nouⁿ^ced^hⁱ^sⁱⁿ^t^eⁿ^t^ioⁿ
^{to n}^o^mⁱ^na^te^J^udg^e^Gⁱ^ns^bur^gⁱⁿ¹⁹^87,^bu^{t G}ⁱ^ns^bur^g^w^ithdr^e^w^his^na^m^e^f^r^o^m^c^ons^ide^r^a^tion^be^f^o^r^e^be^ing^of^fⁱ^cⁱ^a^l^l^y
^nom^ina^t^e^d^{. T}^h^e^Gⁱ^nsburg^c^a^s^e^{is brie}^f^l^y^disc^usse^{d la}^te^{r in t}^h^{is re}^p^o^r^t.
²⁴^T^hⁱ^s^p^a^rtⁱ^c^u^l^arl^yⁱ^s^t^h^{e case f}^o^{r c}^o^{verage o}^f^S^u^p^r^em^{e Co}^u^r^{t a}^p^p^oⁱⁿ^tm^eⁿ^{ts in on-li}^ne^f^u^ll-^te^x^t^his^t^or^ic^a^l^ne^w^s^pa^pe^r^s^,
^w^h^e^r^e^c^ove^r^a^ge^{, a}^s^mⁱ^g^h^{t be}^e^x^pe^c^t^e^d^{, ty}^pic^a^l^l^y^is^f^{ound t}^o^be^le^s^s^c^o^m^p^r^e^he^ns^iv^e^r^e^g^a^r^d^ing^the^pr^oc^e^dur^e^s^of^th
^Supr^e^m^e^C^our^{t a}^p^poi^ntm^e^nts^f^a^r^t^he^r^ba^c^k^into^the¹⁹^cen^t^u^ry^.
²⁵^T^h^e^e^a^r^lie^s^t^Supr^e^m^e^C^our^{t c}^onf^ir^m^a^{tion he}^a^rⁱⁿ^g^s^he^{ld i}ⁿ^opeⁿ^s^e^s^sⁱ^{on w}^e^r^e^thos^eⁱⁿ¹⁹¹⁶^f^o^r^the^no^mⁱ^na^{tion of}
^L^ouis^D^.^B^r^a^nde^is^to^be^aⁿ^A^s^s^o^cⁱ^a^t^e^J^u^s^tic^e^.^Se^e^C^R^S^R^e^por^{t R}^L³¹⁹⁸^9,^Su^pr^e^m^e^C^our^t^Ap^poi^ntm^e^{nt Pr}^oc^e^s^s^:^Ro^le^s
^{of t}^h^e^Pr^e^s^ideⁿ^t,^J^udicⁱ^ar^y^C^o^m^m^itte^e^,^an^d^Se^nate^,^by^D^e^nis^Ste^v^eⁿ^R^u^tk^us^.
²⁶^C^R^S^Kⁿ^ow^le^dg^e^Se^r^v^ice^s^G^r^oup^Iⁿ^f^o^r^m^a^{tion R}^e^s^e^a^r^c^h^Spe^cⁱ^a^lis^{t D}^a^na^Ely^,^K^a^r^eⁿ^Aⁿ^s^{on (}^F^r^a^nk^liⁿ^D^.^R^o^os^e^v^e^lt
^Lⁱ^br^a^r^y⁾^{, Va}^lois^e^A^r^m^s^tr^ong⁽^E^is^e^nhow^e^r^Lⁱ^br^a^r^y⁾^{, J}^o^s^hua^C^o^c^h^r^a^{n (}^F^or^{d L}ⁱ^br^a^r^y⁾^{, J}^e^nnif^e^r^Ev^aⁿ^s⁽^N^ix^on^P^r^e^s^ideⁿ^tia^l
⁽^c^onti^nue^d.^..)

cited throughout this report and in Table 1, Table 2, and Table 3, at the end of the report, are
based on that research.

The need for a new appointment to the Court arises when a Justice position becomes vacant, due
to death, retirement, or resignation, or when a Justice announces his intention to retire or resign. If
the vacated seat is that of the Chief Justice, the President, if he chooses, may nominate a sitting
Associate Justice to be Chief, thus setting the stage for the creation of an Associate Justice
vacancy as well. Vacancies on the Court also will occur if Justices resign to receive new
government appointments or to seek new government positions. When a nomination fails in the
Senate, the President must select a new nominee (unless the President chooses to re-nominate his
first choice).
Supreme Court Justices receive what may be lifetime appointments, “good Behaviour” being the ²⁷
only constitutionally specified requirement for continued service. Lifetime tenure, interesting
work, and the prestige of the office result in Justices often choosing to serve as long as possible.
Historically, a number of Justices have died in office. Most recently, Chief Justice William H.
Rehnquist died on September 3, 2005, after battling thyroid cancer for almost a year. Death in ^th
office was common on the Court during the first half of the 20 century—14 of 34 vacancies
between 1900-1950. In fact, all five Court vacancies occurring between 1946 and 1954 were due
to death of a sitting Justice (see Table 1). Of the 23 vacancies since 1954, though, no Justice had
died while still on the Court until Chief Justice Rehnquist in 2005.
Since 1954, retirement has been by far the most common way in which Justices have left the
bench (19 of 23 vacancies occurring after 1954 resulted from retirements). Resignation (i.e., ²⁸
leaving the bench before becoming eligible for retirement compensation) is rare. In recent

^(...c^on^tin^ue^d)
^Ma^te^rⁱ^a^l^s⁾^{, Sha}^r^oⁿ^K^e^lly⁽^K^e^nne^dy^Lⁱ^br^a^r^y⁾^{, Ma}^tthe^w^Sc^ha^ef^e^r⁽^H^oov^e^r^Lⁱ^br^a^r^y⁾^{, R}^a^nd^y^Sow^e^{ll (}^T^r^u^m^a^{n L}ⁱ^br^a^r^y⁾^,
^Jenⁿⁱ^f^e^{r S}^t^ern^a^man^(Reagan^Lⁱ^b^r^ar^y⁾^,^Deb^o^r^ah^W^h^eel^{er (G}^eo^rg^{e Bu}^sh^Lⁱ^b^r^ary⁾^,^an^d^A^d^a^m^C.^Berg^fel^d^(Clⁱⁿ^t^oⁿ
^Lⁱ^br^a^r^y⁾^pr^ov^ide^d^c^o^ns^ulta^ti^ons^oⁿ^th^is^p^o^r^tioⁿ^of^the^pr^oje^c^t^.
²⁷^{U.S. C}^oⁿ^s^tit^u^tⁱ^oⁿ^,^A^r^{ticle III, Sectio}ⁿ¹^.
²⁸^U^nde^r^{28 U}^.^S.C^.^§3⁷¹^{, S}^upr^e^m^e^C^our^{t J}^u^s^tic^e^s^{, lik}^e^othe^r^A^r^tic^le^I^I^I⁽^t^e^nur^e^“^d^urⁱⁿ^g^g^ood^B^e^ha^vⁱ^ou^r^”⁾^f^e^de^r^a^l
^judg^e^s^{, m}^a^y^r^e^tire^{, an}^d^b^e^en^t^itle^d^to^receiv^e^retire^m^en^{t co}^m^p^en^satioⁿ^,ⁱⁿ^oⁿ^{e o}^f^tw^o^w^a^y^s^—eith^{er b}^y^ta^kⁱⁿ^g^“sen^io^r
^statu^s^{” o}^r^b^y^“retirin^g^f^r^o^m^o^f^fⁱ^ce^{.” Beg}ⁱⁿⁿⁱⁿ^g^{at ag}^{e 6}⁵^,^th^ey^{are e}ⁿ^titled^to^receiv^e^retire^m^en^{t co}^m^p^en^satioⁿ^,^if^h^a^vⁱⁿ^g
^serv^ed^a^mⁱⁿⁱ^m^u^m¹⁰^y^{ears as an}^A^r^{ticle III ju}^d^g^{e, th}^{eir ag}^e^an^d^o^v^{erall A}^r^{ticle III ju}^dⁱ^{cial ex}^p^e^rien^{ce to}^{tals 8}⁰^y^ears.
⁽^H^eⁿ^c^e^,^unde^r^this^“^R^ule^of⁸⁰^,”^a^J^u^s^tic^e^of^a^g^e^{65 m}^u^s^t^ha^v^e^s^e^r^v^e^d¹⁵^y^e^a^r^s^{to be}^c^o^m^e^e^lig^ible^f^o^r^r^e^tir^e^m^eⁿ^t
^co^m^p^en^satⁱ^oⁿ^;^{a Ju}^stⁱ^{ce o}^f^{age 6}⁶^,¹⁴^y^ear^s;^{a Ju}^stⁱ^{ce o}^f^{age 6}⁷^,¹³^years;^et^c.^{) Ju}^d^g^es^w^h^o^t^a^{ke sen}ⁱ^o^r^st^at^u^s^retⁱ^r^e
^f^r^o^m^regu^l^a^{r act}ⁱ^v^{e servi}^{ce b}^u^t^ret^aⁱⁿ^t^h^ei^r^j^u^dⁱ^ci^al^o^f^fⁱ^{ce an}^d^t^h^{e sal}^a^r^y^o^f^t^h^{e o}^f^fⁱ^ce,^su^b^j^ect^t^o^aⁿ^nual^certⁱ^fⁱ^c^atⁱ^oⁿ^o^f
^t^h^ei^{r h}^a^viⁿ^g^p^e^rf^o^r^m^e^d^cert^aⁱⁿ^j^u^dⁱ^ci^al^o^r^a^d^mⁱⁿⁱ^st^ratⁱ^v^{e d}^u^tⁱ^e^{s i}ⁿ^t^h^{e p}^r^ecedⁱⁿ^{g y}^ear.^Ju^d^g^es^w^h^o^retⁱ^r^{e f}^r^o^m^o^f^fⁱ^ce
^c^o^m^p^le^te^l^y^r^e^linquis^h^t^h^eⁱ^r^j^udicⁱ^a^l^of^fⁱ^ce^w^{ith the}^rⁱ^g^h^t^{to a}^f^r^oz^eⁿ^lif^e^tⁱ^m^e^a^nnuity^e^qua^{l to t}^h^e^s^a^la^r^y^o^f^the^of^fⁱ^ce^a^t
^the^tim^e^of^re^tire^m^eⁿ^{t. In c}^ontra^st^{, a}^Justic^e^’^s^resigⁿ^a^tion^eⁿ^ta^ils^v^o^l^unta^r^ily^r^e^linq^u^is^hi^ng^his^or^he^r^j^udicⁱ^a^l^of^fⁱ^ce
^w^{ithout m}^e^e^ting^the^a^g^e^a^{nd s}^e^r^v^ic^e^r^e^quir^e^m^e^nts^of^the^R^u^le^of⁸⁰⁽^a^{nd t}^hus^be^ing^ine^ligⁱ^b^le^to^r^ecei^{ve ret}ⁱ^r^e^m^en^t
^co^m^p^en^satⁱ^oⁿ⁾^.^S^{ee U.}^S^.^A^d^mⁱⁿⁱ^s^t^ratⁱ^v^{e Off}ⁱ^{ce o}^f^t^h^{e Un}ⁱ^t^e^d^S^t^at^es^Co^u^r^t^s^,^Seⁿⁱ^or^Stat^{us a}ⁿ^d^Re^tire^m^eⁿ^{t for Artic}^le^III
⁽^c^onti^nue^d.^..)

history, two Justices have resigned from the Court. Justice Arthur Goldberg resigned in 1965 to ²⁹
assume the post of U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. Justice Abe Fortas resigned in 1969
after protracted criticism over controversial consulting work while on the bench and a failed ³⁰
nomination to be elevated from Associate Justice to Chief Justice. When Justices retire or
resign, the President is usually notified by formal letter. As noted previously, there is evidence in
a few cases that a President informally learned of a forthcoming retirement in advance.
Pursuant to a law enacted in 1939, a Justice (or any other federal judge receiving lifetime
appointment) may also retire if “unable because of permanent disability to perform the duties of ³¹
his office,” by furnishing the President a certificate of disability. Prior to 1939, specific
legislation from Congress was required to provide retirement benefits to a Justice departing the
Court because of disability who otherwise would be ineligible for such benefits, due to
insufficient age and length of service. In such circumstances in 1910, for instance, Congress took
legislative action granting a pension to Justice William H. Moody. As the Washington Post
reported at the time, although illness had kept Justice Moody from the bench for “almost a year,” ³²
he was not yet eligible for retirement.
When a Chief Justice vacancy arises, the President may choose to nominate a sitting Associate
Justice for the Court’s top post. If the Chief Justice nominee is confirmed, he or she must, to
assume the new position, resign as Associate Justice, requiring a new nominee from the President
to fill the newly vacated Associate Justice seat. However, this scenario is relatively rare. During
the 1900-2006 period, Presidents attempted to elevate Associate Justices to Chief Justice four
times, with the Senate confirming three nominees. Most recently, in 1986, President Ronald ³³
Reagan nominated then-Associate Justice William H. Rehnquist to be Chief Justice.
Presidents may also nominate sitting Justices to other political posts, which (if accepted) require
resignation from the Court. Between 1900 and 2006, three Justices resigned to pursue other
formal public service. In 1916, Justice Charles Evans Hughes resigned to pursue the Republican ³⁴
nomination for President. Justice James F. Byrnes resigned on October 3, 1942, becoming

^(...c^on^tin^ue^d)
^J^udge^s^{, A}^p^r^.¹⁹^{99 (}^J^udg^e^s^Iⁿ^f^o^r^m^a^{tion Se}^rⁱ^e^s^{, N}^o^{. 4)}^{, p}^p^{. v}^ii-^vⁱⁱⁱ^.
²⁹^Carro^l^l^Ki^l^p^at^ri^ck,^“G^o^l^d^b^e^{rg i}^s^Na^m^e^d^t^o^S^t^even^soⁿ^P^o^st^,^”^W^a^s^h^ingt^on^Pos^t^,^J^u^ly^21,¹⁹⁶⁵^{, p}^.^A¹^.
³⁰^Oⁿ^the^c^ontr^o^v^e^r^s^ie^s^s^u^r^r^o^u^ndi^ng^J^u^s^tic^e^For^t^a^s^’^sⁿ^o^mⁱ^na^tion^a^{nd r}^e^sⁱ^gⁿ^a^{tion, s}^e^e^A^r^tem^u^s^W^a^r^d^,^De^cⁱ^{ding to}
^Le^av^e^:^The^P^o^litic^s^{of Re}^tire^m^eⁿ^t^from^the^Uⁿ^ite^d^St^ate^s^S^upre^m^e^Court^(A^l^b^an^y^:^S^t^at^{e Un}ⁱ^v^ersi^t^y^o^f^Ne^w^Yo^{rk P}^r^ess,
²⁰⁰³⁾^,^p^p^{. 1}⁷¹^-¹^{75; a}^nd^Phil^{ip W}^a^r^d^eⁿ^aⁿ^d^A^l^{do B}^e^c^k^m^a^{n, “}^F^or^ta^s^A^g^r^e^e^s^{to Q}^u^{it, N}ⁱ^x^oⁿ^Aⁱ^de^Sa^y^s^,”^C^h^ic^a^go
^Tr^ibuⁿ^e^{, Ma}^y^15,¹⁹^69,^p.^7.
³¹^T^h^{e l}^a^w^p^r^o^vⁱ^d^{es t}^h^at^{a Ju}^stⁱ^{ce ret}ⁱ^rⁱⁿ^{g un}^d^e^{r t}^h^{ese p}^r^o^vⁱ^sⁱ^oⁿ^s^sh^al^l^recei^ve^f^o^{r t}^h^{e rem}^aⁱⁿ^d^e^{r o}^f^hⁱ^{s l}ⁱ^f^etⁱ^m^{e “t}^h^e
^sal^a^r^y^h^eⁱ^s^recei^viⁿ^g^at^t^h^{e d}^a^t^e^of^retⁱ^r^e^m^en^t^”^o^r^,ⁱ^f^hⁱ^{s servi}^{ce w}^a^s^l^e^{ss t}^h^an^t^e^{n y}^ear^s,^oⁿ^e^-h^al^f^o^f^t^h^at^sal^a^r^y^.^A^c^t^o^f
^A^u^g^u^s^t^{5, 1}⁹³⁹^{, c}^h^.⁴^33,⁵³^Sta^t^.¹²⁰^4-¹²^05;²⁸^U^.^S.C^.^§³⁷²⁽^a⁾^.
³²^“^M^oo^dy^W^{ill Re}^tire^,^”^Wa^shⁱⁿ^g^t^on^Po^st^{, J}^u^ne¹⁵^,¹⁹^10,^p.^1.
³³^T^h^e^othe^r^A^s^s^o^cⁱ^a^t^e^J^u^s^tic^e^s^nom^ina^t^e^d^f^o^r^C^h^ie^f^J^u^s^tic^e^du^rⁱ^ng^t^h^e^pe^rⁱ^o^d^w^e^r^e^{: Edw}^a^r^d^D^.^W^h^ite⁽¹⁹¹⁰⁾^,^H^a^r^l^aⁿ^F^.
^S^t^oⁿ^e⁽¹⁹⁴¹⁾^,^and^A^b^{e F}^o^rt^{as (196}⁸⁾^.^A^sⁿ^o^t^ed^p^r^evi^o^u^s^l^y^,^Ju^stⁱ^{ce F}^o^rt^{as’s no}^mⁱⁿ^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^f^aⁱ^l^e^d^t^o^recei^{ve S}^eⁿ^a^t^e
^c^onf^ir^m^a^tion.
³⁴^“Hu^g^h^e^s,^Wⁱ^t^h^W^o^rd^{s T}^h^at^Riⁿ^g^,^Ob^ey^{s Cal}^l^t^o^L^ead^Rep^u^b^lⁱ^can^s^,^”^Wa^sh^ing^t^on^P^o^st^,^J^uⁿ^e¹¹^,¹⁹¹⁶^,^p.^1.

Director of Economic Stability for President Franklin D. Roosevelt.³⁵ As noted previously, Justice
Arthur Goldberg resigned in 1965 to become the U.N. Ambassador.
When any Court nomination (whether for an Associate or Chief Justice seat) fails in the Senate,
the President may either re-submit the nomination or choose another candidate to fill the bench.
The entire process thus begins anew. Withdrawals and rejections can greatly increase the amount
of time taken to confirm Justices to the Court. Controversial nominees who are eventually
confirmed also usually take more time to consider. The late 1960s and early 1970s were one of
the most tumultuous periods of nominations and rejections in the Court’s history. On May 14,
1969, Justice Abe Fortas resigned from the bench. Fortas had been embroiled in a scandal
surrounding his consulting income, and failed to win confirmation as Chief Justice when ³⁶
President Johnson nominated him to the seat in 1968. Previously, on October 14, 1968,
President Johnson had withdrawn the Fortas nomination as well as the nomination of Homer
Thornberry to fill the vacancy that would have been created by Fortas’s elevation. The Senate
rejected President Richard M. Nixon’s first two nominees to the Fortas seat—Clement F. ³⁷
Haynsworth, Jr. and G. Harrold Carswell. President Nixon’s third choice, Harry A. Blackmun,
was not confirmed until May 12, 1970—almost a year after Fortas’s resignation.

Table 1 (at the end of this report) lists dates for the following events regarding each nomination
to the Supreme Court since 1900: (1) when the actual or prospective vacancy apparently became
known to the President, (2) when the President announced the nominee, (3) when the Senate
Judiciary Committee held its first hearing on the nominee, (4) when final committee action took
place, and (5) when final Senate action took place. Table 2 presents the number of days elapsed
for six related time intervals: (1) from when the President apparently learned of the actual or
prospective vacancy to the his announcement of a new nominee, (2) from the nomination
announcement to the first Judiciary Committee hearing, (3) from the first hearing to the
committee’s final action, (4) from the committee’s final action to the Senate’s final action, (5)
from nomination announcement to final Senate action (duration of total Senate action), and (6)
from the vacancy starting date (when the President apparently first became aware of the
opportunity to make a nomination) to final Senate action. Table 3 provides summary statistics for
the number of days elapsed during each of these intervals, for all nominations from 1900 until ³⁸
2006, and for two periods within those dates—1900-1980 and 1981-2006. As discussed later in

³⁵^A^sso^ci^at^ed^P^r^ess,^“By^rⁿ^e^{s Re}^si^gⁿ^s^F^r^o^m^Ben^c^hⁱⁿ^L^e^t^t^e^{r t}^o^P^r^esi^d^en^t^,^”^{New Yo}^{rk Times}^{, O}^c^t.^4,¹⁹^42,^p.⁴⁵^.
³⁶^Oⁿ^the^c^ontr^o^v^e^r^s^ie^s^s^u^r^r^o^u^ndi^ng^J^u^s^tic^e^For^t^a^s^’^sⁿ^o^mⁱ^na^tion^a^{nd r}^e^sⁱ^gⁿ^a^{tion, s}^e^e^W^a^r^d^,^D^e^cⁱ^din^g^t^o^Le^av^e^{, p}^p^.¹⁷^1-
¹⁷⁵^{; a}ⁿ^d^Phili^{p W}^a^r^d^eⁿ^aⁿ^d^A^l^do^B^e^c^k^m^a^{n, “}^F^or^ta^s^A^g^r^e^e^s^{to Q}^u^{it, N}ⁱ^x^{on A}ⁱ^de^Sa^y^s^,”^C^h^ic^{ago Tr}^ib^une^{, Ma}^y^15,
¹⁹⁶^{9, p. 7.}
³⁷^H^a^yⁿ^sw^or^{th a}ⁿ^{d C}^a^r^s^w^e^ll^w^e^r^e^b^o^{th r}^e^je^c^t^e^d^due^t^o^Se^na^te^do^ub^ts^a^bout^theⁱ^r^pe^r^s^ona^l^vⁱ^e^w^s^a^{nd pr}^of^e^s^sⁱ^ona^l
^q^u^a^lⁱ^fⁱ^catⁱ^oⁿ^s^.^F^o^{r a s}^u^mm^ar^{y o}^f^t^h^{ese an}^d^ot^h^e^{r cases o}^f^rej^ect^ed^S^u^p^r^em^{e Co}^u^r^t^no^mⁱⁿ^ees,^{see CRS}^Rep^o^r^t^RL³¹¹⁷¹^,
^Supr^e^m^e^C^o^ur^{t N}^o^mⁱ^na^tio^ns^N^o^t^C^onfir^m^e^d,¹⁷⁸⁹^-^A^u^gus^t²⁰⁰⁶^,^by^H^e^nr^y^B^.^H^o^g^u^e^.
³⁸^In^Ta^b^l^{e 3}^{, t}^h^e^m^e^diaⁿ^am^ount^o^f^ti^m^e^f^r^o^m^v^a^ca^ncy^{to f}ⁱ^na^{l Se}^na^te^a^c^{tion w}^ithin^each^tⁱ^m^{e p}^e^ri^o^d^d^o^e^{s no}^t
ⁿ^ecessari^l^y^eq^u^a^l^t^h^{e su}^m^o^f^t^h^{e med}ⁱ^an^{s f}^o^{r each}^st^{age i}ⁿ^t^h^{e nom}ⁱⁿ^atⁱ^oⁿ^-^an^d^-^con^fⁱ^r^matⁱ^oⁿ^p^r^o^cess.^Lⁱ^ke^wⁱ^se,^t^h^e
^medⁱ^an^l^eⁿ^g^t^h^s^o^f^tⁱ^m^e^f^o^{r al}^l^S^eⁿ^a^t^e^actⁱ^oⁿ^s⁽ⁱ^.^e^.^,^f^r^o^mⁿ^o^mⁱⁿ^atⁱ^oⁿ^anⁿ^o^uⁿ^cem^en^t^t^o^fⁱⁿ^a^l^S^eⁿ^a^t^e^actⁱ^oⁿ⁾^wⁱ^t^hⁱⁿ^each
^tⁱ^m^{e p}^e^ri^o^d^do^no^t^equ^a^l^t^h^{e su}^m^o^f^t^h^{e m}^e^dⁱ^an^{s f}^o^{r each}^st^ag^e.^T^h^{e med}ⁱ^anⁱ^d^en^tⁱ^fⁱ^{es t}^h^{e m}ⁱ^d^-^p^oⁱⁿ^t^f^o^{r i}ⁿ^dⁱ^vi^du^al^set^s
⁽^c^onti^nue^d.^..)

this report, those periods were chosen because the data indicate a sharp difference in the pace of
most nominations before and after 1980.
As noted previously, it is often difficult or impossible to determine the specific date that a
President first knew he would have the opportunity to name a new Justice to the Supreme Court.
The President always has the constitutional obligation to make nominations to the Court when
vacancies arise, and is certainly aware of the possibility that vacancies could arise at any time.
However, the “Actual or Prospective Vacancy Became Known to President” columns in Table 1
and Table 2 focus on documented, specific instances when the President knew he had, or soon ³⁹
would have, the opportunity to name a new Justice to the Court. These dates are based on
extensive research about when the Justice’s impending departure (or death) was made public, and
whether the President had advance knowledge of the vacancy before it became public. In cases in
which research revealed no public evidence that the President had advance notice (or in which the
data are inconclusive), the date of the first public account of the vacancy marks the beginning of ⁴⁰
the process (the “When” column in Table 1 and Table 2).
For example, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor announced her retirement, pending confirmation of a
successor, on July 1, 2005. There is no evidence that President George W. Bush definitely knew
that O’Connor would retire until her announcement. Therefore, July 1, 2005, is used as the ⁴¹
starting point for what became the John G. Roberts Associate Justice nomination. On the other
hand, although Chief Justice Warren Burger’s retirement letter to Ronald Reagan was not released
until June 17, 1986, President Reagan’s public papers reveal that Burger informed the President ⁴²
of his decision to retire on May 27, 1986. Therefore, May 27, 1986, is used as the starting point

^(...c^on^tin^ue^d)
^o^f^o^b^s^ervatⁱ^oⁿ^s^.^Becau^{se each}^st^{age o}^f^t^h^{e p}^r^o^{cess can}^h^a^{ve a d}ⁱ^f^f^e^r^en^t^nu^m^b^{er o}^f^o^b^s^ervatⁱ^oⁿ^s^,^and^b^ecau^{se t}^h^{e d}^a^t^a
^{are al}^soⁿ^o^t^{a “n}^o^r^m^a^l^”⁽ⁱ^.^e^.^,^“b^el^l^-^sh^ap^ed^{”) d}ⁱ^st^rⁱ^bu^tⁱ^oⁿ^,^t^h^{e su}^m^o^f^t^h^{e m}^e^dⁱ^an^{s f}^o^{r i}ⁿ^dⁱ^vi^du^al^st^{ages gen}^e^ral^l^yⁱ^sⁿ^o^t
^eq^u^a^l^t^o^t^h^{e m}^e^dⁱ^an^f^o^{r t}^h^{e ent}ⁱ^r^e^p^e^ri^o^d^.^F^o^{r m}^o^{re i}ⁿ^f^o^rm^atⁱ^oⁿ^,^{see ch}^ap^t^e^{r 4 i}ⁿ^Ya-l^uⁿ^C^h^ou^,^St^atistⁱ^c^a^{l An}^aly^s^{is f}^o^r
^Busⁱ^ne^s^s^a^nd^Ec^on^om^ic^s^(N^e^w^Y^o^rk^{: Els}^e^vⁱ^e^r^{, 19}^89).
³⁹^In^Ta^b^l^{e 1}^an^d^Ta^b^l^{e 2}^{, actu}^a^{l v}^acan^{cies are th}^o^s^{e th}^{at alread}^y^h^a^v^e^b^een^anⁿ^o^uⁿ^ced^o^r^o^ccu^rred⁽ⁱ^.^e^{., a sittin}^g
^Ju^stⁱ^{ce an}ⁿ^o^uⁿ^{ces a ret}ⁱ^r^em^en^t^d^a^t^e^o^r^di^es).^P^r^o^s^p^ectⁱ^v^{e vacan}^ci^e^s^,^f^o^{r t}^h^{e pu}^rpo^s^{es o}^f^t^hⁱ^s^repo^rt^,^ar^{e n}^o^t^m^e^rel^y
^sp^ecu^lativ^{e. T}^h^e^y^req^uⁱ^{re f}ⁱ^r^mⁿ^o^{tice, eith}^{er th}^r^o^u^g^hⁿ^o^tif^icatioⁿ^f^r^o^m^{a sittin}^g^Ju^{stice o}^r^m^a^jo^r^m^e^dⁱ^a^acc^ounts^,^t^h^a^t^a
^Justic^e^w^{ill le}^a^v^e^the^Court^im^mⁱ^ne^ntly^{, e}^v^eⁿ^if^aⁿ^e^x^a^c^t^da^te^{is no}^{t spe}^cⁱ^fⁱ^e^d^.
⁴⁰^T^h^{is re}^port,^{it sh}^ou^ld^be^re^-e^m^pha^siz^e^d^{, ba}^se^{s the}^sta^r^ting^p^oⁱⁿ^{t a}^t^w^h^eⁿ^P^r^e^s^ideⁿ^{ts a}^ppa^re^nt^ly^le^a^r^ne^{d of}^a^c^t^ua^{l or}
^p^r^o^s^p^ectⁱ^v^{e Co}^urt^vacan^ci^es.^T^h^e^s^{e d}^a^t^e^{s are b}^a^sed^oⁿ^p^u^b^lⁱ^s^h^e^dⁱⁿ^f^o^r^m^atⁱ^oⁿ^o^rⁱⁿ^f^o^rm^atⁱ^oⁿ^o^b^t^aⁱⁿ^e^d^f^r^o^m^p^r^esi^d^en^tⁱ^a^l
^a^r^c^h^iv^e^s^{. R}^e^a^d^e^r^s^s^hould^be^a^l^e^r^te^{d, a}^s^a^c^a^v^e^a^t^{, tha}^t^the^r^e^mⁱ^g^h^{t w}^e^{ll ha}^v^e^be^eⁿⁱⁿ^s^t^aⁿ^c^e^s^{, unr}^e^por^te^d^a^t^the^tim^e^a^s
^w^e^{ll a}^s^{still unk}^now^{n to}^pre^s^eⁿ^t-d^a^y^sc^hola^r^{s, in w}^h^ic^{h v}^a^ri^{ous Pre}^s^ideⁿ^{ts priv}^a^t^e^l^y^we^re^a^l^e^r^te^{d of}^upc^om^ing^Court
^vacan^ci^{es o}^r^h^a^d^reasoⁿ^s^t^o^b^e^lⁱ^e^{ve t}^h^at^vacan^ci^es^w^e^{re i}^m^mⁱⁿ^eⁿ^tⁱⁿ^ad^van^{ce o}^f^t^h^{e st}^artⁱⁿ^{g d}^a^t^e^{s l}ⁱ^s^t^e^dⁱⁿ^t^hⁱ^s^rep^o^r^t^.
^T^o^the^e^x^te^{nt tha}^t^s^u^c^hⁱⁿ^s^t^aⁿ^c^e^s^a^r^e^una^c^c^ounte^d^f^o^r^,^t^h^e^f^u^{ll e}^x^te^{nt of}^tim^e^dur^ing^w^h^ic^{h s}^u^c^h^P^r^e^s^ideⁿ^ts^w^e^r^e^aw^a^r^e
^o^f^p^r^o^s^p^ectⁱ^v^{e Co}^u^r^t^vacan^ci^{es an}^d^w^e^{re ab}^l^e^t^o^coⁿ^sⁱ^d^{er f}^u^t^u^{re Cou}^r^t^can^di^d^a^t^e^{s b}^e^f^o^{re p}^u^b^lⁱ^c^l^y^a^nnouncⁱⁿ^g^theⁱ^r
^c^hoic^e^s^{, is}^u^nde^r^-^m^e^a^s^ur^e^d^{in th}^is^r^e^por^t.
⁴¹^A^sⁿ^o^t^ed^el^sew^h^{ere i}ⁿ^t^hⁱ^s^repo^rt^,^P^r^esi^d^en^t^G^e^o^r^ge^W^.^Bu^sh^wⁱ^t^h^d^r^ew^Ro^b^e^rt^{s’s n}^o^mⁱⁿ^atⁱ^o^{n as A}^s^so^ci^at^{e Ju}^stⁱ^{ce o}ⁿ
^Se^{pt. 5, 20}^05.
⁴²^P^r^esi^d^en^t^Reagan^h^a^{d a p}^rⁱ^v^at^{e co}ⁿ^v^ersatⁱ^oⁿ^wⁱ^t^h^C^hⁱ^e^f^Ju^stⁱ^{ce Bu}^{rger o}ⁿ^M^a^y²⁷^,¹⁹⁸⁶^,^w^h^en^B^u^{rger al}^ert^e^d^t^h^e
^P^r^e^s^ideⁿ^{t t}^o^his^im^pe^nding^r^e^tir^e^m^eⁿ^{t (}^“^R^e^m^a^r^k^s^{on t}^h^e^R^e^sⁱ^gⁿ^a^tion^of^Supr^e^m^e^C^our^{t C}^h^ie^f^J^u^s^tic^e^W^a^r^r^e^{n E. B}^u^r^g^e^r
^a^{nd t}^h^e^Nomⁱ^na^tions^of^W^illia^m^{H. Re}^hn^{quist T}^o^Be^C^h^ie^f^Ju^stic^e^a^{nd A}ⁿ^toⁿⁱⁿ^Sc^a^lia^T^o^Be^aⁿ^A^s^s^o^cⁱ^a^t^e^Justic^e^,^”
^U^.^{S. N}^a^tio^na^{l A}^r^c^h^iv^e^s^a^{nd R}^e^c^o^r^d^s^A^d^mⁱ^nis^t^r^a^{tion, O}^f^fⁱ^ce^of^the^Fe^de^r^a^{l R}^e^gⁱ^s^t^e^r^,^Public^Pa^pe^{rs o}^f^the^Pre^s^ideⁿ^{ts of}
^the^Uⁿ^ite^d^St^ate^s^:^R^oⁿ^a^ld^Re^ag^an^{, 19}⁸⁶^{, v}^o^l.^{2 (}^W^a^s^hing^to^{n: G}^P^O^,¹⁹⁸⁹⁾^p.⁷⁸¹⁾^.

for what became the William H. Rehnquist elevation to Chief Justice. Notes throughout Table 1
and Table 2 provide information on historical context.
Unless otherwise noted, the “President’s Announcement-of-Nominee” date in Table 1 is the day
when the President announced his nomination to the public or released the text of his nomination
letter (whichever came first). This date is significant because it marks the Senate’s first
opportunity to begin considering the nomination, even if informally. There are a few cases,
explained by table notes, in which Presidents announced their decisions less formally, but still
publicly. For example, President Harry S. Truman casually told reporters during a July 28, 1949,
press conference that he had offered an Associate Justice nomination to then-Attorney General ⁴³
Thomas C. Clark, even though Clark had not yet accepted the nomination. As discussed
previously, in some cases, the announcement date differs by days or even weeks from the date the
nomination was formally submitted to the Senate.
Table 2 provides the duration of each major interval in the process of nominating and considering ⁴⁴
Supreme Court Justices. Table 3 provides the median number of days for each major interval in
the process. The median is the middle number in a set of observations (in this case, the number of
days involved in each stage of considering Supreme Court nominations). The median is generally ⁴⁵
the preferred measure of central tendency in social science research. As statistician William H.
Greene notes, “Loosely speaking, the median corresponds more closely than the mean to the ⁴⁶
middle of a distribution [group of numbers]. It is unaffected by extreme values.” In other words,
the median represents the best example of the “average” case, regardless of extremely short or
long individual confirmations.
However, in describing the speed of the Supreme Court nomination-and-confirmation process,
even median values should be considered carefully. Each nomination is different, and political
context and historical factors can have a major impact on when various events occur. Several
factors affecting individual nominations to the Court are discussed later in this report.

⁴³^P^r^esid^en^{t T}^r^u^m^an^dⁱ^dⁿ^o^{t an}ⁿ^o^uⁿ^{ce th}^{at Clark}^h^a^d^accep^ted^t^h^{e n}^o^mⁱⁿ^atioⁿ^uⁿ^{til A}^u^g^.¹^,¹⁹⁴⁹^(E^d^w^ard^T^.^Fo^lliar^d^,
^“^C^la^r^k^A^c^ce^pts^Hⁱ^g^h^C^our^t^P^r^of^f^e^r^,^”^Wa^shⁱⁿ^gt^on^Po^st^{, A}^u^g^.^2,¹⁹⁴⁹⁾^,^p.^1.
⁴⁴^W^h^eⁿ^c^a^l^c^u^la^ting^d^u^ra^tio^{ns, t}^h^e^da^te^on^w^h^ic^{h the}^fⁱ^na^{l e}^v^eⁿ^{t oc}^c^u^{rs is n}^o^{t c}^o^un^te^{d a}^s^a^f^u^{ll da}^y^.^{For e}^x^a^m^ple^,^if
^c^o^m^m^itte^e^he^a^r^ing^s^be^g^a^{n on J}^u^l^y^{12 a}^{nd t}^h^e^c^o^m^m^itte^e^took^its^fⁱ^na^{l a}^c^tion^oⁿ^July^13,^the^dura^tⁱ^oⁿ^{is one}^da^y^,^not
^t^w^o^.^F^o^{r cases i}ⁿ^w^hⁱ^c^h^du^ratⁱ^oⁿ^s^{are l}^e^{ss t}^h^an^on^{e d}^a^y⁽ⁱ^.^e^.^,^t^h^{e commi}^t^t^ee^fⁱⁿ^a^l^actⁱ^oⁿ^and^fⁱⁿ^a^l^S^e^nat^e^vo^t^e^t^o^o^k^p^l^ace
^{on t}^h^e^s^a^m^e^day⁾^{, the}^dur^a^tio^{n is}^lⁱ^s^t^e^d^a^s⁰^da^y^s^.
⁴⁵^A^lthoug^{h t}^h^e^a^r^ithm^e^tic^m^e^aⁿ⁽^t^he^s^u^m^of^a^{ll obs}^e^r^v^a^tions^divⁱ^de^d^by^the^num^be^r^of^obs^e^r^v^a^tions⁾^is^the^tr^ue
^“^a^v^e^r^a^g^e”^num^be^r^,^{it ha}^s^the^dis^a^dv^aⁿ^ta^g^e^of^be^ing^s^k^ew^e^d^by^e^x^tr^em^e^l^y^hig^h^or^low^v^a^lue^s^{. For}^aⁿ^intr^o^duc^ti^on^to
^medⁱ^an^versu^s^mean^an^d^argu^m^eⁿ^t^{s su}^rrouⁿ^dⁱⁿ^g^w^h^en^each^sh^ou^l^d^b^e^u^s^ed^,^{see ch}^apt^e^{r 3}ⁱⁿ^A^l^an^A^g^restⁱ^an^d^Barb^ara^rd
^Finla^y^,^Statistic^{al M}^e^tho^d^{s f}^o^{r the}^Socⁱ^a^l^Sc^ie^nc^e^s^{, 3}^e^d^.^(Upp^{er S}^a^d^d^l^{e Ri}^ver,^NJ:^P^r^en^tⁱ^{ce Hal}^l^,¹⁹⁹⁷⁾^.
⁴⁶^W^illia^m^{H. G}^r^e^e^ne^,^Ec^onom^e^t^rⁱ^c^Ana^l^y^s^is^{, 5}^th^ed^.⁽^U^pp^er^S^a^dd^l^e^Rⁱ^ver^,^NJ:^P^r^entⁱ^{ce Hal}^l^,²⁰⁰³^,^p^.⁸⁴⁷⁾^.

During the entire period covered by this report (1900-2006), the President and the Senate have
each taken varying amounts of time to act on Supreme Court nominations and confirmations. As
Table 3 shows, from 1900-2006, Presidents took a median of 28 days after a vacancy occurred to
announce their nominees, compared with a median of 22 days for final Senate action once the
nomination was announced. The entire process, from actual or prospective vacancy to final ⁴⁷
Senate action, lasted a median of 76 days from 1900-2006.
However, the amount of time involved in each stage of the nomination-and-confirmation process
varies widely when individual cases are examined. Some Supreme Court nominations are
unusually fast, coming immediately on the heels a sitting Justice’s departure from the bench. In
these cases, the President almost certainly knew in advance of the outgoing Justice’s intention to
retire yet delayed announcement of the retirement to coincide with announcing a new nominee.
For example, on May 27, 1986, President Reagan simultaneously announced the retirement of
Chief Justice Warren Burger, the elevation of William H. Rehnquist to Chief Justice, and the
nomination of Antonin Scalia to assume the Associate Justice seat being vacated by Justice ⁴⁸
Rehnquist. On the other hand, some nomination decisions can take months—at least to become
public. For example, although Justice Harold H. Burton submitted his retirement letter to
President Dwight D. Eisenhower on October 6, 1958, Eisenhower did not publicly announce
Potter Stewart’s nomination until January 17, 1959—103 days after announcing Justice Burton’s
retirement. The entire interval between Burton’s announced retirement and Stewart’s confirmation ⁴⁹
lasted 211 days, the bulk of the interval due to a long congressional recess.
The data indicate that the median decision-making intervals surrounding Supreme Court ⁵⁰
nominations have changed substantially since 1981. When comparing Supreme Court

⁴⁷^D^u^e^to^up^da^te^d^da^taⁱⁿ^Ta^b^l^{e 1}^a^nd^Ta^b^l^{e 2}^{, s}^o^m^e^of^the^s^u^m^m^a^r^{y s}^t^a^tis^tic^s^he^r^e^a^{nd i}ⁿ^Ta^b^l^{e 3}^ha^v^e^c^h^aⁿ^g^e^{d f}^r^om
^pr^e^v^ious^v^e^r^s^ions^of^this^r^e^p^o^r^t^{. T}^h^is^v^e^r^s^ion^of^the^r^e^por^t^d^o^e^s^no^t^inc^l^u^d^e^,^w^h^eⁿ^c^a^l^c^u^la^ting^the^inte^rv^a^l^f^o^{r tota}^l
^Se^na^te^a^c^{tion (}^nom^ina^tio^{n a}ⁿ^no^uⁿ^c^e^m^eⁿ^{t to f}ⁱ^na^{l Se}^na^te^a^c^tio^{n), c}^a^se^{s in w}^h^ic^{h nom}^ina^tions^ling^e^re^{d in}^the^Se^na^te^{, b}^u^t
^f^o^{r w}^h^ic^{h the}^Se^na^te^to^okⁿ^o^fⁱ^na^{l v}^o^te^(e^.g^{., the}^nom^ina^tio^{n w}^a^s^wⁱ^thdra^w^{n, re}^c^o^m^m^itte^{d, e}^t^c^.^{). If}^the^Judicⁱ^a^r^y
^Co^mmⁱ^t^t^{ee h}^e^l^d^h^eariⁿ^{gs o}^r^h^e^l^d^{a f}ⁱⁿ^a^l^vo^t^e^,^t^h^o^s^e^d^a^t^e^{s are i}ⁿ^cl^u^d^edⁱⁿ^m^e^dⁱ^an^cal^cu^l^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^.
⁴⁸^A^s^pr^e^v^ious^l^y^note^d^,^a^lth^oug^{h C}^h^ie^f^J^u^s^tic^e^B^u^r^g^e^r^{, by}^le^tte^r^{on J}^une¹⁷^,¹⁹⁸⁶^{, of}^fⁱ^cⁱ^a^l^l^y^notif^ie^d^Pr^e^s^ideⁿ^{t R}^e^a^g^aⁿ
^of^his^de^sⁱ^r^e^to^r^e^tir^e^,^B^u^r^g^e^r^pr^iv^a^t^e^l^y^inf^o^r^m^e^d^R^e^a^g^aⁿ^of^his^plaⁿ^s^on^Ma^y^{27, 1}⁹⁸⁶⁽^“^R^e^m^a^r^k^s^{on the}^R^e^sⁱ^gⁿ^a^tion^of
^Supre^m^e^{Court Ch}^ie^f^J^u^s^tic^e^W^a^r^r^eⁿ^{E. B}^u^rg^e^r^a^{nd t}^h^e^N^o^mⁱ^na^tion^s^of^W^illiam^H^.^Re^hnquis^t^T^o^Be^Chie^f^J^u^s^tic^e^a^nd
^Aⁿ^t^oⁿⁱⁿ^S^calⁱ^a^T^o^{Be an}^A^sso^ci^at^{e Ju}^stⁱ^ce,^{” U.}^S^.^Natⁱ^oⁿ^a^l^A^r^chⁱ^v^e^s^an^d^Reco^rd^{s A}^d^mⁱⁿⁱ^st^ratⁱ^o^n,^Of^fⁱ^{ce o}^f^t^h^{e F}^e^d^e^ral
^Regⁱ^ster,^Public^P^ape^r^s^of^the^Pr^e^s^ideⁿ^ts^of^the^Uⁿ^ite^d^Sta^t^e^s^:^Roⁿ^a^ld^Re^ag^an^{, 1}⁹⁸⁶^,^vo^l.^2,^p.⁷⁸¹⁾^.
⁴⁹^C^onte^x^{t p}^r^ov^ide^s^im^por^ta^nt^c^a^v^ea^ts^{, a}^s^is^a^l^w^a^y^s^the^c^a^s^e^w^h^eⁿ^e^xplorⁱⁿ^g^m^e^diaⁿ^de^cⁱ^sⁱ^on-^m^a^kⁱ^ng^sur^r^o^un^ding
^Supr^e^m^e^C^our^t^nom^ina^tions^.^P^r^e^s^ideⁿ^{t E}ⁱ^s^e^nh^ow^e^r^r^e^c^e^s^s^-^a^ppointe^d^J^u^s^tic^e^Ste^w^a^r^{t b}^ecau^{se Co}ⁿ^g^{ress was n}^o^tⁱⁿ^th
^sessi^oⁿ^on^Oct^.^6,¹⁹⁵⁸^,^w^h^en^J^u^stⁱ^{ce Bu}^rt^on^ann^o^uⁿ^ced^hⁱ^{s ret}ⁱ^r^emen^t^.^T^h^{e 8}⁵^C^o^ng^r^e^s^s^ha^{d a}^d^j^our^ne^d^sⁱ^ne^die^on
^A^u^g^.^{24, 1}⁹⁵⁸^{. T}^h^e^P^r^e^s^ideⁿ^t^no^mⁱ^na^te^{d P}^o^tte^r^Ste^w^a^r^{t to the}^C^o^u^r^{t on}^J^a^n.^17,¹⁹⁵⁹^{, a}^f^te^r^C^ong^r^e^s^s^ha^{d r}^e^c^onv^eⁿ^e^d^th
^f^o^{r the}^fⁱ^{rst se}^{ssion of}^the⁸⁶^C^o^ng^r^e^s^s^.^T^h^e^r^ef^or^e^,^a^lthoug^h^theⁱⁿ^te^r^v^a^l^be^tw^e^eⁿ^the^s^t^a^r^ting^da^te⁽^O^c^t^{. 6,}¹⁹^58,^a^s
^s^how^{n in}^Ta^b^l^{e 1}⁾^aⁿ^{d n}^o^mⁱ^na^tio^{n da}^te⁽^J^aⁿ^.¹⁷^,¹⁹⁵⁹⁾^is¹⁰³^da^y^s^{, a}^nd^the^eⁿ^tⁱ^r^e^inte^r^v^a^l^f^r^om^the^s^t^a^r^ting^da^te^uⁿ^til
^fⁱ^na^{l Se}^na^te^a^c^{tion (}^M^a^y^{5, 1}⁹⁵⁹⁾^is²¹¹^da^y^s^{, the}^P^r^e^s^ideⁿ^t’^s^a^c^t^ua^{l de}^cⁱ^sⁱ^on-^m^a^kⁱ^ng^tim^e^t^a^b^le^c^ould^a^l^s^o^be^c^l^a^s^sⁱ^fⁱ^e^d
^{as ei}^gh^t^d^a^y^s^,^o^r^t^h^{e i}ⁿ^t^e^rval^b^e^t^w^een^Bu^rt^on^{’s ret}ⁱ^r^em^en^t^anⁿ^o^uⁿ^c^e^m^en^t^(Oct^.⁶^,¹⁹⁵⁸^{) an}^{d E}ⁱ^senh^ow^er’^s^reces^s
^a^ppoi^ntm^e^{nt of}^J^u^s^tic^e^Ste^w^a^r^{t (}^O^c^t^{. 14,}¹⁹⁵⁸⁾^.^B^o^th^inte^r^v^a^l^s^a^r^e^us^e^d^to^c^a^l^c^u^la^te^the^m^e^diaⁿ^e^l^a^p^s^e^{d tim}^e^f^r^om
^vacan^c^y^t^oⁿ^o^mⁱⁿ^atⁱ^oⁿ^ann^o^uⁿ^c^e^m^en^t^.^Noⁿ^e^t^h^el^ess,^t^h^{e l}^oⁿ^gⁱⁿ^t^e^rval^{s h}^a^{ve a}^mⁱⁿⁱ^m^a^lⁱ^m^p^act^oⁿ^com^p^u^tⁱⁿ^{g t}^h^{e m}^e^dⁱ^an
^d^u^r^ati^oⁿ^s^b^e^tw^een^stag^{es in}^th^{e p}^r^o^{cess b}^ecau^{se th}^{e m}^e^dⁱ^an^{is less sen}^s^itiv^{e th}^an^t^h^{e m}^ean^to^ex^tre^m^e^l^y^hⁱ^g^h^o^r^lo^w
^val^u^es.
⁵⁰^For^aⁿ^aⁿ^a^l^y^s^is^of^the^de^cⁱ^sⁱ^on-^m^a^kⁱ^ng^s^p^e^e^d^s^u^r^r^o^uⁿ^dⁱ^ng^S^upr^e^m^{e C}^our^tⁿ^o^mⁱ^na^tions^be^tw^e^eⁿ¹⁹⁶²^-¹⁹^87,^s^e^e^C^R^S
⁽^c^onti^nue^d.^..)

nominations from 1900-1980 with those from 1981-2006, five patterns stand out. First, after
apparently learning of vacancies, Presidents have typically been quicker to announce nominees
since 1981 than in the previous 80 years. As shown in Figure 1 (and Table 3), from 1900-1980,
Presidents took a median of 34 days to announce their nominees after apparently learning of
vacancies, compared with only 12 days from 1981-2006.
Second, and perhaps most notably, the median interval between the President’s announcement of
his nominee and the first Judiciary Committee hearing was substantially longer from 1981-2006
than from 1900-1980. As shown in Figure 1 (and Table 3), this period more than tripled—from
12.5 days during the 1900-1980 period to 52 days from 1981-2006. Again, however, context is
important. Even before hearings begin, the Senate can be actively working on the nomination. For
example, prior to the start of John G. Roberts’s hearings (and even before his nomination was
submitted to the Senate), Senators met privately with Judge Roberts, and some pressed the White ⁵¹
House to release records from Roberts’s Department of Justice service. The Harriet Miers and
Samuel Alito nominations followed similar patterns.
Figure 1. Speed in Days of Intervals Surrounding Supreme Court Nominations and
Confirmations
^Source:^Computations^{based on}^{data compiled by the CRS aut}^{hors. See}^{Table 3}^{for rounding info}^rmation.
Third, committee and floor action from 1981-2006 also took slightly longer than prior to 1981.
From 1981-2006, the Judiciary Committee took a median of 14 days to reach a decision after
starting hearings, while the interval between final committee action and final Senate action took
seven days (compared with six and three days respectively from 1900-1980).
Fourth, as shown in Figure 1 (and Table 3), total Senate activity (the interval between the
President’s announcement of the nominee and final Senate action) increased from a median of 17
days (1900-1980) to 84 days (1981-2006).

^(...c^on^tin^ue^d)
^R^e^por^{t 87-}⁵⁷^6,^T^h^e^S^p^e^e^d^W^ith^W^h^ic^{h Ac}^tio^{n H}^a^s^Be^eⁿ^T^a^k^eⁿ^oⁿ^Su^pr^e^m^e^C^our^{t N}^o^mⁱⁿ^a^ti^onsⁱⁿ^t^h^e^Las^t²⁵^Ye^ar^s^{, by}
^D^e^nis^Ste^v^e^R^u^tk^us⁽^o^{ut of}^prⁱⁿ^t^{but a}^v^a^ila^ble^f^r^om^a^u^thor⁾^.
⁵¹^S^ee,^f^o^{r exa}^m^p^l^e,^Ch^arl^e^{s Bab}ⁱ^ngt^oⁿ^,^“A^cces^{s t}^o^Reco^rd^{s M}^a^y^{Be a S}^tⁱ^c^kiⁿ^g^P^oⁱⁿ^t^;^Dem^o^crat^{s P}^u^sh^f^o^r^P^r^o^m^p^t
^Revⁱ^e^w^,”^Wa^shⁱⁿ^g^t^on^P^o^st^{, J}^u^ly^28,²⁰⁰⁵^{, p}^.^A⁶^{; a}ⁿ^d^Mik^e^A^lle^{n a}^{nd J}^o^B^e^c^k^e^r^{, “A}^C^l^a^s^{h O}^v^e^r^R^obe^r^t^s^D^o^c^u^m^e^nts^;
^Ju^stⁱ^{ce Dep}^a^rt^men^t^Bal^k^{s at}^S^eⁿ^a^t^e^De^m^o^crat^{s’ De}^man^d^s^,^”^Wa^sh^ing^t^on^P^o^st^{, A}^u^g^.^7,²⁰⁰⁵^{, p}^.^A⁴^.

Finally, the entire nomination-and-confirmation process took substantially longer after 1980 than
during the previous 80 years. The median duration for the entire process (from when the President
apparently became aware of a vacancy until the Senate’s final action on the nomination) was
almost twice as long from 1981-2006 than during 1900-1980 (113 days versus 59 days,
respectively).
Some elements of the decision-making process surrounding the naming and the confirmation or
rejection of Supreme Court nominees are known only to Presidents, nominees, and a few select
advisors. Other elements are more obvious. Each nomination has its own political context,
making each nomination somewhat different. However, several factors appear to be relatively
constant in affecting the speed of Supreme Court nominations and Senate decisions.
How quickly the President announces his nominee and how quickly the Senate considers that
nomination can depend on how the vacancy occurred. When Justices die unexpectedly, Presidents
can be eager to bring the Court back to full strength as soon as possible. On July 19, 1949, for ⁵²
example, Justice Frank Murphy unexpectedly died of a heart attack after a brief illness.
President Harry S. Truman announced his nomination of Thomas C. Clark at a press conference ⁵³
nine days later, on July 28. The Senate also considered the nomination quickly, beginning
hearings on August 9. Clark’s entire nomination-and-confirmation process lasted just 30 days. A
few months later, Sherman Minton was confirmed even faster—in 24 days—after the death of
Justice Wiley B. Rutledge. Nonetheless, sudden death does not guarantee that either the President
or the Senate will make nomination-and-confirmation decisions quickly. For example, when
Justice Rufus W. Peckham died unexpectedly on October 24, 1909, President William Howard
Taft waited 50 days to announce a nominee. Once Taft announced his choice, the Senate
confirmed Horace H. Lurton seven days later.
Retirements and resignations are often expected, allowing the President time to prepare for his
choice even before an official announcement that a sitting Justice will step down. For example, at
the time of his retirement, Justice William O. Douglas’s health had been so poor and abilities
allegedly in such decline that seven of his fellow Justices voted on October 17, 1975, to ⁵⁴
“effectively strip Douglas of his power” and excluded the aging Justice from deliberations. By
the time Justice Douglas officially wrote to President Gerald R. Ford on November 12, 1975,
announcing his retirement, the President was prepared to act quickly. He announced the
nomination of John Paul Stevens just 16 days later. Congress, too, acted quickly, confirming
Stevens 19 days later, on December 17, 1975.
Sometimes, though, even when retirements or resignations come with advance notice, the process
moves slowly. For example, Justice Harry A. Blackmun privately told President William J.

⁵²^For^a^pr^of^ile^of^Mur^phy^a^{nd h}ⁱ^s^de^a^t^{h, s}^e^e^Chic^a^g^o^Daily^Tribuⁿ^e^,^“Ju^s^tⁱ^{ce M}^u^r^p^h^y^Di^{es o}^f^Heart^A^t^t^a^c^k^at⁵⁹^,^”
^Chic^ag^{o Da}^ily^Trib^une^,^J^u^ly^{20, 194}^{9, p. 2.}
⁵³^P^r^esid^en^{t T}^r^u^m^an^dⁱ^dⁿ^o^{t an}ⁿ^o^uⁿ^{ce th}^{at Clark}^h^a^d^accep^ted^t^h^{e n}^o^mⁱⁿ^atioⁿ^uⁿ^{til A}^u^g^.¹^,¹⁹⁴⁹^(E^d^w^ard^T^.^Fo^lliar^d^,
^“^C^la^r^k^A^c^ce^pts^Hⁱ^g^h^C^our^t^P^r^of^f^e^r^,^Wa^sh^ing^t^on^P^o^st^,^A^u^g.²^,¹⁹⁴⁹^,^p.¹⁾^.
⁵⁴^Ju^stⁱ^{ce By}^roⁿ^R.^W^hⁱ^t^e^dⁱ^sagreed^wⁱ^t^h^t^h^e^d^eci^si^oⁿ^.^S^{ee W}^a^rd^,^D^e^cⁱ^{ding to Le}^av^e^,^p.¹⁸^7.

Clinton around January 1, 1994, that he was planning to leave the Court. Soon afterward, the ⁵⁵
White House staff began quietly considering replacements. However, President Clinton did not
publicly announce Justice Blackmun’s retirement until April 6, did not publicly announce Judge
Stephen G. Breyer’s nomination until May 13, and did not formally nominate Breyer until May ⁵⁶
17. The Judiciary Committee began hearings 60 days after the nomination was announced, and
the entire process surrounding Breyer’s nomination lasted 209 days. However, decisions affecting
the nomination were apparently being made even before Blackmun’s retirement became public
knowledge.
Congress’s schedule, especially whether the Senate is in session at all, plays an important role in
how long Supreme Court nominations take to reach a conclusion. In the early 1900s, several
vacancies arose during summer recess or election years when Congress was away from the
Capitol. In 1910, for example, Congress adjourned on June 25 and did not return until December ⁵⁷

5—a break of more than five months. In the interim, Chief Justice Melville W. Fuller died of a ⁵⁸

heart attack on July 4. As press coverage noted at the time, although potential nominees were
immediately considered, President William Howard Taft waited to formally submit a nomination ⁵⁹
to the Senate until Congress reconvened. On December 12, five days after the Senate
reconvened, President Taft announced and formally submitted to the Senate his nomination of
former Senator Edward D. White of Louisiana to be Chief Justice. That same day, without
referring the nomination to the Judiciary Committee, the Senate quickly confirmed Senator
White.
Three times during the 1950s, President Eisenhower resorted to recess appointments when ⁶⁰
Justices died or announced their retirement after Congress had already adjourned for the year. In
each case, President Eisenhower formally submitted the nomination after the Senate convened the
following January. Of the five persons whom he nominated to the Court, three first received
recess appointments and served as Justices before being confirmed—Earl Warren (as Chief
Justice) in 1953, William Brennan in 1956, and Potter Stewart in 1958. President Eisenhower’s
recess appointments, however, generated controversy, prompting the Senate in 1960, voting
closely along party lines, to pass a resolution expressing opposition to Supreme Court recess ⁶¹
appointments in the future.

⁵⁵^T^ony^Ma^ur^{o, “}^H^ow^B^l^a^c^k^m^{un H}ⁱ^{d R}^e^tir^e^m^eⁿ^{t P}^l^aⁿ^s^,^”^{New Jersey}^La^{w Jo}^u^rⁿ^a^l^,^A^p^{r. 25}^,¹⁹⁹⁴^{, p. 1}⁸^.
⁵⁶^U^.^{S. N}^a^tio^na^{l A}^r^c^h^iv^e^s^a^{nd R}^e^c^o^r^d^s^A^d^mⁱ^nis^t^r^a^{tion, O}^f^fⁱ^ce^of^the^Fe^de^r^a^{l R}^e^gⁱ^s^t^e^r^,^Public^Pa^pe^{rs o}^f^the^Pre^s^ideⁿ^ts
^{of t}^h^e^Unite^d^St^ate^s^{: W}^{illiam J}^.^C^linto^n,¹⁹⁹⁴^{, v}^o^l.^{1 (}^W^a^s^hing^to^n:^G^P^O^,¹⁹⁹⁵⁾^{, p}^.⁵⁹⁷^.
⁵⁷^{U.S. C}^ong^re^{ss, Join}^{t Com}^m^itte^e^on^Printⁱ^ng^,²⁰^03-²⁰^{04 O}^f^fⁱ^cⁱ^{al C}^ongr^e^s^sⁱ^o^nal^Dⁱ^r^e^c^t^or^y^:¹⁰⁸^th^C^o^ngr^e^s^s
⁽^W^a^s^hing^ton:^G^P^O⁾^{, p. 51}^7.
⁵⁸^“Ju^s^tⁱ^{ce F}^u^l^l^e^{r Di}^{es S}^u^dd^en^l^y^,^”^Wa^shⁱⁿ^gt^on^Po^st^{, J}^u^ly^{5, 19}^10,^p.^1.
⁵⁹^{In a}^d^diti^on^{to w}^a^iting^f^o^{r the}^Seⁿ^a^te^to^re^turⁿ^,^P^r^e^sⁱ^d^eⁿ^{t T}^a^f^t^re^porte^dly^c^onside^r^e^d^m^o^re^thaⁿ²⁰⁰^no^mⁱ^ne^e^s^{, a}^f^a^r
^m^o^r^e^thor^oug^h^pr^oc^e^s^s^thaⁿ^t^h^e^m^e^dia^pr^e^d^ic^te^d^a^f^te^r^Fulle^r^’^s^de^a^t^h⁽ⁱ^bi^{d. a}ⁿ^{d “}^W^hite^H^e^a^d^s^B^e^nc^h,”^Wa^sh^ing^t^on^P^o^st^,
^D^e^c^.^13,¹⁹^10,^p.¹⁾^.
⁶⁰^T^h^e^dis^c^us^sⁱ^on^of^r^e^c^e^s^s^a^ppoint^m^e^nts^{in t}^h^e^f^o^llowⁱ^ng^tw^{o pa}^r^a^g^r^a^phs^is^a^d^a^p^te^{d f}^r^om^C^R^S^R^e^por^t^R^L³¹⁹⁸^9,
^Supr^e^m^e^Co^ur^{t A}^p^p^o^intm^eⁿ^{t Pr}^oc^e^s^s^:^Role^s^{of t}^h^e^Pr^e^s^ideⁿ^t^,^J^u^dⁱ^cⁱ^ar^y^Com^m^itte^e^,^aⁿ^d^Seⁿ^a^te^,^by^De^nis^Ste^v^eⁿ
^Ru^tk^u^s^.
⁶¹^A^dopte^d^by^the^Se^na^te^on^A^u^g^.^{29, 1}⁹⁶⁰^,^by^a^48-³⁷^v^o^te^,^S.R^e^s^.³^{34 e}^x^pr^e^s^s^e^{d the}^s^e^ns^e^of^the^Seⁿ^a^te^tha^t^r^ecess
^a^ppoi^ntm^e^nts^{to t}^h^e^Su^pr^e^m^e^C^our^{t “}^s^hou^ld^no^{t be}^m^a^de^{, e}^x^c^e^p^{t un}^de^r^un^us^ua^{l c}ⁱ^r^c^um^s^t^aⁿ^c^e^s^a^{nd f}^o^r^the^p^u^r^p^os^e^of
^pr^e^v^eⁿ^ting^or^eⁿ^di^ng^a^de^m^ons^tr^a^b^le^br^e^a^k^dow^{n in}^the^a^d^mⁱ^nis^t^r^a^ti^on^of^the^C^o^ur^t’^s^b^u^sⁱ^ne^s^s^.^”^P^r^op^one^nts^of^the
^r^e^s^o^luti^{on c}^o^nteⁿ^de^d,^a^m^ong^othe^r^thiⁿ^g^s^{, tha}^t^j^udicⁱ^a^lⁱⁿ^de^peⁿ^d^eⁿ^c^e^w^{ould be}^a^f^f^e^c^t^e^d^if^Supr^e^m^e^C^our^{t r}^e^c^e^s^s
⁽^c^onti^nue^d.^..)

President Eisenhower’s actions were the most recent recess appointments to the Supreme Court,
and recess appointments to the lower federal courts also have become relatively rare since the late

1960s. While a President’s constitutional power to make judicial recess appointments was upheld ⁶²

by a federal court in 1985, such appointments, when they do occur, may cause controversy, in
large part because they bypass the Senate and its “advice and consent” role. Because of the
criticisms of judicial recess appointments in recent decades, the long passage of time since the
last Supreme Court recess appointment, and the relatively short duration of contemporary Senate
recesses (which arguably undercuts the need for recess appointments to the Court), a President in ^st
the 21 century might be expected to make a recess appointment to the Supreme Court only under ⁶³
the most unusual of circumstances.
Today, Congress’s availability is less of an obstacle to speedy consideration of nominations than
in the past. Given Congress’s increasingly year-round schedule, extended decision-making is
more often the result of waiting for presidential decisions, background investigations of
nominees, or preparations for Judiciary Committee hearings.
Today, it would be highly unusual for the Judiciary Committee not to hold Supreme Court
confirmation hearings lasting at least a few days. In the past, however, the Judiciary Committee
often handled Supreme Court nominations without holding hearings at all. As Table 1 shows, of
the 22 nominees to the Court from 1900 to 1937, only three had Judiciary Committee hearings
(Louis D. Brandeis in 1916, Harlan F. Stone in 1925, and John J. Parker in 1930 (whose
nomination was eventually rejected)). In contrast, of the 41 nominees after 1937, only three did

^(...c^on^tin^ue^d)
^a^ppoi^nte^e^s^{, d}^u^rⁱ^ng^t^h^e^pr^oba^ti^ona^r^y^pe^rⁱ^{od of}^theⁱ^r^a^p^poi^ntm^e^{nt, to}^ok^pos^it^io^ns^to^ple^a^s^e^the^P^r^e^s^ideⁿ^{t (}ⁱ^{n or}^de^rⁿ^o^{t t}^o
^ha^v^e^the^P^r^e^s^ideⁿ^{t w}^ith^dra^w^theⁱ^{r nom}^ina^tio^{ns) or}^to^pl^e^a^s^e^the^Seⁿ^a^te⁽ⁱ^{n or}^de^r^to^g^a^{in c}^onf^ir^m^a^tion^of^theⁱ^r
^nom^ina^tions⁾^.^I^t^a^l^s^o^w^a^s^a^r^g^u^e^d^tha^t^Se^na^teⁱⁿ^v^e^s^tig^a^{tion of}^nomⁱⁿ^a^tions^of^the^s^e^r^e^c^e^s^s^a^ppointe^e^s^w^a^s^m^a^de^dif^f^ic^ult
^by^the^oa^{th pre}^v^eⁿ^ti^ng^s^itting^J^u^s^t^ic^e^s^f^r^o^m^te^s^tⁱ^f^yⁱ^ng^a^{bout m}^a^tte^rs^pe^nd^ing^be^f^o^re^the^C^ourt^.^O^p^poⁿ^e^nts^,^h^o^w^e^ve^r,
^s^a^{id, a}^m^ong^othe^r^t^h^ing^s^{, t}^h^a^t^the^r^e^s^o^luti^{on w}^a^s^aⁿ^a^tte^m^p^{t to r}^e^s^t^rⁱ^c^t^the^P^r^e^s^ideⁿ^t’^s^c^ons^t^ituti^ona^l^r^e^c^e^s^s^a^ppointm^e^nt
^p^o^w^{ers an}^d^t^h^at^{recess ap}^poⁱⁿ^t^m^en^t^s^w^e^{re so}^m^e^tⁱ^m^e^{s cal}^l^e^d^f^o^{r i}ⁿ^o^r^d^e^{r t}^o^keep^t^h^{e C}^o^u^r^t^at^f^u^l^l^st^ren^g^t^h^and^t^o
^pre^v^eⁿ^{t e}^v^eⁿ^l^y^s^p^{lit rul}ⁱ^ng^s^by^its^m^e^m^b^e^r^s^.^Se^e^“^O^ppos^itio^{n t}^o^R^e^c^e^s^s^A^ppoi^ntm^e^nts^{to the}^Su^pr^e^m^{e C}^our^t^,^”^de^ba^teⁱⁿ
^the^Se^na^te^oⁿ^S^.^R^e^s^.³^34,^C^o^ngr^e^s^sⁱ^onal^Re^c^o^r^d^,^v^o^l.¹⁰^{6, A}^u^g^.²⁹^,¹⁹⁶⁰^{, p}^p^.¹⁸¹³^0-¹⁸¹⁴⁵^.^Se^e^a^l^s^o^C^R^S^R^e^por^t
^R^L³²⁹⁷^1,^Judⁱ^ci^al^R^{ecess A}^p^poⁱⁿ^t^m^en^t^s^{: A}^L^e^ga^l^Overvi^ew^,^b^y^T^.^J.^Hal^s^t^ead^.^F^o^{r a}ⁿ^o^v^ervi^ew^o^f^j^u^dⁱ^ci^al^recess
^a^ppoi^ntm^e^nts^durⁱⁿ^g^the^G^e^or^g^e^W^.^B^u^s^h^pr^e^s^ideⁿ^c^y⁽^none^of^w^h^ic^{h w}^e^r^e^{to the}^Su^pr^e^m^e^C^our^t)^{, s}^e^e^C^R^S^R^e^por^t
^R^L³³³¹^0,^R^{ecess A}^p^poⁱⁿ^t^m^en^t^s^Ma^d^e^b^y^P^r^esi^d^en^t^Geo^r^g^e^W.^B^u^sh^,^Jan^u^a^r^{y 2}⁰^,²⁰⁰¹^-S^ept^e^mb^{er 5}^,²⁰⁰⁶^{, by}^H^e^nr^y
^B.^Ho^gu^{e an}^{d M}^a^u^r^een^Beard^eⁿ^.
⁶²^U.^S^.^v.^Wo^od^ley^,⁷^{51 F.2}^d¹⁰⁰⁸⁽⁹^th^Cⁱ^r^.¹⁹⁸⁵⁾^.
⁶³^A^nota^b^le^{, r}^e^la^tiv^e^l^y^r^e^ce^{nt ins}^t^aⁿ^c^e^{in w}^h^ic^{h t}^h^e^p^o^s^sⁱ^bili^ty^of^a^r^e^c^e^s^s^a^ppointm^e^{nt to t}^h^e^S^upr^e^m^e^C^our^{t w}^a^s^r^a^is^e^d
^o^ccu^rred^on^Jul^y²⁸^,¹⁹⁸⁷^,^w^h^en^S^eⁿ^a^t^e^Mⁱ^no^ri^t^y^L^e^ad^{er Ro}^b^e^rt^D^o^l^e^ob^served^t^h^at^P^r^esi^d^eⁿ^t^Reagan^h^a^{d t}^h^e
^coⁿ^s^titu^tioⁿ^a^{l p}^r^er^o^g^ativ^{e to}^{recess a}^ppoi^{nt U}^.^{S. a}^p^pe^lla^te^c^our^{t j}^u^d^g^e^R^obe^r^t^H^.^B^o^r^k^t^o^t^h^e^C^o^ur^{t. E}^a^r^lie^r^tha^t^m^onth
^Ju^d^g^{e Bo}^{rk h}^a^d^b^eenⁿ^o^mⁱⁿ^at^ed^t^o^t^h^{e C}^o^u^r^t^,^and^at^t^h^{e t}ⁱ^m^{e o}^f^S^eⁿ^a^t^o^{r Dol}^e^{’s st}^at^emen^t^,^t^h^{e ch}^ai^r^o^f^S^eⁿ^a^t^e^Ju^dⁱ^ci^ary
^C^o^m^m^itte^e^,^Se^{n. J}^o^s^e^{ph R}^.^Bⁱ^deⁿ^,^J^r^{. ha}^{d s}^c^he^du^le^{d c}^o^nf^ir^m^a^{tion h}^e^a^r^ing^s^{to be}^gⁱⁿ^on^Se^pte^m^be^r¹⁵^{. W}^{ith v}^a^rⁱ^ous
^Rep^u^b^lⁱ^{can S}^eⁿ^a^t^o^{rs accu}^siⁿ^g^S^eⁿ^a^t^e^Dem^o^cr^at^{s o}^f^d^e^l^a^yⁱⁿ^g^t^h^{e Bo}^{rk h}^eariⁿ^gs,^S^eⁿ^a^t^o^{r Do}^l^e^o^f^fere^d^{as “f}^{ood f}^o^r
^th^o^u^g^h^{t” th}^e^p^o^ssi^b^ility^o^f^P^r^esid^en^{t Reag}^an^{recess a}^ppointiⁿ^g^J^u^d^g^e^B^o^r^k^dur^ing^C^ong^r^e^s^s^’^s^A^u^g^u^{st r}^ecess.^S^ee
^Mⁱ^ch^ael^F^u^m^eⁿ^t^o^,^“Reagan^{Has P}^o^w^e^r^T^o^S^eat^Bo^{rk W}^hⁱ^l^e^S^eⁿ^a^t^e^S^t^al^l^s^:^Do^l^e^,^”^Wa^shiⁿ^g^t^on^Tⁱ^mes^,^J^u^ly^{28, 1}⁹⁸⁷^,^p.
^A³^;^al^so^,^E^d^w^a^rd^W^a^l^s^h^,^“Reagaⁿ^’s^P^o^w^e^{r T}^o^M^a^{ke Rece}^ss^A^p^p^oⁱⁿ^t^m^en^t^{Is No}^t^e^d^,^”^Wa^shing^t^on^P^o^st^{, J}^u^ly^28,¹⁹⁸⁷^,
^p^.^A⁸^.^Jud^g^{e Bo}^rk,^ho^w^e^v^e^r,^dⁱ^dⁿ^o^t^recei^{ve a recess a}^ppointm^e^{nt a}^{nd, a}^s^a^S^upr^e^m^e^C^our^{t n}^o^mⁱ^ne^e^,^w^a^s^r^e^jec^t^e^d^by
^the^Se^na^teⁱⁿ^a⁵⁸^-⁴^{2 v}^o^te^{on O}^c^t.^23,¹⁹⁸⁷^.

not have hearings.⁶⁴ Nominees did not begin regularly testifying at their own hearings until John ⁶⁵
M. Harlan did so in 1955.
When the Judiciary Committee holds hearings, Senate floor consideration can be pushed back
sometimes by weeks or even months. Controversial nominees often spur protracted hearings. For
example, the Judiciary Committee spent 19 days considering Justice Louis D. Brandeis’s
nomination in 1916, and the interval between the start of hearings and final committee action
lasted 105 days. The final Senate vote came eight days later. More recently, the Judiciary
Committee, after learning of President Ronald Reagan’s selection of Robert H. Bork, took 76
days to hold its first day of hearings on the nomination, and then 21 more days to conclude action
on the nomination.
Senate custom plays an especially large role when sitting or former Senators are nominated to the
Court. The Senate has almost always considered their colleagues’s nominations to the Court ⁶⁶
within days of receiving the nomination, often without committee hearings or floor debate. For
example, although President Taft waited five months to nominate Edward D. White (a former
Senator from Louisiana) for Chief Justice, the Senate confirmed the nomination with no debate in ⁶⁷
less than one hour. Since 1900, three sitting Senators—Hugo L. Black of Alabama (1937),
James F. Byrnes of South Carolina (1941), and Harold H. Burton of Ohio (1945)—have been ⁶⁸
nominated to the Court, and all were quickly confirmed. Senators George Sutherland of Utah
(1922) and Sherman Minton of Indiana (1949) were nominated to the Court after having
concluded their Senate service. Sutherland was confirmed on the same day on which President
Warren Harding announced the nomination, and Minton was confirmed in 19 days.
The decades since 1945 have yet to test again the Senate tradition of bypassing the Judiciary
Committee when the Supreme Court nominee is a sitting U.S. Senator; no President since then
has nominated a sitting Senator. The last former Senator to be nominated to the Court, in 1949,
was Judge Sherman Minton of Indiana. (After defeat for re-election to the Senate in 1940, he had
been appointed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt to a federal appellate court judgeship.) In a
break with tradition, the Supreme Court nomination of former Senator Minton was referred to the
Judiciary Committee, and Senate confirmation followed the day after the committee approved the
nomination.

⁶⁴^T^h^is^num^be^r^doe^s^not^inc^l^u^d^eⁱⁿ^s^t^aⁿ^c^e^s^s^u^c^h^a^s^the^J^o^hn^G^.^R^obe^r^t^s^A^sso^ci^a^t^{e Ju}^stⁱ^c^eⁿ^o^mⁱ^na^tion,ⁱⁿ^w^h^ic^{h the}
^J^udicⁱ^a^r^y^C^o^m^m^itte^e^{did n}^o^t^ha^v^e^the^o^p^p^o^r^t^unity^to^hol^d^h^eariⁿ^gs.^Heariⁿ^{gs b}^e^f^o^{re t}^h^{e Ju}^dⁱ^ci^ary^Co^mmi^t^t^ee^w^e^re
^dis^p^eⁿ^s^e^{d w}^{ith f}^o^r^t^h^r^e^e^nom^ine^e^s^{: Fr}^aⁿ^k^Mur^phy^{in 1}⁹³⁹^{, J}^a^m^e^s^{F. B}^y^rⁿ^e^s^{in 19}⁴¹^{, a}ⁿ^{d H}^a^r^o^l^d^H^.^B^u^r^t^oⁿⁱⁿ¹⁹⁴⁵^{, a}^l^l
^of^w^h^o^m^ha^{d pr}ⁱ^o^r^s^e^r^v^ic^e^{in hig}^h^pu^blic^of^fⁱ^c^e^.^Mur^phy^ha^d^pr^e^v^io^us^ly^s^e^r^v^e^d^a^s^G^o^v^e^r^nor^of^Mic^hⁱ^g^aⁿ^a^{nd U}^.^S^.
^A^ttorne^y^G^e^ne^ra^{l. B}^y^rne^s^w^a^{s a}^s^itting^Se^na^t^o^{r f}^r^om^South^Ca^roliⁿ^a^w^h^eⁿ^nom^ina^t^e^d^{to t}^h^e^Co^urt.^Ha^{rold H. B}^u^rt^on
^w^a^s^a^Se^na^tor^f^r^om^O^h^{io. (}^B^iog^r^a^phic^a^lⁱⁿ^f^o^r^m^a^{tion obta}ⁱ^ne^{d f}^r^om^the^Fe^de^r^a^{l J}^u^dicⁱ^a^l^C^e^nte^r^’^s^Fe^d^e^r^a^{l J}^udg^e^s
^Biog^ra^phic^a^l^Da^ta^ba^se^{, a}^v^a^ila^ble^a^t^http^://w^ww^.^f^jc^.^g^ov^/^p^u^b^lic^/^hom^e^.^nsf^/^hisj).
⁶⁵^Se^e^C^R^S^R^e^por^{t R}^L³¹⁹⁸⁹^,^Su^p^r^{eme Co}^u^r^t^A^p^p^oⁱⁿ^t^m^en^t^P^r^o^{cess: R}^o^l^e^{s o}^f^t^h^{e P}^r^esi^d^eⁿ^t^,^Judⁱ^ci^a^r^y^Co^mmi^t^t^ee,^an^d
^Se^nate^,^by^D^e^nis^Ste^v^eⁿ^R^u^tk^us^.
⁶⁶^For^a^dditi^ona^l^ba^c^k^g^r^oun^{d inf}^o^r^m^a^{tion o}ⁿ^Se^na^tor^s^gⁱ^vⁱ^ng^c^u^r^r^e^nt^or^f^o^r^m^e^r^c^o^lle^a^g^ue^s^def^e^r^e^nce^w^h^eⁿⁿ^o^mⁱ^na^te^{d to}
^the^Co^{urt, se}^e^Rutk^us,^Su^p^r^{eme Co}^u^r^t^A^p^poⁱⁿ^t^m^en^t^s^P^r^o^cess^{, p}^p^.¹⁷^-1^8.
⁶⁷^“W^hⁱ^t^e^Head^{s Ben}^c^h^,^”^W^a^s^hⁱⁿ^gt^{on P}^o^s^t^,^D^e^c^.^13,¹⁹¹⁰^{, p. 1.}
⁶⁸^Se^na^{tors B}^u^rtoⁿ^aⁿ^{d By}^rne^s^{’s no}^mⁱ^na^{tions w}^e^re^{not re}^f^e^rre^{d to the}^Judicⁱ^a^r^y^Com^m^itte^e^.^Se^{n. Bla}^c^k^{’s nom}^ina^tion
^w^a^s^r^e^f^e^r^r^e^{d to the}^c^o^m^m^itte^e^,^w^h^ic^{h r}^e^c^o^m^m^e^nde^{d his}^c^o^nf^ir^m^a^ti^{on, a}^l^th^oug^h^by^a^divⁱ^de^{d 1}³^-⁴^v^o^t^e^.

As noted previously, withdrawn, rejected, or controversial nominations can substantially lengthen
the process. In these cases, although Presidents often name nominees fairly quickly, consideration
of the nominations can be drawn out in the Senate. During Judge Robert H. Bork’s controversial
nomination, for example, Senate consideration of Bork lasted more than a month, from the first
Judiciary Committee hearing on September 15, 1987, until the Senate’s floor vote to reject the
nomination on October 23, 1987. The entire process—from President Reagan’s announcement of
his intention to nominate Bork to Senate rejection—took 119 days.
Controversy can also delay confirmation of nominees who are ultimately successful. Despite a
relatively quick nomination-and-confirmation process of 42 days in late 1924 and early 1925 for
then-Attorney General Harlan F. Stone, his nomination was temporarily set back when it was
recommitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee, apparently because of Stone’s investigation as ⁶⁹
Attorney General of Senator Burton K. Wheeler. More recently, although Judge Clarence
Thomas narrowly won confirmation in 1991, nominating and confirming him took 110 days,
including a second round of Judiciary Committee hearings surrounding law professor Anita Hill’s
allegations against Thomas of sexual harassment.
Understanding how long the previous Supreme Court nomination-and-confirmation process has
taken, and what factors affected that schedule, can provide useful perspective on presidential
decision-making and the Senate’s preparations for future nominations. While Presidents and
supporters of nominees want Justices confirmed quickly, some Senators will continue to
emphasize their right to consider nominees carefully and their responsibility to hold sufficient
hearings. Against that political backdrop, this report demonstrates that the length of time required
to nominate and confirm or reject a nominee varies widely. Even median durations must be
interpreted cautiously. The context surrounding each nomination is particularly important in
understanding how long the process takes.
Given the advanced ages of some members of the current Court, more vacancies in the near
future are widely anticipated. Should those vacancies occur unexpectedly, such as with a sudden
retirement or death, the Court could well be operating without a full bench—making the timing of
nominations and confirmations even more pressing. In such a scenario, the Senate would likely be
under intense pressure to confirm a successor quickly. This report indicates that, from 1900-1980,
the President’s portion of the process took longer than the Senate’s. Since 1981, though, there has
been a substantial increase in the median duration between the President’s announcement of a
nominee and the start of Judiciary Committee hearings. As a result, the Senate’s portion of the
process has taken longer than the President’s.
Prior to 1981, lengthy nomination-and-confirmation processes usually occurred because either the
Senate was out of session when a vacancy on the Court arose, or the nomination was
controversial. In recent decades, by contrast, slower decision-making has taken place during an ^th
era when Congress is in session longer than during the early 20 century.

⁶⁹^Oⁿ^St^one^’^s^te^s^tim^ony^be^f^o^r^e^the^J^udicⁱ^a^r^y^C^o^m^m^itte^e^r^e^g^a^r^d^ing^th^e^inv^e^stig^a^{tion, se}^e^A^l^be^{rt W}^.^Fo^x^,^“^S^tone^T^e^lls
^Se^na^te^Com^m^itte^e^He^A^s^sum^e^{s Full Re}^sp^onsi^b^ility^For^P^r^e^ssing^N^e^w^W^h^e^e^l^e^r^Ca^s^e^,”^W^a^s^h^ingt^{on P}^o^s^t^{, J}^a^n.²⁹^{, 1}⁹²⁵^,
^{p. 1}^.

Since 1981, the nomination-and-confirmation process has lasted a median of 113 days—almost
twice as long as the 59-day median from 1900-1980. Although the data in Table 1, Table 2, and
Table 3 provide a median measure of the process, political context is an essential backdrop for
understanding the numbers. The President and the Senate share decision-making responsibilities
for placing new Justices on the Court. Ultimately, the choices each institution makes determine
how long nominations and confirmations take.
One possible explanation for the paradox of slower decisions despite more time in session is that,
as some critics on both sides of the aisle contend, Supreme Court nominations have become ⁷⁰
battlegrounds for larger political debates. Another possibility is that the Senate is considering
nominations more carefully than in the past, and therefore taking more time to make decisions
about nominees. Similarly, the Senate might be using longer decision-making and scrutiny of
nominees as a method of counterbalancing presidential power, especially when Senators believe
that the President has chosen an unqualified nominee.
Some early 20^th century appointments to the Supreme Court were confirmed within days of a
vacancy occurring. More recent nominations and confirmations, by contrast, typically have taken
several weeks or months. How and when a vacancy occurs, the Senate’s schedule, Judiciary
Committee involvement, institutional customs, and whether or not the nomination is
controversial, all affect the speed with which the President nominates, and the Senate passes
judgment, on prospective Justices.

⁷⁰^Onⁱⁿ^creasiⁿ^gl^y^coⁿ^t^ro^versi^a^l^j^u^di^ci^alⁿ^o^mⁱⁿ^atⁱ^oⁿ^s^,^{see ch}^ap^t^e^{r 4 i}ⁿ^W^a^l^t^e^{r F}^.^Mu^rph^y^,^C.^Her^m^an^P^rⁱ^t^ch^et^t^,^aⁿ^d^L^ee
^Epsteⁱ^n,^Courts^{, J}^u^d^g^e^s^{, &}^Politic^{s: An Intr}^od^uc^tio^{n t}^o^t^h^e^J^udicⁱ^a^l^Proc^e^s^s^{, 5}^th^e^d^{. (Bost}^oⁿ^:^Mc^G^r^a^w^{Hill, 200}^2);
^[^T^hom^a^s^O^.^Sa^r^g^eⁿ^tic^h,^P^a^ul^D^.^C^a^r^rⁱ^ng^ton,^B^a^r^b^a^r^a^{E. R}^e^e^d^{, C}^h^a^r^le^s^G^a^r^dne^r^G^e^y^h^{, a}^{nd Er}^wⁱ^{n C}^h^em^e^r^ins^k^y^]^,
^Unc^e^r^{tain J}^u^stic^e^:^P^o^litic^s^an^{d A}^m^e^r^ic^a’s^{Courts: T}^h^e^Re^ports^of^t^h^e^Task^F^o^r^c^e^s^{of Citize}ⁿ^s^{for I}ⁿ^d^e^pe^nde^nt^Courts
⁽^N^ew^Y^o^r^k^{: T}^h^e^C^e^ntur^y^Founda^tⁱ^on,²⁰⁰⁰⁾^;^aⁿ^{d Ma}^r^k^Silv^e^r^s^t^eⁱ^n,^Ju^dⁱ^ci^ou^{s Cho}ⁱ^{ces: T}^h^{e New P}^o^lⁱ^tⁱ^c^{s o}^f^Su^p^r^eme
^{Court C}^onfirm^a^tio^ns^(New^Yo^rk^{: W}^.^W^.^No^rtoⁿ^{& C}^o^m^p^an^y^,¹⁹⁹⁴⁾^.

Table 1. Major Events in the Supreme Court Nomination-and-Confirmation Process, 1900-2006
^{Actual o}^r^Pros^{pective Vacan}^cy^{President’s Announcement}
^Appa^{rently Became Known t}^o^{of Nominee}^{Senate Action Dates on No}^mination
^President^Nominating^Outgoing
^President^Justice
^{When How}^Nominee^Date^First^Hearing^Committee^{Final Action}^{Senate F}^{inal Action}
^Theodore^{Horace Gra}^y^09/1^5/1⁹⁰²^{Death of outgoing}^Oliver^12/0^2/1⁹⁰^{2 No}^record^12/0^4/1⁹⁰^{2 12/0}^4/1⁹⁰²
^Roosevelt^Justice^Wendell^{of hearing}
^Holmes
^Theodore^George^08/2^0/1⁹⁰²^a^{Public reports of}^Will^{iam R.}^01/1^4/1⁹⁰³^b^{No record}^02/2^3/1⁹⁰^{3 02/2}^3/1⁹⁰³
^Roosevelt^{Shiras, Jr.}^{imminent retireme}^nt^Day^{of hearing}
^Theodore^{Henry B.}^03/0^8/1⁹⁰⁶^c^Outgoing^Justice^Will^{iam H.}^11/0^7/1⁹⁰^{6 No}^record^12/1^0/1⁹⁰^{6 12/1}^2/1⁹⁰⁶
^Roosevelt^Brown^{notified President of}^d^Moody^{of hearing}
^{intention to retire}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^Will^{iam Howard}^Taft^{Rufus W.}^Peckham^10/2^4/1⁹⁰⁹^{Death of outgoing}^Justice^{Horace H.}^Lurton^12/1^3/1⁹⁰⁹^e^No^record^{of hearing}^12/1^6/1⁹⁰^{9 12/2}^0/1⁹⁰⁹
^g/w
^s^.or^Will^{iam Howard}^{David J.}^3/28/¹⁹¹⁰^{Death of outgoing}^{Charles Eva}^ns^4/25/¹⁹^{10 No}^record^05/0^2/1⁹¹^{0 05/0}^2/1⁹¹⁰
^le^ak^Taft^Brewer^Justice^Hughe^s^{of hearing}
^://wiki^Will^{iam Howard}^Taft^{Melville W.}^Fuller,^Chief^07/0^4/1⁹¹⁰^{Death of outgoing Chief}^Justice^{Edward D.}^White^12/1^2/1⁹¹⁰^{Nomination was not refe}^rred^{to Judiciary Committee}^12/1^2/1⁹¹⁰
^h^ttp^Justice
^Will^{iam Howard}^{Edward D.}^12/1^2/1⁹¹⁰^{Justice Edward D.}^Will^{is Van}^12/1^2/1⁹¹^{0 No}^record^12/1^5/1⁹¹^{0 12/1}^5/1⁹¹⁰
^Taft^White^{White nomination to be}^Devanter^{of hearing}
^{Chief Justice}
^Will^{iam Howard}^Will^{iam H.}^06/1^5/1⁹¹⁰^f^{Congressional}^action^{Joseph R.}^12/1^2/1⁹¹^{0 No}^record^12/1^5/1⁹¹^{0 12/1}^5/1⁹¹⁰
^Taft^Moody^{authorizing retirement}^Lamar^{of hearing}
^Will^{iam Howard}^{John Ma}^rshall^10/1^4/1⁹¹¹^{Death of outgoing}^{Mahlon Pitney}^02/1^9/1⁹¹²^{No record}^03/0^4/1⁹¹^{2 03/1}^3/1⁹¹²
^Taft^Harlan^Justice^{of hearing}
^Woodrow^{Horace H.}^07/1^2/1⁹¹⁴^{Death of outgoing}^{James C.}^08/1^9/1⁹¹⁴^g^No^record^08/2^4/1⁹¹^{4 08/2}^9/1⁹¹⁴
^Wilson^Lurton^Justice^McReynolds^{of hearing}
^Woodrow^{Joseph R.}^01/0^2/1⁹¹⁶^{Death of outgoing}^{Louis D.}^01/2^8/1⁹¹^{6 02/0}^9/1⁹¹⁶^05/2^4/1⁹¹⁶^06/0^1/1⁹¹⁶
^Wilson^Lamar^Justice^Brandeis
^Woodrow^Charles^06/1^0/1⁹¹⁶^h^Resignation^letter^{John H. Clarke}^07/1^4/1⁹¹⁶^{No record}^07/2^4/1⁹¹^{6 07/2}^4/1⁹¹⁶

^Wilson^{Evans Hug}^hes^{submitted to President}^{of hearing}

^{Actual o}^r^Pros^{pective Vacan}^cy^{President’s Announcement}
^Appa^{rently Became Known t}^o^{of Nominee}^{Senate Action Dates on No}^mination
^President^Nominating^Outgoing
^President^Justice
^{When How}^Nominee^Date^First^Hearing^Committee^{Final Action}^{Senate F}^{inal Action}
^{Warren Ha}^rding^{Edward D.}^05/1^9/1⁹²¹^{Death of outgoing}^Will^iam^06/3^0/1⁹²¹^{Nomination was not refe}^rred^06/3^0/1⁹²¹
^White^Justice^{Howard Taft}^{to Judiciary Committee}
^{Warren Ha}^rding^{John H.}^09/0^5/1⁹²^{2 Resignation}^letter^George^09/0^5/1⁹²²^{Nomination was not refe}^rred^09/0^5/1⁹²²
^Clarke^{submitted to President}^Sutherland^{to Judiciary Committee}
^09/0^5/1⁹²²ⁱ^{Public reports of}^{Pierce Butler}^11/2^3/1⁹²²^{No record}^11/2^8/1⁹²²^{Placed on Executive}^{Warren Ha}^rding^Will^{iam R.}
^{imminent retireme}^nt^{of hearing}^{Calendar on}^Day
^11/2^8/1⁹²^{2, with no}
^{record of furt}^her^j
^action
^12/0^4/1⁹²²^{Lack of action on first}^{Pierce Butler}^12/0^5/1⁹²²^{No record}^12/1^8/1⁹²^{2 12/2}^1/1⁹²²
^{nomination of Butler}^{of hearing}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^{Warren Ha}^rding^Mahlon^12/1^6/1⁹²^{2 White}^House^{Edward T.}^01/0^9/1⁹²³^l^No^record^01/2^9/1⁹²^{3 01/2}^9/1⁹²³
^g/w^Pitney^annou^{nced forth}^coming^Sanford^{of hearing}
^s^.or^retirement^k
^le^ak^m
^01/2^1/1⁹²^{5 Recommitted}^{Calvin Coo}^lidge^Joseph^12/2^5/1⁹²⁴^{Public reports of}^{Harlan F.}^01/0^5/1⁹²^{5 01/2}^8/1⁹²⁵
^://wiki^01/2^6/1⁹²⁵^McKenna^{forthcoming retireme}^nt^Stone
^h^ttp^02/0^2/1⁹²^{5 02/0}^5/1⁹²⁵
^Herbe^{rt Hoover}^Will^iam^02/0^3/1⁹³^{0 Retirement}^letter^{Charles Eva}^ns^02/0^3/1⁹³^{0 No}^record^02/1^0/1⁹³^{0 02/1}^3/1⁹³⁰
^{Howard Taft}^{submitted to President}^Hughe^s^{of hearing}
^{Chief Justice}
^Herbe^{rt Hoover}^{Edward T.}^03/0^8/1⁹³⁰^{Death of outgoing}^{John J. Parker}^03/2^1/1⁹³⁰^04/0^5/1⁹³⁰^04/2^1/1⁹³⁰^{Rejected 05/07/}¹⁹³⁰
^Sanford^Justice
^Herbe^{rt Hoover}^{Edward T.}^05/0^7/1⁹³^{0 Parker}^nomination^{Owen J.}^05/0^9/1⁹³^{0 No}^record^05/1^9/1⁹³^{0 05/2}^0/1⁹³⁰
^Sanford^{rejected by Senate}^Roberts^{of hearing}
^Herbe^{rt Hoover}^Oliver^01/1^2/1⁹³^{2 Retirement}^letter^{Benjamin N.}^02/1^5/1⁹³^{2 02/1}^9/1⁹³²^02/2^3/1⁹³²^02/2^4/1⁹³²
^Wendell^{submitted to President}^Cardozo
^{Holmes, Jr.}
^{Franklin D.}^Will^{is Van}^05/1^8/1⁹³⁷ⁿ^Retirement^letter^{Hugo L. Black}^08/1^2/1⁹³⁷^{No record}^08/1^6/1⁹³^{7 08/1}^7/1⁹³⁷

^Roosevelt^Devanter^{submitted to President}^{of hearing}

^{Actual o}^r^Pros^{pective Vacan}^cy^{President’s Announcement}
^Appa^{rently Became Known t}^o^{of Nominee}^{Senate Action Dates on No}^mination
^President^Nominating^Outgoing
^President^Justice
^{When How}^Nominee^Date^First^Hearing^Committee^{Final Action}^{Senate F}^{inal Action}
^{Franklin D.}^George^01/0^5/1⁹³^{8 Retirement}^letter^{Stanley F.}^01/1^5/1⁹³⁸^o^01/2^0/1⁹³⁸^01/2^4/1⁹³⁸^01/2^5/1⁹³⁸
^Roosevelt^Sutherland^{submitted to President}^Reed
^{Franklin D.}^{Benjamin N.}^07/0^9/1⁹³⁸^p^{Death of outgoing}^Felix^01/0^5/1⁹³^{9 01/1}^0/1⁹³⁹^01/1^6/1⁹³⁹^01/1^7/1⁹³⁹
^Roosevelt^Cardozo^Justice^Frankfu^rter
^{Franklin D.}^{Louis D.}^02/1^3/1⁹³⁹^q^Retirement^letter^Will^{iam O.}^03/2^0/1⁹³^{9 03/2}^4/1⁹³⁹^03/2^7/1⁹³⁹^04/0^4/1⁹³⁹
^Roosevelt^Brandeis^{submitted to President}^Douglas
^{Franklin D.}^{Pierce Butler}^11/1^6/1⁹³⁹^{Death of outgoing}^{Frank M}^u^r^phy^01/0^4/1⁹⁴⁰^01/1^1/1⁹⁴⁰^01/1^5/1⁹⁴⁰^01/1^6/1⁹⁴⁰
^Roosevelt^Justice
^{Franklin D.}^{James Clark}^01/2^2/1⁹⁴^{1 Outgoing}^Justice^{James F.}^06/1^2/1⁹⁴¹^{Nomination was not refe}^rred^06/1^2/1⁹⁴¹
^Roosevelt^McReynolds^{notified President of}^Byrnes^{to Judiciary Committee}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^{intention to retire}^r
^g/w^{Franklin D.}^Charles^06/0^2/1⁹⁴^s^{Retirement letter}^{Harlan F.}^06/1^2/1⁹⁴^{1 06/2}^1/1⁹⁴¹^06/2^3/1⁹⁴¹^06/2^7/1⁹⁴¹
^s^.or^Roosevelt^{Evans Hug}^hes^{submitted to President}^Stone
^le^ak^{Chief Justice}
^{Franklin D.}^{Harlan F.}^06/1^2/1⁹⁴¹^{Harlan F. Stone}^{Robert H.}^06/1^2/1⁹⁴^{1 06/2}^1/1⁹⁴¹^06/3^0/1⁹⁴¹^07/0^7/1⁹⁴¹
^://wiki^Roosevelt^Stone^{nomination to be}^Jackson
^h^ttp^{Chief Justice}
^{Franklin D.}^{James F.}^10/0^3/1⁹⁴²^t^{Byrnes a}^ppointme^{nt to}^{Wiley B.}^01/1^1/1⁹⁴^{3 01/2}^2/1⁹⁴³^02/0^1/1⁹⁴³^02/0^8/1⁹⁴³
^Roosevelt^Byrnes^{other p}^{ublic office}^Rutledge
^{Harry S.}^{Owen J.}^06/3^0/1⁹⁴⁵^u^Retirement^letter^{Harold H.}^09/1^8/1⁹⁴^{5 No}^record^09/1^9/1⁹⁴^{5 09/1}^9/1⁹⁴⁵
^Truman^Roberts^{submitted to President}^Burton^{of hearing}
^{Harry S.}^{Harlan F.}^04/2^2/1⁹⁴⁶^{Death of outgoing Chief}^{Fred M.}^06/0^6/1⁹⁴^{6 06/1}^4/1⁹⁴⁶^06/1^9/1⁹⁴⁶^06/2^0/1⁹⁴⁶
^Truman^Stone^Justice^Vinson
^{Chief Justice}
^{Harry S.}^Frank^07/1^9/1⁹⁴⁹^{Death of outgoing}^{Thomas C.}^07/2^8/1⁹⁴^{9 08/0}^9/1⁹⁴⁹^08/1^2/1⁹⁴⁹^08/1^8/1⁹⁴⁹
^Truman^Mur^phy^Justice^Clark
^{Harry S.}^{Wiley B.}^09/1^0/1⁹⁴⁹^{Death of outgoing}^Sherman^09/1^5/1⁹⁴^{9 09/2}^7/1⁹⁴⁹^10/0^3/1⁹⁴⁹^10/0^4/1⁹⁴⁹

^Truman^Rutledge^Justice^Minton

^{Actual o}^r^Pros^{pective Vacan}^cy^{President’s Announcement}
^Appa^{rently Became Known t}^o^{of Nominee}^{Senate Action Dates on No}^mination
^President^Nominating^Outgoing
^President^Justice
^{When How}^Nominee^Date^First^Hearing^Committee^{Final Action}^{Senate F}^{inal Action}
^Reces^{s appointm}^{ent, 10/02/1953}^{Dwight D.}^{Fred M.}^09/0^8/1⁹⁵³^{Death of outgoing Chief}^{Earl Warre}ⁿ
^Eisenhower^Vinson^Justice^01/1^1/1⁹⁵^{4 02/0}^2/1⁹⁵⁴^02/2^4/1⁹⁵⁴^03/0^1/1⁹⁵⁴
^{Chief Justice}
^10/0^9/1⁹⁵⁴^{Death of outgoing}^{John Ma}^rshall^11/0^8/1⁹⁵⁴^v^{No record of heari}^{ng, committee vote, or Senate vote}^{Dwight D.}^{Robert H.}
^Justice^{Harlan II}^Eisenhower^Jackson
^01/0^5/1⁹⁵⁵^{Lack of action on first}^{John Ma}^rshall^01/1^0/1⁹⁵^{5 02/2}^4/1⁹⁵⁵^03/1^0/1⁹⁵⁵^03/1^6/1⁹⁵⁵
^(Congress^{nomination of Harlan}^{Harlan II}
^reconvene^s)^nomination
^Reces^{s appointm}^{ent, 10/15/1956}^{Dwight D.}^Sherman^09/0^7/1⁹⁵^{6 Retirement}^letter^Will^{iam J.}
^Eisenhower^Minton^{submitted to President}^Brennaⁿ^01/1^4/1⁹⁵^{7 02/2}^6/1⁹⁵⁷^03/0^4/1⁹⁵⁷^03/1^9/1⁹⁵⁷
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^{Dwight D.}^{Stanley F.}^01/3^1/1⁹⁵^{7 Press}^confer^ence^held^{Charles E.}^03/0^2/1⁹⁵^{7 03/1}^8/1⁹⁵⁷^03/1^8/1⁹⁵⁷^03/1^9/1⁹⁵⁷
^g/w^Eisenhower^Reed^{by Reed an}^nouncing^Whittaker
^s^.or^retirement^w
^le^ak^Reces^{s Appoint}^{ment, 10/14/1958}^{Dwight D.}^{Harold H.}^10/0^6/1⁹⁵^{8 Retirement}^letter^{Potter Stewart}
^Eisenhower^Burton^{submitted to President}^01/1^7/1⁹⁵^{9 04/0}^9/1⁹⁵⁹^04/2^0/1⁹⁵⁹^05/0^5/1⁹⁵⁹
^://wiki
^h^ttp^{John F. Kennedy}^{Charles E.}^03/2^8/1⁹⁶^{2 Retirement}^letter^{Byron R.}^03/3^0/1⁹⁶²^y^04/1^1/1⁹⁶²^04/1^1/1⁹⁶²^04/1^1/1⁹⁶²
^Whittaker^{received by President}^x^White
^{John F. Kennedy}^Felix^08/2^8/1⁹⁶²^z^Retirement^letter^Arthu^{r J.}^08/2^9/1⁹⁶^{2 09/1}^1/1⁹⁶²^09/2^5/1⁹⁶²^09/2^5/1⁹⁶²
^Frankfu^rter^{submitted to President}^Goldberg
^{Lyndon B.}^Arthu^{r J.}^07/2^0/1⁹⁶^{5 Goldberg}^appointme^nt^aa^{Abe Fortas}^07/2^8/1⁹⁶⁵^bbbb^08/0^5/1⁹⁶⁵^08/1^0/1⁹⁶⁵^08/1^1/1⁹⁶⁵
^Johnson^Goldberg^{to other pu}^{blic office}
^{Lyndon B.}^{Thomas C.}^02/2^8/1⁹⁶^{7 Outgoing}^Justice^Thurgood^06/1^3/1⁹⁶⁷^dd^07/1^3/1⁹⁶^{7 08/0}^3/1⁹⁶⁷^08/3^0/1⁹⁶⁷
^Johnson^Clark^{notified President of}^cc^Marshall
^{intention to retire}
^{Lyndon B.}^{Earl Warre}ⁿ^06/1^3/1⁹⁶⁸^ee^{Retirement letter}^{Abe Fortas}^06/2^6/1⁹⁶⁸^07/1^1/1⁹⁶⁸^09/1^7/1⁹⁶⁸^10/0^1/1⁹⁶^{8 (Cloture}
^Johnson^C^{hief Justice}^{submitted to President}^{motion rejected)}
^{Lyndon B.}^{Abe Fortas}^06/2^6/1⁹⁶⁸^ff^{Fortas nomination to be}^Homer^06/2^6/1⁹⁶⁸^07/1^1/1⁹⁶⁸^{No record of}^{Nomination withdrawn}
^Johnson^{Chief Justice}^Thornber^ry^{committee vote}^{by President,}
^10/0^4/1⁹⁶⁸

^{Actual o}^r^Pros^{pective Vacan}^cy^{President’s Announcement}
^Appa^{rently Became Known t}^o^{of Nominee}^{Senate Action Dates on No}^mination
^President^Nominating^Outgoing
^President^Justice
^{When How}^Nominee^Date^First^Hearing^Committee^{Final Action}^{Senate F}^{inal Action}
^{Richard M.}^{Earl Warre}ⁿ^01/2^0/1⁹⁶⁹^gg^{Fortas Chief Justice}^{Warren E.}^05/2^1/1⁹⁶^{9 06/0}^3/1⁹⁶⁹^06/0^3/1⁹⁶⁹^06/0^9/1⁹⁶⁹
^Nixon^{Chief Justice}^{nomination withdrawn}^Burger
^{by President Jo}^hnson
^(10/0^4/1⁹⁶⁸⁾
^05/1^4/1⁹⁶^{9 Resignation}^letter^{Clement F.}^08/1^8/1⁹⁶⁹^hh^09/1^6/1⁹⁶^{9 10/0}^9/1⁹⁶⁹^11/2^1/1⁹⁶⁹^{Richard M.}^{Abe Fortas}
^{submitted to President}^Haynswort^h,^(Rejected)^Nixon
^Jr.
^11/2^1/1⁹⁶^{9 Haynswort}^h^nomination^{G. Harrold}^01/1^9/1⁹⁷^{0 01/2}^7/1⁹⁷⁰^02/1^6/1⁹⁷⁰^04/0^8/1⁹⁷⁰
^{rejected by Senate}^Carswell^(Rejected)
^04/0^8/1⁹⁷^{0 Carswell}^nomination^{Harry A.}^04/1^4/1⁹⁷^{0 04/2}^9/1⁹⁷⁰^05/0^6/1⁹⁷⁰^05/1^2/1⁹⁷⁰
^{rejected by Senate}^Blackmun
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^{Richard M.}^{Hugo L. Black}^09/1^7/1⁹⁷¹^{Retirement letter}^{Lewis F.}^10/2^1/1⁹⁷^{1 11/0}^3/1⁹⁷¹^11/2^3/1⁹⁷¹^12/0^6/1⁹⁷¹
^g/w^Nixon^{submitted to President}^Powell^{, Jr.}
^s^.or
^le^ak^{Richard M.}^{John Ma}^rshall^09/2^3/1⁹⁷^{1 Retirement}^letter^Will^{iam H.}^10/2^1/1⁹⁷^{1 11/0}^3/1⁹⁷¹^11/2^3/1⁹⁷¹^12/1^0/1⁹⁷¹
^Nixon^{Harlan II}^{submitted to President}^Rehnq^uist
^://wiki^{Gerald R. Ford}^Will^{iam O.}^11/1^2/1⁹⁷⁵ⁱⁱ^Retirement^letter^{John Paul}^11/2^8/1⁹⁷⁵^jj^12/0^8/1⁹⁷⁵^12/1^1/1⁹⁷⁵^12/1^7/1⁹⁷⁵
^h^ttp^Douglas^{submitted to President}^Stevens
^{Ronald Reagan}^Potter^05/1^8/1⁹⁸¹^kk^Retirement^letter^{Sandra Day}^07/0^7/1⁹⁸¹^ll^09/0^9/1⁹⁸¹^09/1^5/1⁹⁸¹^09/2^1/1⁹⁸¹
^Stewart^{submitted to President}^O’Connor
^{Ronald Reagan}^Warren^E.^05/2^7/1⁹⁸⁶^mm^{Chief Justice}^privately^Will^{iam H.}^06/1^7/1⁹⁸^{6 07/2}^9/1⁹⁸⁶^08/1^4/1⁹⁸⁶^09/1^7/1⁹⁸⁶
^Burger^{alerted President of}^Rehnq^uist
^{Chief Justice}^{intention to retire}
^{Ronald Reagan}^Will^{iam H.}^05/2^7/1⁹⁸⁶ⁿⁿ^Rehnq^uist^nomination^{Antonin Scalia}^06/1^7/1⁹⁸⁶^08/0^5/1⁹⁸⁶^08/1^4/1⁹⁸⁶^09/1^7/1⁹⁸⁶
^Rehnq^uist^{by Reagan to b}^e^Chief
^Justice
^06/2^6/1⁹⁸⁷^oo^Press^confer^ence^held^{Robert H.}^07/0^1/1⁹⁸^{7 09/1}^5/1⁹⁸⁷^10/0^6/1⁹⁸⁷^10/2^3/1⁹⁸⁷^{Ronald Reagan}^{Lewis F.}
^{by Powell announcing}^Bork^(Rejected)^Powell^{, Jr.}
^retirement
^10/2^3/1⁹⁸^{7 Bork}^nomination^{Douglas H.}^10/2^9/1⁹⁸⁷^Ginsb^{urg withdrew}^(11/^07/¹⁹⁸⁷⁾^pp
^{rejected by Senate}^Ginsb^urg^{before official nomination}

^{Actual o}^r^Pros^{pective Vacan}^cy^{President’s Announcement}
^Appa^{rently Became Known t}^o^{of Nominee}^{Senate Action Dates on No}^mination
^President^Nominating^Outgoing
^President^Justice
^{When How}^Nominee^Date^First^Hearing^Committee^{Final Action}^{Senate F}^{inal Action}
^11/0^7/1⁹⁸^{7 Ginsb}^urg^withdrawal^Anthony^M.^11/1^1/1⁹⁸^{7 12/1}^4/1⁹⁸⁷^01/2^7/1⁹⁸⁸^02/0^3/1⁹⁸⁸
^Kennedy
^{George H.W.}^Will^{iam J.}^07/2^0/1⁹⁹^{0 Retirement}^letter^{David H.}^07/2^3/1⁹⁹⁰^qq^09/1^3/1⁹⁹^{0 09/2}^7/1⁹⁹⁰^10/0^2/1⁹⁹⁰
^Bush^Brennaⁿ^{submitted to President}^Souter
^{George H.W.}^Thurgood^06/2^7/1⁹⁹^{1 Retirement}^letter^Clarence^07/0^1/1⁹⁹^{1 09/1}^0/1⁹⁹¹^09/2^7/1⁹⁹¹^10/1^5/1⁹⁹¹
^Bush^Marshall^{submitted to President}^Thomas
^Will^{iam J.}^{Byron R.}^03/1^9/1⁹⁹³^rr^Retirement^letter^{Ruth Bader}^06/1^4/1⁹⁹³^ss^07/2^0/1⁹⁹³^07/2^9/1⁹⁹³^08/0^3/1⁹⁹³
^Clinton^White^{submitted to President}^Ginsb^urg
^Will^{iam J.}^{Harry A.}^01/0^1/1⁹⁹⁴^tt^{Justice p}^{rivately alerted}^{Stephen G.}^05/1^3/1⁹⁹^{4 07/1}^2/1⁹⁹⁴^07/1^9/1⁹⁹⁴^07/2^9/1⁹⁹⁴
^Clinton^Blackmun^{President of}^Breyer
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^{forthcoming retireme}^nt
^g/w^07/0^1/2⁰⁰^{5 Retirement}^letter^{John G.}^07/1^9/2⁰⁰⁵^{Nomination was withdrawn}^{by P}^{resident (09/}^05/²⁰⁰⁵⁾^{George W.}^{Sandra Day}
^s^.or^{submitted to President}^Roberts^{before th}^{e start of}^{Judiciary Committee hearings; re-}^Bush^O’Connor
^le^ak^{nominated as Chief J}^{ustice (0}^9/0⁵^/200⁵⁾
^09/0^5/2⁰⁰^{5 Annou}^nceme^nt^of^{Harriet E.}^10/0^3/2⁰⁰⁵^{Miers withdrew as}^{nominee (1}^0/^27/2⁰⁰^{5) be}^{fore the}^start
^://wiki^{Roberts nomination}^Miers^{of Judiciary Committee hearings}
^h^ttp^{withdrawal and re-}
^{submission b}^y^President
^10/2^7/2⁰⁰⁵^Annou^nceme^{nt of Miers}^{Samuel A.}^10/3^1/2⁰⁰^{5 01/0}^9/2⁰⁰⁶^01/2^4/2⁰⁰⁶^01/3^1/2⁰⁰⁶
^withdrawal^Alito^{, Jr.}
^{George W.}^Will^{iam H.}^09/0^3/2⁰⁰⁵^{Death of outgoing}^{John G.}^09/0^5/2⁰⁰^{5 09/1}^2/2⁰⁰⁵^09/2^2/2⁰⁰⁵^09/2^9/2⁰⁰⁵
^Bush^Rehnq^uist^Justice^Roberts
^Sources:^{As describ}^{ed in the t}^e^{xt, this resear}^ch^{relied on historical newspa}^{pers, official presidential papers, and CRS corres}^ponden^ce^{with Presidential Libraries. Ward’s}
^{Deciding to Leave}^{was especially u}^{seful in compiling data on the}^rea^{sons why}^{Justices left t}^he^benc^h.^Additi^{onal source information ap}^{pears in t}^{he ta}^{ble notes b}^elow.
^a.^{It is unclear}^whe^{n President The}^{odore Ro}^{osevelt learned of Justic}^{e Shiras’s intention to retire. However,}^{Washington P}^ost^coverag^e^{suggests t}^{hat Shiras’s fort}^hcomin^g
^departur^{e was well known in}^{Washington, DC by at least A}^{ug. 20,}¹⁹⁰^{2 (“}^no^{x May}^{Not Want It: Bel}^{ief that He Would Decline Justic}^{e Shiras’s Positi}^on,”^Washington
^Post^{, Aug.}^{20, 1}⁹⁰^{2, p. 1).}
^b.^{President Roosevelt did not form}^{ally announce Day’s}^{nomination u}^{ntil Feb. 19, 1}⁹⁰^{3. However, the}^{Washington Po}^st^re^{ported as early}^{as Jan. 1}^{4, 1}⁹⁰³^{that P}^resident
^{Roosevelt had already offered Day the}^{nomination, after William}^{Howard Taft declined the offer i}ⁿ^{favor of contin}^uing^{his posit}^{ion as Civil Governor of the Philippin}^e
^{Islands (“eclined by Taft,”}^Washing^{ton Post}^{, Ja}^{n. 1}^{4, 19}^03,^{p. 1).}

^c.^{According to the}^{Washington Post}^{, Justice Brown notified the Presi}^{dent, on Mar. 8,}¹⁹⁰^{6, that}^{he wi}^{shed to retire (“To Leave the}^{Bench: J}^{ustice Brown Will Reti}^{re in}
^{the Fall,”}^{Washington Post}^{, Mar.}^{8, 19}^{06, p.}^3).
^d.^{It is unclear}^{from t}^{he historical r}^{ecord whethe}^{r the P}^{resident lear}^{ned of Justice Brow}^{n’s desire to r}^{etire by letter, pe}^rsonal^conversa^{tion, etc.}
^e.^{Despite the delay betwee}^{n J}^ustic^{e Peckham’s death a}^{nd President}^Will^{iam Howard Taft’s nominatio}^{n of Horace}^{H. Lurton, President}^{Taft, in nominating Lu}^{rton, was}
^{reportedly “adhering to}^{his original purpose}^{to promote Judge}^Lur^{ton, whom he}^{has know}^{n for yea}^{rs, and with whom}^{he se}^{rved on}^t^{he be}^{nch,” (“Taft Na}^{mes L}^urton^,”
^{Washington Po}^st^{, Dec. 14, 1}⁹⁰^{9, p}^.^3).
^f.^{Justice Moody did not actually depart th}^{e Court}^{until Nov. 20,}¹⁹¹⁰^(Ward,^{Deciding to Leave}^{, p. 5). However, “llness of a serious}^nat^ure^{has kept}^Ju^{stice Moody from}
^{his duties in the}^Supr^{eme Court}^f^{or almost a year. There ha}^{ve bee}^{n occasional rumors of}^retiremen^{t, but Senator Lodge [on}^Ju^ne¹^{5, 19}^10]^prese^{nted th}^{e real}
^harbinge^{r of that}^{action, in the fo}^{rm of a bill extending t}^{he stat}^ute^{relating to retirement f}^{rom the S}^upre^{me Court to cover}^th^{e ca}^se^{of Mr. Moody” (“Moody Wil}^l
^Retire,”^{Washington Post}^{, J}^une^15,¹⁹^{10, p.}^1).
^g.^{Although J}^{ustice McRey}^{nolds’s nomination was not annou}^nced^un^{til Aug. 20, 19}^{14, the}^{Washington Post}^{reported on A}^{ug. 1}⁹^{that Pr}^{esident Woodrow Wi}^{lson had}
^{“definitely decided” on McReynol}^{ds (“Picks M’Reynolds,”}^Washingt^{on Po}^st^{, Aug. 19,}¹⁹^{14, p.}^{1), ther}^{eby informally alerting Congress}^{to the President’s choice.}
^h.^{On J}^une^10,¹⁹^{16, J}^{ustice Hug}^hes^{resigned to p}^ursu^{e the}¹⁹¹⁶^Rep^{ublican p}^{residential nomination (“Hughe}^{s, With Words That Ring,}^{Obeys Call to Lead Repu}^blicans,”
^{Washington Po}^st^{, Ju}^{ne 1}^{1, 1}⁹¹^{6, p. 1). Although historical media res}^{earch does not indicate t}^{hat Presi}^{dent Wilson knew for ce}^{rtain tha}^{t Justic}^{e H}^ughe^{s would resign,}
^{media reports had}^{hinted at a H}^u^{ghes resignation t}^hroug^{hout th}^{e s}^{pring of}¹⁹^16.
^i.^{Day did not leave the Court u}^{ntil Nov. 13, 1}⁹²^{2. However, the}^W^{ashington Post}^{reported t}^{hat Day’s consideration of retirement}^wa^{s mentioned at a White}^House
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^{briefing on Sept.}^{5, 19}^{22 (“J}^ustice^{Day May Leave}^{the Be}^nch,”^Was^{hington Post}^{, Sept. 6, 1}⁹²^{2, p. 1).}
^g/w^j.^{After the}^{Senate took no final act}^{ion on Butler’s nomination by t}^h^e^{end of the t}^{hird session of t}^{he 6}⁷^th^Congre^{ss on Dec. 4, 1}⁹²^{2, Pr}^{esident Warren}^{Harding re-}
^s^.or^{nominated Butler on Dec. 5, 1}⁹²^{2. See “Fight Over Butler’s}^{Nomination Forecast,”}^{Washington Po}^st^{, Dec. 6, 192}^{2, p. 1}^{2; and “Fight}^{Against Butler Op}^ened^by^{Shipstead,”}^{Washington Po}^st^{, Dec. 9, 19}^22,^{p. 2.}
^le^ak
^k.^{Although J}^{ustice Pitney’s resignati}^{on was effective as}^{of Dec. 31,}¹⁹^{22, the W}^{hite House a}^nno^unced^{Pitney’s forthcoming depart}^u^{re o}ⁿ^{Dec. 16,}¹⁹^{22 ( “Resigns,”}
^://wiki^{Chicago Daily Tr}^ibune^,^{Dec. 17, 19}^{22, p. 1}^7).
^h^ttp^l.^{President Warren}^{Harding did n}^{ot official}^{ly nominate Sanford unt}^{il Jan. 24, 19}^{23. Howeve}^{r, the me}^{dia reported as early as Ja}^n.^{9, 1}⁹^{23, that Pr}^{esident Harding inte}^nd^ed
^{to nominate Sanford (“E.T. Sanford Choice for Supr}^{eme Court,”}^{Washington Po}^st^{, Jan. 9,}¹⁹^{23, p. 1}^).
^m.^{Justice McKe}^{nna did not officially retire until Ja}^{n. 5, 19}^{25. Howeve}^r^,^{the media reported his immine}ⁿ^t^{retirement o}ⁿ^{Dec. 25,}¹⁹^{24 (“}^{M’Kenna to Retire Soon as a}
^{Justice of the}^Sup^{reme Court,”}^{Washington Po}^st^{, Dec. 25, 1}⁹²^{4, p}^.^2).
^n.^{For an account}^{of Ju}^{stice Van De}^vanter^{privately alerting a re}^port^{er of his decision to retire on th}^e^{morning of th}^{e an}^nounc^eme^{nt, s}^{ee “News ‘Beat’ Aided by Van}
^Devanter,”^{New Y}^{ork Times}^{, May}^{23, 1}⁹³^{7, p. 4}^0.
^o.^{Justice Reed had also bee}^{n a fro}ⁿ^trun^ner^{for the}¹⁹³⁷^{seat that}^ev^{entually went to J}^{ustice H}^{ugo Black. This perha}^{ps e}^{xplains Pr}^eside^{nt Franklin D. Roosevelt’s}
^{relatively quick nomination of Reed, despite what many}^reporte^rs^{considered to be a su}^rprise^retir^{ement an}^nou^nceme^{nt from Sut}^he^{rland. See Robert C. Albright,}
^{“Sutherland, 7}^{5, Quits U.S. Supre}^{me Court,”}^{New Y}^{ork Times}^{, Jan.}^{6, 19}^{38, p. X}^{1; and Fra}^{nklyn Waltman, “Stanley F. Reed Named to U.S. Supreme Court.”}^{New Y}^ork
^Times^{, Jan. 1}^{6, 1}⁹³^{8, p. 1.}
^p.^{Although J}^{ustice Cardozo had be}^{en ill and away from the}^be^nch^{since Decem}^ber¹⁹^{37 (United Pre}^{ss, “Supreme Cou}^{rt Libe}^{ral Succ}^umb^{s to}^{Heart Ailment in}^N.Y.,”
^{Washington Po}^st^{, July 1}^{0, 1}⁹³^{8, p.}^{M1), a definite need to nominate}^{a new J}^{ustice did not occur}^{until Cardozo}^{’s death on July}^{9, 19}^38.

^q.^{Justice Brandeis}^{had bee}^{n away f}^r^{om the be}^nch^{for a mont}^{h, recov}^{ering from a}^{heart attac}^{k, prior t}^o^announ^{cing his retire}^{ment (}^Uni^{ted Press, “Justice Bra}^{ndeis, Dean}
^{of Supreme Cou}^{rt, Quits,”}^{Los An}^{geles Time}^s^{, Feb. 14,}¹⁹^{39, p. 1).}^{Nonetheless, his r}^{etirement wa}^s^{considered abru}^{pt, suggesti}^{ng tha}^{t President Roosevelt had little}
^{advance notice to consider a s}^u^c^cessor.
^r.^{It is unclear}^{from t}^{he historical r}^{ecord whethe}^{r the P}^{resident lear}^{ned of Justice}^{McReynolds’s desire to retire by letter,}^pers^{onal co}^{nversation, etc.}
^s.^{Although Chief J}^{ustice H}^ughe^{s’s r}^{etirement due to age a}^{nd poor}^h^{ealth had bee}^{n “r}^{umored some}^months”^{prior to sub}^{mission of h}ⁱ^s^{formal retirement letter (Walt}^er
^{Trohan, “Hug}^{hes Retires From C}^ourt,”^{Chicago Daily Tri}^bune^{, June 3, 19}^{41, p.}^{1), the definite need}^f^{or a new}^{nominee did not arise u}^{ntil Hughes a}^nno^unced^his
^retirement.
^t.^{Justice Byr}^{nes resign}^{ed at President Roosevelt’s request on}^{Oct. 3,}¹⁹^{42, be}^{coming Director of Eco}^{nomic Stability. R}^{oosevelt wa}^{s, th}^{erefore, aware of an}^impending
^{vacancy on}^{the Cou}^{rt p}^{rior to the formal resignation, although t}^h^e^{precise date is u}^{nclear. For a su}^{mmary of Byr}^{nes’s tra}^nsitio^{n from the Court}^{to his new}^{post, see}
^{Associated Press, “Byrnes Resign}^{s From Bench i}ⁿ^Letter^{to President,”}^{New York Time}^s^{, Oct. 4, 1}⁹⁴^{2, p. 45.}
^u.^{Although President Tr}^{uman did n}^{ot announ}^{ce J}^{ustice Roberts’s int}^{ention to retire u}^{ntil July 5, 1}⁹⁴⁵^{(United Press, “Morgantha}^u^{and Roberts}^Resign,”^{Los Angeles Ti}^me^s^,
^{July 6, 1}⁹⁴^{5, p. 1), Ju}^{stice Roberts}^{’s retirement letter is dated J}^uly^{30, 1}⁹⁴^{5. Truma}^{n received t}^{he letter on that}^{date “or so}^{on the}^rea^{fter” (e-mail communication}
^{between CRS I}^{nformation Specialist Dana Ely and Tr}^uman^Library^{Archivist Randy Sowell, Sept. 2, 2005).}
^v.^{The Senate took no final action on the}^Harlan^{nomination before t}^{he 8}³^rd^{Congress’s final adjournm}^{ent on Dec. 2, 1}⁹⁵^{4. President Ei}^senhower^{re-nominated Harla}^{n t}^o^th
^{the Court on}^{Jan. 1}^{0, 1}⁹⁵^{5, five days after t}^{he start}^{of the}^{first sess}^{ion of the 8}⁴^Congre^{ss. Evidenc}^{e does not suggest t}^{hat anot}^{her a}^nnou^nceme^{nt of the}^nomination
^{was made.}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^w.^{Whether P}^{resident Eise}^nhower^{first learned of J}^{ustice Reed’s retir}^{ement t}^hrough^the^press^confe^re^{nce or a letter}^{from Reed is u}ⁿ^{clear. Contemporary}^media^{coverage mentioned a}^press^conf^{erence a}^{nd a letter to Eise}^nhowe^{r (Edward T. Foll}^{iard, “Reed Is R}^{etiring From High Court,”}^Wa^{shington Post}^{, Feb.}^{1, 19}^{57, p. A}^1).
^g/w^{However, political scientist Artemus Ward’s accou}^{nt assert}^{s that}^{Reed announ}^{ced his retireme}^{nt t}^hrough^{a p}^{ress con}^feren^{ce (War}^d^,^{Deciding to Leave}^{, pp. 162-1}^63).
^s^.or^{Regardless, both events occ}^urred^{on Jan. 3}^{1, 1}⁹⁵^{7. For the Ja}^{n. 31}^corresponde^{nce bet}^{ween Reed a}^{nd Eisen}^{hower, see “Lette}^{r to S}^{tanley Reed Regarding His}
^le^ak^{Retirement From Active Service}^{as An Associate Ju}^{stice of the S}^u^{preme Cou}^{rt,” U.S. National Arc}^{hives and Records Administration}^{, Office of th}^{e Federal Register,}
^{Public Papers of the Pre}^{sidents of th}^{e United States: Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1957}^{(Washington: GPO, 19}^{58), pp.}¹⁰^9-11^0.
^://wiki^x.^{This information is based on e-}^m^{ail communication between CRS}^{Information Specialist Dana Ely a}^{nd Kennedy}^Library^Refere^{nce T}^{echnician Sha}^{ron Kelly, Sept. 14,}
^h^ttp²⁰⁰^5.
^y.^{According to a press a}^{ccount, Pr}^{esident Kennedy’s decision to nominate White “was ap}^pare^{ntly m}^{ade just a few}^hours^{before t}^{he s}^{election was annou}^{nced Friday}
^{night” (on Mar}^ch^{30, 1}⁹⁶^{2) (Jame}^{s E. Clayton, “White Was One of}^{Three I}ⁿ^Line^{for High Cou}^rt,”^{Washington Po}^st^{, Apr. 1,}^{p. A1). G}^{iven the r}^{elatively quick action,}
^{however, Kennedy}^{might ha}^{ve co}^{nsidered White as a Su}^{preme Co}^{urt ca}^{ndidate in advance of th}^{e M}^{ar. 28, 1}⁹⁶^{2, anno}^{unced vaca}^ncy.
^z.^{Aug. 28, 1}⁹⁶^{2, is the only definitive date which ca}ⁿ^{be esta}^{blished based on available data, as the ea}^{rliest point at which Pre}^{sident Kennedy lear}^{ned of Justice}
^Frankfu^{rter’s inte}^{ntion to retire. However, President Ken}^{nedy’s q}^{uick nomination of Goldberg, and}^{Justice Fra}^nkfu^{rter’s poor}^he^alth^{in the week}^{s leading up to}^his
^{retirement, sugge}^{st that}^Presiden^{t Kennedy was}^{considering p}^rosp^{ective nominees well before Fra}ⁿ^kfurte^{r step}^{ped down. Kennedy’s}^{letter to Justice Fra}^nkfu^rter
^accepting^{his retiremen}^{t refe}^renc^{es a visit the President}^{paid to Frankfu}^{rter to c}^{heck on}^{his health}^s^{ometime during the s}^umme^r^{of 1}⁹⁶²^{(U.S. National Archives and}
^{Records Administration, Office of the Federal Register,}^{Public Pape}^{rs of the Presidents of the}^{United States: John F. Kennedy, 1962}^{, (Washington: GPO, 1}⁹⁶^{3), p. 65}^6).
^{According to Kennedy Lib}^{rary R}^eference^Tech^{nician Sharon Kelly, Kennedy’s office files suggest t}^h^{at corresponde}^nce^between^Fran^kfurte^{r, Special Assistant for}
^{National Security Affairs M}^cGeor^{ge Bundy, and t}^{he President woul}^{d have alerted Ken}^{nedy to Frankf}^{urter’s declining health}^arou^nd^M^{ay 17,}¹⁹^{62 (e-mail}
^{communication betwee}^{n CRS Inf}^{ormation Specialist Dana Ely and Kennedy Lib}^{rary Refe}^rence^Tech^{nician Sharon Kelly, Sept. 14, 2}⁰⁰⁵^).
^aa.^{President Lyndon B. Joh}^nson^une^{xpectedly nominated}^Justice^{Goldberg to be}^{U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations following the}^d^{eath on J}^{uly 14,}¹⁹^{65, of the}
^{previous am}^{bassador, Adlai E. Ste}^{venson. See Carroll Kilpatrick, “}^{Goldberg is Named to Stevenson}^Post,”^{Washington Post}^{, J}^{uly 21,}¹^965,^{p. A1.}

^bb.^{Although J}^{ustice Fortas was}^{not nominated until July}^{28, 1}⁹⁶^{5, Pr}^{esident Johnson}^ap^{parently decid}^{ed to nominate Fortas long bef}^or^{e the Goldberg}^{vacancy, making}^t^he
^{gap of only one week}^betwee^{n G}^{oldberg’s resignation and Fortas’s nomination uns}^ur^{prising. At the}^{press co}^nfere^{nce a}^nnou^{ncing Fo}^r^{tas’s nomination, President}
^{Johnson said that}^{he a}^{nd Fortas h}^{ad discussed the}^{nomination “on nume}^{rous occasions in t}^{he 2}⁰^m^{onths,” (U.S. National Archives}^{and Records Administration, Office}
^{of the Federal Register,}^{Public Pap}^{ers of the Presidents}^{of the United States: Lyndon B. Johnson, 1966}^{, vol.}^{2 (Washington: GPO), 1}⁹⁶^{7, p.}^798).
^cc.^{Despite the fact}^that^{Justice Clar}^{k annou}^{nced his}^{forthcoming r}^{etirement on}^{Feb. 2}^{8, 19}^67,^{historical evidence suggests t}^{hat Jo}^h^nson^{might have}^prom^{pted Clark’s}
^{retirement as}^{early as Ja}^{n. 19}^67,^{when t}^{he President}^pre^{pared to}^{nominated Justice Clark’s son, Ra}^{msey, to be Attorney}^Ge^neral.^{“On Ja}^nuar^{y 2}^{5, 19}^{67, Jo}^{hnson tol}^d
^{Ramsey that}^{he could only be}^na^{med the pe}^rman^{ent attor}^{ney ge}ⁿ^{eral if his fathe}^{r step}^{ped down f}^r^{om the Court” (Ward,}^{Deciding to Leave}^{, p. 17}^0).
^dd.^{Like the 1}⁹⁶⁵^Fortas^{nomination, Mars}^{hall’s nomination was no su}^{rprise, since Jo}^{hnson wa}^{s re}^porte^{dly considering Marshall for a}^p^{pointment to the}^Court^{before t}^he
^{formal nomination. According to a 19}⁶⁷^{Washington P}^ost^r^{eport, “}^{Marshall’s resignation two years}^{ago, at the President’s req}^{uest, fr}^{om a lifetime seat on the 2d U.S.}
^{Circuit Court of Ap}^{peals to beco}^{me Solic}^{itor General, had seeme}^{d clearly a move to groom him for the}^{Nation’s highest cou}^rt”^(Joh^{n P. MacKenzie, “LBJ Names}
^{Marshall to Court,” Ju}^{ne 1}^{4], 1}⁹⁶^7,^{Washington Po}^st^{, p. A1).}
^ee.^{Although President Jo}^{hnson did n}^{ot announ}^{ce Chief J}^{ustice Warr}^e^{n’s retirement}^u^{ntil June}^26,^{he r}^{eceived Warren’s retireme}^{nt le}^tt^{er on J}^une^{13, 1}⁹⁶⁸^{(U.S. National}
^{Archives and Records Administra}^{tion, Office of the Federal Register,}^{Public Papers of the}^{Presidents o}^f^{the United States: Lyndon B. Johnson, 1968-69}^{, vol. 1 (Washington:}
^{GPO), 197}^{0, p. 7}^46).
^ff.^{Although a s}^{pecific opport}^{unity t}^o^{name a new}^{Associate Justice d}^{id not arise until the Fortas Chief}^Justice^{nomination on Ju}^ne²^{6, 1}^{968, it was}^{reported t}^{hat “[s]om}^e
^{Texans at t}^{he Capitol are su}^{re th}^{at Mr. John}^{son ha}^{s plan}^{ned for t}^h^e^{last four year}^{s to name T}^horn^b^{erry to the}^Supr^{eme Court}^bef^or^{e he [Joh}^{nson] left office,”}
^{(Richard L. Lyons, “Homer Thor}^nber^{ry: ‘Constructive Lib}^{eral,’ Cl}^{ose LBJ friend,”}^{Washington P}^ost,^J^une^{27, 1}⁹⁶^{9, p. 1).}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^gg.^{Jan. 20,}¹⁹^{69 (t}^{he date of Richard}^{M. Nixon’s inaug}^{uration), is used}^{as the sta}^{rting date for t}^{he vaca}ⁿ^{cy beca}^{use it marks}^the^beginni^ng^{of President Nixon’s official}
^g/w^{decision-making powers. After th}^{e Abe Fortas Chief}^Justice^nomin^{ation failed, Presi}^{dent Johnson a}ⁿ^{nounced on}^{Oct. 2, 1}⁹⁶^{8, that}^he^{would not name anot}^her^nominee^(U.S^{. National Archives and Records Administration, Office of the}^{Federal Register,}^{Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: L}^{yndon B. Johnson, 1968-69}^{, vol. 2}
^s^.or^{(Washington: GPO), 19}^{66, p.}⁵⁰⁹^{). Eight days later, Johnson elabor}^{ated on his decision. The President wrote that}^although^{he wo}^uld^{have made a}^nother^{nomination in}
^le^ak^{“ordinary times,” the situation w}^{as extraordinary}^{and that, “U}^{nder the circ}^umsta^{nces, the}^foundati^{ons of governme}^{nt would be}^be^tt^{er served}^{by t}^{he p}^resent^Chief
^{Justice [Ea}^{rl Warren]}^{remaining [}^{in office] until emotionalism subsi}^{des, reason and fairn}^{ess p}^{revail (U.S. Nati}^{onal Archives an}^{d Recor}^{ds Administration, Office of the}
^://wiki^{Federal Register,}^{Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: L}^{yndon B. Johnson, 1968-69}^{, vol. 2 (Washington: GPO, 1}⁹⁷^{0), p. 10}²^{4). On Dec. 3, 1}⁹⁶^{8, Chief J}^ustice
^h^ttp^{Warren infor}^{med President-elect Richard M. Nixon t}^{hat he}^{was wi}^{lling to continue serving}^{until a su}^{ccessor was con}^{firmed (“Stat}^{ement by}^{the C}^{hief Ju}^{stice,” Dec. 4,}
¹⁹⁶^{8, Earl War}^{ren Pa}^{pers, Ma}^nus^{cript Division, Library of Congres}^{s, Washington, DC). In a May}¹⁹^{69, conver}^{sation with re}^porters^,^{President Nixon offe}^{red an}
^unu^{sually detailed discussion of his decision-making process s}^urrou^{nding the Bu}^rger^{nomination. Nix}^{on reported t}^{hat he}^thoug^ht^“it^{would not be a p}^{roper ma}^{rk of}
^respect^{for the Cou}^{rt and}^{for the}^{Chief Justice to}^{have a}^{nomination go down, say, in Februar}^{y or}^{March, a}^{nd the}^{n have}^possibly^th^{e Senate hea}^{rings and t}^{he like at}^a
^{time that the Cou}^{rt was sitting,”}^{and that}^{his target date for a}^no^{mination decision was between}^{May 1 a}^{nd J}^une^{1, 19}⁶⁸^{(U.S. N}^{ational Archives and Records}
^{Administration, Office of the Federal Register,}^{Public Papers of the}^{Presidents of the United States:}^{Richard Nixon, 1970}^{, (Washington: GPO), 1971,}^{p. 39}^0).
^hh.^{Although President Richard}^{M. N}^{ixon waited until Aug. 18,}¹⁹^{69, t}^o^{nominate Hayns}^{worth, media accounts s}^pec^{ulated that Hay}^nswo^r^{th would be t}^he^{nominee at leas}^t
^{as early as Aug. 6. See AP, “Possible High Court C}^{hoice Hit,”}^Was^{hington Post}^{, Aug. 7,}¹⁹^{69, p. B4.}
^ii.^{Chief Justice War}^{ren B}^urger^rep^{ortedly “hint[ed] at a possible va}^{cancy” on t}^{he Court}^{in a letter t}^o^{President Gerald Ford on No}^{v. 10, 1}⁹⁷^{5, and offer}^{ed “factors fo}^r
^{[the President] to consider w}^hen^{appointing a}^{new justice,” (e-}^{mail communication betwee}^{n CRS In}^{formation Specialist Dana Ely and}^{Ford Library Arc}^{hivist Technicia}ⁿ
^{Joshua Coch}^{ran, Sept. 1}^{2, 20}^05).^{Justice Douglas’s health}^{had bee}ⁿ^{in que}^{stion since Dec. 3}^{1, 19}^74,^when^{he s}^uffe^{red a stroke (}^Johⁿ^{P. MacKenzie, “Douglas Retires}
^{From Court,”}^{Washington Po}^st^{, N}^{ov. 13, 19}^{75, p. A}^{1). However, President Ford would have had r}^{elatively litt}^{le time to consider a replacement J}^{ustice since}^{he did no}^t
^{assume t}^{he p}^residency^{until Aug.}^{9, 19}^{75, and a}^vacanc^{y did not official}^{ly arise until Justice Douglas’s Nov. 12, 1}⁹⁷⁵^retirem^e^{nt letter.}
^jj.^{During a Nov. 2}^{9, 1}⁹⁷^{5, press}^confere^{nce, White House}^{Press Sec}^{retary Ron Ne}^ssen^{revealed that}^{the President}^{had decided to nom}^{inate, as well as annou}^{nce his}
^{choice of, Stevens the sa}^{me day (}^{Spencer Rich, “Ford Picks Chicag}^{o Jurist,”}^{Washington P}^ost^{, Nov. 2}^{9, 19}^{75, p. A}^{1). The anno}^uncem^e^{nt occur}^{red on Nov. 2}^{8, 1}⁹⁷^5.

^kk.^{Although J}^{ustice Stewart’s decision to retire was not made}^pu^{blic until Ju}^{ne 1}^{8, 1}⁹⁸^{1, Stewart delivered a letter, stating his}^{desire to}^{retire, to President Ronald Reag}^an
^{on May}^{18, 1}⁹⁸¹^{(U.S. National A}^{rchives a}^{nd Records Administration, Office of the Federal Register}^,^{Public Papers of the Presidents}^{of t}^{he United States: Ronald Reagan,}
¹⁹⁸¹^{(Washington: GPO, 19}^82),^{p. 53}^9.
^ll.^{In this ca}^{se, the distinction betwe}^{en the dates}^{of an}^nounce^{ment of}^{the nominee}^{and th}^{e formal no}^{mination is particularly import}^ant^{. On July}^{7, 19}^{81, President}^Reagan
^“annou^{nced his inte}^{ntion” to nominate Judge O’Con}^{nor u}^{pon co}^{mpletion of a req}^{uired FBI backg}^r^{ound check}^{(U.S. National Archives}^{and Records Administration,}
^{Office of the Federal Register,}^Pu^{blic Papers of the Presidents}^{of the}^{United States: Ronald Reagan, 1981, (}^{Washington: GPO, 1}⁹⁸^{2), p. 5}^{97). President Reagan did not}
^{formally nominate her}^{until Aug.}^{19, 1}⁹⁸^{1, after s}^he^{had passed t}^h^e^backgrou^{nd che}^ck.
^mm.^{Although Chief J}^{ustice Bu}^{rger offi}^{cially notifie}^{d President Reagan, by letter on J}^une^{17, 1}⁹⁸^{6, of his d}^{esire to retire, Burger}^{privately informed Reagan of}^{his plans o}ⁿ
^{May 2}^{7, 19}⁸⁶^{(“Remarks on t}^he^{Resignation of Supreme Cou}^{rt C}^{hief Justice Wa}^rren^{E. Burge}^{r and}^{the Nominations of William H. Reh}^nq^{uist To Be Chief Justice a}ⁿ^d
^{Antonin Scalia To Be an Associate Justice,” U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, Off}^{ice of the Federal Register,}^{Public Papers of the President}^{s of the}
^{United States: Ronald Reagan, 1986,}^{vol. 2 (Washington: GPO, 19}⁸^{9), p. 78}^1).
^nn.^{The May}^{27, 1}⁹⁸^{6, date is used}^b^{ecause Chief}^{Justice B}^{urger’s inte}^{ntion to retire (known to Preside}^{nt Reagan on}^May^{27) alerted}^th^e^{President of the}^forthcoming
^opportu^{nity to elevate Rehn}^quist^{from Associate Justice to C}^{hief J}^{ustice, and in tu}^{rn, of the}^opport^{unity to nominate someone}^t^{o su}^{cceed Rehn}^{quist as a}ⁿ^Associate
^Justice.
^oo.^{President Reagan re}^{portedly “ha}^{d no advance war}^{ning of t}^{he resi}^{gnation” (Al Kamen, “Nixon-App}^{ointed Democrat Cites Age, Heal}^th,^”^{Washington P}^ost^{, Ju}^ne^{27, 1}⁹⁸^7,
^{p. A1).}
^pp.^{Judge Gins}^bu^{rg withdrew}^{his nam}^{e from consideration before}^bein^{g officially nominated, but after P}^{resident Reagan had a}^nnou^nced^h^{is intention to nominate Gins}^bu^r^g.
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^{Among other cont}^{roversies su}^rr^{ounding the}^{nomination, Ginsb}^ur^{g admitted shortly before withdr}^{awing that h}^e^{“had smoked ma}^rijuan^{a w}^{hile a Harvard law}
^g/w^{professor” (Lou Ca}^{nnon a}^{nd Rut}^{h Mark}^{us, “J}^{udge Kennedy}^{Likely Choice,”}^{Washington Post}^{, Nov. 9,}¹⁹^{87, p. A}^6).
^s^.or^qq.^{President George H. W. Bus}^{h sta}^{ted in a July 2}^{3, 1}⁹⁹^{0, pres}^{s confe}^rence^{nominating Souter t}^{hat he}^{had not decided on a final no}^min^{ee until that day (U.S. National}
^le^ak^{Archives and Records Administra}^{tion, Office of the Federal Register,}^{Public Papers of the}^{Presidents o}^f^{the United States: George Bush, 1990,}^{vol. 2 (Washington: GPO,}
¹⁹⁹^{2), p. 1}⁰⁵^1).
^://wiki^rr.^{On th}^{e details of transfe}^{rring J}^ust^{ice White’s retirement letter to t}^{he President}^{beginning o}ⁿ^Mar.¹^{8, 19}^{93, see De}^{nnis J. H}^u^t^chi^nson^,^{The Man Who Was Once}^Whizzer
^h^ttp^{White: A Portrait of Justice Byron R.}^White^{(New York: Free Press ,}¹^998,^{p. 43}^{7) and Ward,}^{Deciding to Leave,}^{p. 1}^{83, n.}¹⁸^{3. One of}^Jus^{tice White’s former law clerks, b}^y
^{then working i}ⁿ^{the W}^{hite Hous}^{e, delivered the letter on the}^Mar^{. 19, 19}^93.
^ss.^{President Will}^{iam J. Clinton announced}^Ginsb^{urg’s nomination on}^June^14,¹⁹^{93. However, Preside}^{nt Clinton noted in his}^nominati^{on spee}^{ch t}^{hat h}^e^{asked Gin}^sb^urg
^{to accept the}^{nomination on t}^he^{evening of J}^une¹³^{(U.S. National}^{Archives and Records Administra}^{tion, Office of the Federal Re}^gister,^{Public Papers of the}^{Presidents o}^f
^{the United States: William J. Clinton}^{, 1993,}^{vol. 1 (Washington: GPO, 19}^{94), p. 8}^43).
^tt.^{Jan. 1, 1}⁹⁹⁴^{is a slight estimation, since Justice Blackm}^un^{reportedly “told President Bil}^{l Cl}^{inton at Renaissance Weeke}^{nd over}^t^{he N}^{ew Year’s holiday in Hilton Head,}
^S.C.^{, that this would be his last te}^{rm (Tony Mau}^{ro, “How Blackmun Hid Retirement Plans,”}^{New Jer}^{sey Law Journal,}^{Apr. 25, 1}⁹⁹^{4, p.}^{18. ). Clinton publicly an}^nounced
^{Blackmun’s retireme}^{nt on A}^{pril 6}^,¹⁹⁹^{4. (U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, Office of the Federal Register,}^{Public P}^{apers of the Presidents}^{of the Unite}^d
^{States: William J. Clinton, 1994,}^vol^{. 1 (Washington: GPO, 1}⁹⁹^{5), p. 597).}

Table 2. Duration in Days Between Major Events in the Supreme Court Nomination-and-Confirmation Process, 1900-2006
^{Actual o}^r^Pros^pective
^Vacan^{cy Ap}^{parently Became}^{Number of}^{days elapsed fr}^o^m...
^Known^{to President}
^Nominating^Outgoing^Nominee^Nomination^Nomination^Starting
^President^Justice^Vacan^{cy to}^annou^nce-^First^Committee^annou^nce-^{date to}
^{When How}^nomination^annou^nce-^{ment to}^{hearing to}^committee^{final action}^{to Senate}^{ment to}^final
^ment^first^hearing^{final action}^action^{final Senate}^action^Senate^action
^Theodore^Horace^09/1^5/1⁹⁰^{2 Death}^of^Oliver⁷⁸^{No record of}^{No record}^{0 2}⁸⁰
^Roosevelt^Gray^outgoing^Wendell^hearing^{of hearing}
^Justice^Holmes
^Theodore^George^08/2^0/1⁹⁰²^a^Public^reports^Will^{iam R.}¹⁴⁷^{No record of}^{No record}^{0 40}¹⁸⁷
^Roosevelt^{Shiras, Jr.}^{of imminent}^Day^hearing^{of hearing}
^retirement
^Theodore^{Henry B.}^03/0^8/1⁹⁰⁶^b^Outgoing^Will^{iam H.}²⁴⁴^{No record of}^{No record}^{2 35}²⁷⁹
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^Roosevelt^Brown^{Justice notified}^Moody^hearing^{of hearing}
^g/w^{President of}
^s^.or^{intention to}^retire^c
^le^ak
^Will^iam^{Rufus W.}^10/2^4/1⁹⁰^{9 Death}^of^{Horace H.}⁵⁰^{No record of}^{No record}^{4 7}⁵⁹
^://wiki^{Howard Taft}^Peckham^outgoing^Lurton^hearing^{of hearing}
^h^ttp^Justice
^Will^iam^{David J.}^03/2^8/1⁹¹^{0 Death}^of^Charles²⁸^{No record of}^{No record}^{0 7}³⁵
^{Howard Taft}^Brewer^outgoing^Evans^hearing^{of hearing}
^Justice^Hughe^s
^Will^iam^{Melville W.}^07/0^4/1⁹¹^{0 Death}^of^{Edward D.}^{161 Nomination}^Nomination^{Nom. was}^{0 161}
^{Howard Taft}^Fuller^{outgoing Chief}^White^{was not}^{was not}^{not refer}^red
^{Chief Justice}^Justice^{referred to}^{referred to}^{to Judiciary}
^Judiciary^Judiciary^Committee
^Committee^Committee
^Will^iam^{Edward D.}^12/1^2/1⁹¹^{0 White}^Will^{is Van}⁰^{No record of}^{No record}^{0 3}³
^{Howard Taft}^White^{nomination by}^Devanter^hearing^{of hearing}
^{President to}
^{be Chief}
^Justice
^Will^{iam Will}^iam^H.^06/1^5/1⁹¹⁰^d^{Congressional}^{Joseph R.}¹⁸⁰^{No record of}^{No record}⁰³¹⁸³

^{Actual o}^r^Pros^pective
^Vacan^{cy Ap}^{parently Became}^{Number of}^{days elapsed fr}^o^m...
^Known^{to President}
^Nominating^Outgoing^Nominee^Nomination^Nomination^Starting
^President^Justice^Vacan^{cy to}^annou^nce-^First^Committee^annou^nce-^{date to}
^{When How}^nomination^annou^nce-^{ment to}^{hearing to}^committee^{final action}^{to Senate}^{ment to}^final
^ment^first^hearing^{final action}^action^{final Senate}^action^Senate^action
^{Howard Taft}^Moody^action^{Lamar hearing}^of^hearing
^authorizing
^retirement
^Will^iam^John^10/1^4/1⁹¹^{1 Death}^of^Mahlon¹²⁸^{No record of}^{No record}^{9 23}¹⁵¹
^{Howard Taft}^Marshall^outgoing^Pitney^hearing^{of hearing}
^Harlan^Justice
^Woodrow^{Horace H.}^07/1^2/1⁹¹^{4 Death}^of^{James C.}³⁸^{No record of}^{No record}^{5 10}⁴⁸
^Wilson^Lurton^outgoing^McReynolds^hearing^{of hearing}
^Justice
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}
^g/w^Woodrow^Wilson^{Joseph R.}^Lamar^01/0^2/1⁹¹^{6 Death}^of^outgoing^{Louis D.}^Brandeis^{26 12}¹⁰⁵⁸¹²⁵¹⁵¹
^s^.or^Justice
^le^ak^e
^Woodrow^Charles^06/1^0/1⁹¹⁶^Resignation^to^{John H.}³⁴^{No record of}^{No record}^{0 10}⁴⁴
^://wiki^Wilson^Evans^Hughe^s^purs^{ue political}^office^Clarke^hearing^{of hearing}
^h^ttp
^Warren^{Edward D.}^05/1^9/1⁹²^{1 Death}^of^Will^iam^{42 Nomination}^Nomination^Nomination^{0 42}
^Harding^White^outgoing^Howard^{was not}^{was not}^{was not}
^Justice^Taft^{referred to}^{referred to}^{referred to}
^Judiciary^Judiciary^Judiciary
^Committee^Committee^Committee
^Warren^{John H.}^09/0^5/1⁹²^{2 Resignation}^George^{0 Nomination}^Nomination^Nomination^{0 0}
^Harding^Clarke^letter^Sutherland^{was not}^{was not}^{was not}
^{submitted to}^{referred to}^{referred to}^{referred to}
^President^Judiciary^Judiciary^Judiciary
^Committee^Committee^Committee
^09/0^5/1⁹²²^f^Public^reports^Pierce⁷⁹^{No record of}^{No record}^{No record of}^{No Senate}^{No final}^Warren^Will^{iam R.}
^{of imminent}^Butler^hearing^{of hearing}^hearing^action^action^Harding^Day
^retirement
^12/0^4/1⁹²²^{Lack of action}^Pierce¹^{No record of}^{No record}³¹⁶⁴

^{on first}

^{Actual o}^r^Pros^pective
^Vacan^{cy Ap}^{parently Became}^{Number of}^{days elapsed fr}^o^m...
^Known^{to President}
^Nominating^Outgoing^Nominee^Nomination^Nomination^Starting
^President^Justice^Vacan^{cy to}^annou^nce-^First^Committee^annou^nce-^{date to}
^{When How}^nomination^annou^nce-^{ment to}^{hearing to}^committee^{final action}^{to Senate}^{ment to}^final
^ment^first^hearing^{final action}^action^{final Senate}^action^Senate^action
^{nomination of}^{Butler hearing}^of^hearing
^Butler
^Warren^Mahlon^12/1^6/1⁹²^{2 White}^House^{Edward T.}²⁴^{No record of}^{No record}^{0 20}⁴⁴
^Harding^Pitney^annou^nced^Sanford^hearing^{of hearing}
^forthcoming^g
^retirement
^Calvin^Joseph^12/2^5/1⁹²⁴^h^Public^reports^{Harlan F.}^{11 23}⁵^h³³¹⁴²
^Cool^idge^McKenna^{of imminent}^Stone
^retirement
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}
^g/w^Herbe^rt^Hoover^Will^iam^Howard^02/0^3/1⁹³^{0 Retirement}^letter^Charles^Evans⁰^{No record of}^hearing^{No record}^{of hearing}^{3 10}¹⁰
^s^.or^Taft^{submitted to}^Hughe^s
^le^ak^President
^://wiki^Herbe^rt^Hoover^{Edward T.}^Sanford^03/0^8/1⁹³^{0 Death}^of^outgoing^{John J.}^Parker^{13 15}¹⁶¹⁶⁴⁷⁶⁰
^h^ttp^Justice
^Herbe^rt^{Edward T.}^05/0^7/1⁹³^{0 Parker}^{Owen J.}²^{No record of}^{No record}^{1 11}¹³
^Hoover^Sanford^nomination^Roberts^hearing^{of hearing}
^{rejected by}
^Senate
^Herbe^rt^Oliver^01/1^2/1⁹³^{2 Outgoing}^{Benjamin N.}^{34 4}⁴¹⁹⁴³
^Hoover^Wendell^{Justice notified}^Cardozo
^{Holmes, Jr.}^{President of}
^{intention to}
^retire
^{Franklin D.}^Will^{is Van}^05/1^8/1⁹³⁷ⁱ^Retirement^{Hugo L.}⁸⁶^{No record of}^{No record}^{1 5}⁹¹

^Roosevelt^Devanter^letter^Black^hearing^{of hearing}
^{submitted to}
^President

^{Actual o}^r^Pros^pective
^Vacan^{cy Ap}^{parently Became}^{Number of}^{days elapsed fr}^o^m...
^Known^{to President}
^Nominating^Outgoing^Nominee^Nomination^Nomination^Starting
^President^Justice^Vacan^{cy to}^annou^nce-^First^Committee^annou^nce-^{date to}
^{When How}^nomination^annou^nce-^{ment to}^{hearing to}^committee^{final action}^{to Senate}^{ment to}^final
^ment^first^hearing^{final action}^action^{final Senate}^action^Senate^action
^{Franklin D.}^George^01/0^5/1⁹³^{8 Retirement}^{Stanley F.}^{10 5}⁴¹¹⁰²⁰
^Roosevelt^Sutherland^letter^Reed
^{submitted to}
^President
^{Franklin D.}^Benjamin^07/0^9/1⁹³⁸^j^Death^of^Felix^{180 5}⁶¹¹²¹⁹²
^Roosevelt^{N. Cardozo}^outgoing^Frankfu^rter
^Justice
^{Franklin D.}^{Louis D.}^02/1^3/1⁹³⁹^k^Retirement^Will^{iam O.}^{35 4}³⁸¹⁵⁵⁰
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^Roosevelt^Brandeis^letter^{submitted to}^Douglas
^g/w^President
^s^.or
^le^ak^{Franklin D.}^Roosevelt^Pierce^Butler^11/1^6/1⁹³^{9 Death}^of^outgoing^Frank^Mur^phy^{49 7}⁴¹¹²⁶¹
^://wiki^Justice
^h^ttp^{Franklin D.}^Roosevelt^{James C.}^McReynolds^01/2^2/1⁹⁴^{1 Outgoing}^{Justice notified}^{James F.}^Byrnes^{141 Nomination}^{was not}^Nomination^{was not}^Nomination^{was not}^{0 141}
^{President of}^{referred to}^{referred to}^{referred to}
^{intention to}^Judiciary^Judiciary^Judiciary
^retire^l^Committee^Committee^Committee
^{Franklin D.}^Charles^06/0^2/1⁹⁴¹^m^Retirement^{Harlan F.}^{10 9}²⁴¹⁵²⁵
^Roosevelt^Evans^letter^Stone
^Hughe^s^{submitted to}
^{Chief Justice}^President
^{Franklin D.}^{Harlan F.}^06/1^2/1⁹⁴^{1 Stone}^{Robert H.}^{0 9}⁹⁷²⁵²⁵
^Roosevelt^Stone^{nomination by}^Jackson
^{President to}
^{be Chief}
^Justice
^{Franklin D.}^{James F.}^10/0^3/1⁹⁴²ⁿ^Byrnes^{Wiley B.}^{100 11}¹⁰⁷²⁸¹²⁸

^Roosevelt^Byrnes^appointment^Rutledge

^{Actual o}^r^Pros^pective
^Vacan^{cy Ap}^{parently Became}^{Number of}^{days elapsed fr}^o^m...
^Known^{to President}
^Nominating^Outgoing^Nominee^Nomination^Nomination^Starting
^President^Justice^Vacan^{cy to}^annou^nce-^First^Committee^annou^nce-^{date to}
^{When How}^nomination^annou^nce-^{ment to}^{hearing to}^committee^{final action}^{to Senate}^{ment to}^final
^ment^first^hearing^{final action}^action^{final Senate}^action^Senate^action
^{to other pu}^blic
^office
^{Harry. S.}^{Owen J.}^06/3^0/1⁹⁴⁵^o^Retirement^{Harold H.}⁸⁰^{No record of}^{No record}^{0 1}⁸¹
^Truman^Roberts^letter^Burton^hearing^{of hearing}
^{submitted to}
^President
^{Harry S.}^{Harlan F.}^04/2^2/1⁹⁴^{6 Death}^of^{Fred M.}^{45 8}⁵¹¹⁴⁵⁹
^Truman^Stone^{outgoing Chief}^Vinson
^{Chief Justice}^Justice
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}
^g/w^{Harry S.}^Truman^Frank^Mur^phy^07/1^9/1⁹⁴^{9 Death}^of^outgoing^{Thomas C.}^Clark^{9 12}³⁶²¹³⁰
^s^.or^Justice
^le^ak
^{Harry S.}^{Wiley B.}^09/1^0/1⁹⁴^{9 Death}^of^Sherman^{5 12}⁶¹¹⁹²⁴
^://wiki^Truman^Rutledge^outgoing^Justice^Minton
^h^ttp
²⁴^Reces^{s appointm}^{ent, 10/02/1953}^{Dwight D.}^{Fred M.}^09/0^8/1⁹⁵^{3 Death}^of^{Earl Warre}ⁿ
^Eisenhower^Vinson^{outgoing Chief}¹²⁵^p²²²²⁵⁴⁹¹⁷⁴
^{Chief Justice}^Justice
³⁰^{No record of}^{No record}^{No record of}^{No record of}^{No record}^{Dwight D.}^{Robert H.}^10/0^9/1⁹⁵^{4 Death}^of^John
^hearing^committee^committee^{final action}^{of final}^Eisenhower^Jackson^outgoing^Marshall
^action^action^after^{action after}^Justice^{Harlan II}
^committee^committee
^referral^referral
^{5 45}¹⁴⁶⁶⁵⁷⁰
³⁸^Reces^{s appointm}^{ent, 10/15/1956}^{Dwight D.}^Sherman^09/0^7/1⁹⁵^{6 Retirement}^Will^{iam J.}
^Eisenhower^Minton^letter^Brennaⁿ¹²⁹^q⁴³⁶¹⁵⁶⁴¹⁹³
^{submitted to}
^President
^{Dwight D.}^{Stanley F.}^01/3^1/1⁹⁵⁷^Press^{Charles E.}³⁰¹⁶⁰¹¹⁷⁴⁷

^{Actual o}^r^Pros^pective
^Vacan^{cy Ap}^{parently Became}^{Number of}^{days elapsed fr}^o^m...
^Known^{to President}
^Nominating^Outgoing^Nominee^Nomination^Nomination^Starting
^President^Justice^Vacan^{cy to}^annou^nce-^First^Committee^annou^nce-^{date to}
^{When How}^nomination^annou^nce-^{ment to}^{hearing to}^committee^{final action}^{to Senate}^{ment to}^final
^ment^first^hearing^{final action}^action^{final Senate}^action^Senate^action
^{Eisenhower Reed}^conferen^ce^Whittaker
^{held by Reed}
^annou^ncing^r
^retirement
⁸^Reces^{s appointm}^{ent, 10/14/1958}^{Dwight D.}^{Harold H.}^10/0^6/1⁹⁵^{8 Retirement}^Potter
^Eisenhower^Burton^letter^Stewart¹⁰³^s⁸²¹¹¹⁵¹⁰⁸²¹¹
^{submitted to}
^President
^{John F.}^{Charles E.}^03/2^8/1⁹⁶^{2 Retirement}^{Byron R.}^{2 12}⁰⁰¹²¹⁴
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^Kennedy^Whittaker^{letter received}^White
^g/w^{by President}^t
^s^.or^{John F.}^Felix^08/2^8/1⁹⁶²^u^Retirement^Arthu^{r J.}^{1 13}¹⁴⁰²⁷²⁸
^le^ak^Kennedy^Frankfu^rter^letter^Goldberg
^{submitted to}
^://wiki^President
^h^ttp^{Lyndon B.}^Arthu^{r J.}^07/2^0/1⁹⁶^{5 Goldberg}^{Abe Fortas}⁸⁸⁵¹¹⁴²²
^Johnson^Goldberg^appointment
^{to other pu}^blic
^office^v
^{Lyndon B.}^{Thomas C.}^02/2^8/1⁹⁶^{7 Outgoing}^Thurgood^{105 30}²¹²⁷⁷⁸¹⁸³
^Johnson^Clark^{Justice notified}^Marshall
^{President of}
^{intention to}
^retire^w
^{Lyndon B.}^Earl^06/1^3/1⁹⁶⁸^x^Retirement^{Abe Fortas}¹³¹⁵⁶⁸¹⁴⁹⁷¹¹⁰
^Johnson^Warren^letter
^{Chief Justice}^{submitted to}
^President
^{Lyndon B.}^{Abe Fortas}^06/2^6/1⁹⁶⁸^y^Fortas^Homer^{0 15}^No^record^{No record of}^Nomination^Nomination
^Johnson^{nomination by}^Thornber^ry^of^final^{withdrawn b}^y^withdrawn

^{Actual o}^r^Pros^pective
^Vacan^{cy Ap}^{parently Became}^{Number of}^{days elapsed fr}^o^m...
^Known^{to President}
^Nominating^Outgoing^Nominee^Nomination^Nomination^Starting
^President^Justice^Vacan^{cy to}^annou^nce-^First^Committee^annou^nce-^{date to}
^{When How}^nomination^annou^nce-^{ment to}^{hearing to}^committee^{final action}^{to Senate}^{ment to}^final
^ment^first^hearing^{final action}^action^{final Senate}^action^Senate^action
^{Johnson to}^be^committee^committee^President^by
^{Chief Justice}^vote^action^(10/0^4/1⁹⁶⁸⁾^President
^{Richard M.}^Earl^01/2^0/1⁹⁶⁹^z^Fortas^Chief^{Warren E.}^{121 13}⁰⁶¹⁹¹⁴⁰
^Nixon^Warren^Justice^Burger
^{Chief Justice}^nomination
^{withdrawn b}^y
^President
^(10/4/¹⁹⁶⁸⁾
^05/1^4/1⁹⁶^{9 Resignation}^{Clement F.}^{96 29}²³⁴³⁹⁵¹⁹¹^{Richard M.}^{Abe Fortas}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^letter^Haynswort^h,^Nixon
^g/w^{submitted to}^Jr.
^s^.or^President
^le^ak^11/2^1/1⁹⁶^{9 Haynswort}^h^{G. Harrold}^{59 8}²⁰⁵¹⁷⁹¹³⁸
^nomination^Carswell
^://wiki^{rejected by}
^h^ttp^Senate
^04/0^8/1⁹⁷^{0 Carswell}^{Harry A.}^{6 15}⁷⁶²⁸³⁴
^nomination^Blackmun
^{rejected by}
^Senate
^{Richard M.}^{Hugo L.}^09/1^7/1⁹⁷^{1 Retirement}^{Lewis F.}^{34 13}²⁰¹³⁴⁶⁸⁰
^Nixon^Black^letter^Powell^{, Jr.}
^{submitted to}
^President
^{Richard M.}^John^09/2^3/1⁹⁷^{1 Retirement}^Will^{iam H.}^{28 13}²⁰¹⁷⁵⁰⁷⁸
^Nixon^Marshall^letter^Rehnq^uist
^{Harlan II}^{submitted to}
^President
^{Gerald R.}^Will^{iam O.}^11/1^2/1⁹⁷⁵^aa^Retirement^{John Paul}^{16 10}³⁶¹⁹³⁵

^Ford^Douglas^letter^Stevens

^{Actual o}^r^Pros^pective
^Vacan^{cy Ap}^{parently Became}^{Number of}^{days elapsed fr}^o^m...
^Known^{to President}
^Nominating^Outgoing^Nominee^Nomination^Nomination^Starting
^President^Justice^Vacan^{cy to}^annou^nce-^First^Committee^annou^nce-^{date to}
^{When How}^nomination^annou^nce-^{ment to}^{hearing to}^committee^{final action}^{to Senate}^{ment to}^final
^ment^first^hearing^{final action}^action^{final Senate}^action^Senate^action
^{submitted to}
^President
^Ronald^Potter^05/1^8/1⁹⁸¹^bb^bb^Retirement^{Sandra Day}^{50 64}⁶⁶⁷⁶¹²⁶
^Reagan^Stewart^letter^O’Connor
^{submitted to}
^President
^Ronald^{Warren E.}^05/2^7/1⁹⁸⁶^cc^Justice^Will^{iam H.}^{21 42}¹⁶³⁴⁹²¹¹³
^Reagan^Burger^privately^Rehnq^uist
^{Chief Justice}^alerted
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^{President of}
^g/w^{intention to}
^s^.or^retire
^le^ak^Ronald^Will^{iam H.}^05/2^7/1⁹⁸⁶^dd^Rehnq^uist^Antonin^{21 49}⁹³⁴⁹²¹¹³
^Reagan^Rehnq^uist^{nomination by}^Scalia
^://wiki^{Reagan to be}
^h^ttp^{Chief Justice}
^06/2^6/1⁹⁸⁷^ee^Press^{Robert H.}^{5 76}²¹¹⁷¹¹⁴¹¹⁹^Ronald^{Lewis F.}
^conferen^ce^Bork^Reagan^Powell^{, Jr.}
^{held by Powell}
^annou^ncing
^retirement
^10/2^3/1⁹⁸^{7 Bork}^{Douglas H.}⁶^Ginsb^{urg withdrew}^(11/^07/¹⁹⁸⁷⁾^ff
^nomination^Ginsb^urg^{before official nomination}
^{rejected by}
^Senate
^11/0^7/1⁹⁸^{7 Ginsb}^urg^{Anthony M.}^{4 33}⁴⁴⁷⁸⁴⁸⁸
^withdrawal^Kennedy
^{George H.}^Will^{iam J.}^07/2^0/1⁹⁹^{0 Retirement}^{David H.}^{3 52}¹⁴⁵⁷¹⁷⁴

^{W. Bush}^Brennaⁿ^letter^Souter
^{submitted to}

^{Actual o}^r^Pros^pective
^Vacan^{cy Ap}^{parently Became}^{Number of}^{days elapsed fr}^o^m...
^Known^{to President}
^Nominating^Outgoing^Nominee^Nomination^Nomination^Starting
^President^Justice^Vacan^{cy to}^annou^nce-^First^Committee^annou^nce-^{date to}
^{When How}^nomination^annou^nce-^{ment to}^{hearing to}^committee^{final action}^{to Senate}^{ment to}^final
^ment^first^hearing^{final action}^action^{final Senate}^action^Senate^action
^President
^{George H.}^Thurgood^06/2^7/1⁹⁹^{1 Retirement}^Clarence^{4 71}¹⁷¹⁸¹⁰⁶¹¹⁰
^{W. Bush}^Marshall^letter^Thomas
^{submitted to}
^President
^Will^{iam J.}^{Byron R.}^03/1^9/1⁹⁹³^gg^Retirement^{Ruth Bader}^{87 36}⁹⁵⁵⁰¹³⁷
^Clinton^White^letter^Ginsb^urg
^{submitted to}
^President
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^hh
^g/w^Will^{iam J.}^Clinton^{Harry A.}^Blackmun^01/0^1/1⁹⁹⁴^Justice^privately^{Stephen G.}^Breyer^{132 60}⁷¹⁰⁷⁷²⁰⁹
^s^.or^alerted
^le^ak^President
^://wiki^{George W.}^Bush^{Sandra Day}^O’Connor^07/0^1/2⁰⁰^{5 Retirement}^letter^{John G.}^Roberts¹⁸^{Nomination withdrawn}^{by President (0}^9/05/²⁰⁰⁵⁾^{before t}^{he first}^Judiciary^{Committee hearing; re-nominate}^{d as Chief Ju}^{stice (09/}^05/²⁰⁰⁵⁾
^h^ttp^{submitted to}
^President
^09/0^5/2⁰⁰^{5 Annou}^nceme^nt^Harriet²⁸^{Miers withdrew as}^{nominee (1}^0/^27/2⁰⁰^{5) be}^{fore the}^{start of J}^udiciary
^{of Roberts}^Miers^{Committee hearings}
^nomination
^{withdrawal and}
^{re-submission}
^{by President}
^10/2^7/2⁰⁰^{5 Annou}^nceme^nt^{Samuel A.}^{4 70}¹⁵⁷⁹²⁹⁶
^{of Miers}^Alito^{, Jr.}
^withdrawal
^{George W.}^Will^{iam H.}^09/0^3/2⁰⁰^{5 Death}^of^{John G.}^{2 7}¹⁰⁷²⁴²⁶

^Bush^Rehnq^uist^outgoing^Roberts
^Justice

^Sources:^{Durations for}^{major intervals in the}^{nomination-and-confirmation proces}^{s were com}^put^{ed by the}^{CRS authors. As descri}^{bed in the}^t^{ext, this r}^esearc^{h relied on}
^{historical newspape}^{rs, official presidential papers, and CRS corres}^{pondence with}^{Presidential Libra}^{ries. Ward’s}^{Deciding to Leave}^{was especially usef}^{ul in compiling data on}
^{the reason}^{s why}^Justices^{left the}^benc^{h. Additional source information appears i}ⁿ^{the ta}^{ble notes}^be^low.
^a.^{It is unclear}^whe^{n President The}^{odore Ro}^{osevelt learned of Justic}^{e Shiras’s intention to retire. However,}^{Washington P}^ost^coverag^e^{suggests t}^{hat Shiras’s fort}^hcomin^g
^departur^{e was well known in}^{Washington b}^y^{at least Aug.}^{20, 1}⁹⁰²^(“^{Knox Ma}^{y Not Want}^{It: Belie}^{f that He}^{Would Decline Justice}^{Shiras’ Posit}^ion,”^{Washington Post}^,
^{Aug. 20, 1}⁹⁰^{2, p. 1).}
^b.^{According to the}^{Washington Post}^{, Justice Brown notified the Presi}^{dent, on Mar. 8,}¹⁹⁰^{6, that}^{he wi}^{shed to retire (“To Leave the}^{Bench: J}^{ustice Brown Will Reti}^{re in}
^{the Fall,”}^{Washington Post}^{, Mar.}^{8, 19}^{06, p.}^3).
^c.^{It is unclear}^{from t}^{he historical r}^{ecord whethe}^{r the P}^{resident lear}^{ned of Justice Brow}^{n’s desire to r}^{etire by letter, pe}^rsonal^conversa^{tion, etc.}
^d.^{Justice Moody did not actually depart th}^{e Court}^{until Nov. 20,}¹⁹¹⁰^(Ward,^{Deciding to Leave}^{, p. 5). However, “Illness of a serious}^na^ture^{has kep}^{t Ju}^{stice Moody from}
^{his duties in the}^Supr^{eme Court}^f^{or almost a year. There ha}^{ve bee}^{n occasional rumors of}^retiremen^{t, but Senator Lodge [on}^Ju^ne¹^{5, 19}^10]^prese^{nted th}^{e real}
^harbinge^{r of that}^{action, in the fo}^{rm of a bill extending t}^{he stat}^ute^{relating to retirement f}^{rom the S}^upre^{me Court to cover}^th^{e ca}^se^{of Mr. Moody” (“Moody Wil}^l
^Retire,”^{Washington Post}^{, J}^une^15,¹⁹^{10, p.}^1).
^e.^{On J}^une^10,¹⁹^{16, J}^{ustice Hug}^hes^{resigned to p}^ursu^{e the}¹⁹¹⁶^Rep^{ublican p}^{residential nomination (“Hughe}^{s, With Words That Ring,}^{Obeys Call to Lead Repu}^blicans,”
^{Washington Po}^st^{, Ju}^{ne 1}^{1, 1}⁹¹^{6, p. 1). Although historical media res}^{earch does not indicate t}^{hat Presi}^{dent Wilson knew for ce}^{rtain tha}^{t Justic}^{e H}^ughe^{s would resign,}
^{media reports had}^{hinted at a H}^u^{ghes resignation t}^hroug^{hout th}^{e s}^{pring of}¹⁹^16.
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^f.^{Day did not leave the Court u}^{ntil Nov. 13, 1}⁹²^{2. However, the}^W^{ashington Post}^{reported t}^{hat Day’s consideration of retirement}^wa^{s mentioned at a White}^House^{briefing on Sept.}^{5, 19}^{22 (“J}^ustice^{Day May Leave}^{the Be}^nch,”^Was^{hington Post}^{, Sept. 6, 1}⁹²^{2, p. 1).}
^g/w
^s^.or^g.^{Although J}^{ustice Pitney’s resignati}^{on was effective as}^{of Dec. 31,}¹⁹^{22, the W}^{hite House a}^nno^unced^{Pitney’s forthcoming depart}^u^{re o}ⁿ^{Dec. 16,}¹⁹^{22 (“Resigns,”}^{Chicago Daily Tr}^ibune^,^{Dec. 17, 19}^{22, p. 1}^7).
^le^ak
^h.^{Justice McKe}^{nna did not officially retire until Ja}^{n. 5, 19}^{25. Howeve}^r^,^{the media reported his immine}ⁿ^t^{retirement o}ⁿ^{Dec. 25,}¹⁹^{24 (“}^{M’Kenna to Retire Soon as a}
^://wiki^{Justice of the}^Sup^{reme Court,”}^{Washington Po}^st^{, Dec. 25, 1}⁹²^{4, p}^.^{2). Duration calculations for fina}^{l Senate action on Stone are ba}^se^{d on the Feb.}^{5, 19}^{25, confirma}^tion
^h^ttp^{date shown in}^Ta^{ble 1}^{, not the J}^{an. 26, 1}⁹²^{5, recommittal.}
^i.^{For an account}^{of Ju}^{stice Van De}^vanter^{privately alerting a re}^port^{er of his decision to retire on th}^e^{morning of th}^{e an}^nounc^eme^{nt, s}^{ee “News ‘Beat’ Aided by Van}
^Devanter,”^{New Y}^{ork Times}^{, May}^{23, 1}⁹³^{7, p. 4}^0.
^j.^{Although J}^{ustice Cardozo had be}^{en ill and away from the}^be^nch^{since Decem}^ber¹⁹^{37 (United Pre}^{ss, “Supreme Cou}^{rt Libe}^{ral Succ}^umb^{s to}^{Heart Ailment in}^N.Y.,”
^{Washington Po}^st^{, July 1}^{0, 1}⁹³^{8, p.}^{M1), a definite need to nominate}^{a new J}^{ustice did not occur}^{until Cardozo}^{’s death on July}^{9, 19}^38.
^k.^{Justice Brandeis}^{had bee}^{n away f}^r^{om the be}^nch^{for a mont}^{h, recov}^{ering from a}^{heart attac}^{k, prior t}^o^announ^{cing his retire}^{ment (}^Uni^{ted Press, “Justice Bra}^{ndeis, Dean}
^{of Supreme Cou}^{rt, Quits,”}^{Los An}^{geles Time}^s^{, Feb. 14,}¹⁹^{39, p. 1).}^{Nonetheless, his r}^{etirement wa}^s^{considered abru}^{pt, suggesti}^{ng tha}^{t President Roosevelt had little}
^{advance notice to consider a s}^u^c^cessor.
^l.^{It is unclear}^{from t}^{he historical r}^{ecord whethe}^{r the P}^{resident lear}^{ned of Justice}^{McReynolds’s desire to retire by letter,}^pers^{onal co}^{nversation, etc.}
^m.^{Although Chief J}^{ustice H}^ughe^{s’s r}^{etirement due to age a}^{nd poor}^h^{ealth had bee}^{n “r}^{umored some}^months”^{prior to sub}^{mission of h}ⁱ^s^{formal retirement letter (Walt}^er
^{Trohan, “Hug}^{hes Retires From C}^ourt,”^{Chicago Daily Tri}^bune^{, June 3, 19}^{41, p.}^{1), the definite need}^f^{or a new}^{nominee did not arise u}^{ntil Hughes a}^nno^unced^his
^retirement.

^n.^{Justice Byr}^{nes resign}^{ed at President Roosevelt’s request on}^{Oct. 3,}¹⁹^{42, be}^{coming Director of Eco}^{nomic Stability. R}^{oosevelt wa}^{s, th}^{erefore, aware of an}^impending
^{vacancy on}^{the Cou}^{rt p}^{rior to the formal resignation, although t}^h^e^{precise date is u}^{nclear. For a su}^{mmary of Byr}^{nes’s tra}^nsitio^{n from the Court}^{to his new}^{post, see}
^{Associated Press, “Byrnes Resign}^{s From Bench i}ⁿ^Letter^{to President,”}^{New York Time}^s^{, Oct. 4, 1}⁹⁴^{2, p. 45.}
^o.^{Although President Tr}^{uman did n}^{ot announ}^{ce J}^{ustice Roberts’s int}^{ention to retire u}^{ntil July 5, 1}⁹⁴⁵^{(United Press, “Morgantha}^u^{and Roberts}^Resign,”^{Los Angeles Ti}^me^s^,
^{July 6, 1}⁹⁴^{5, p. 1), Ju}^{stice Roberts}^{’s retirement letter is dated J}^une^{30, 1}⁹⁴^{5. Truma}^{n received t}^{he letter on that}^{date “or so}^{on the}^rea^{fter” (e-mail communication}
^{between CRS I}^{nformation Specialist Dana Ely and Tr}^uman^Library^{Archivist Randy Sowell, Sept. 2, 2005).}
^p.^{Congress was}^{not in session w}^h^eⁿ^{Chief J}^{ustice Vinson died on Sept. 8, 19}⁵³^{(U.S. Congress, Joint Committee on Printing,}^2003-^{2004 Official Cong}^{ressional Directory:}
¹⁰⁸^th^Congress^{(Washington: GPO), p. 519). President}^Eisen^{hower recess-a}^{ppointed Ea}^{rl Warren a}^s^{Chief Ju}^{stice on Oct. 2,}¹⁹^{53 a}ⁿ^d^{nominated h}^{im to the Cou}^{rt, on}^r^d
^{Jan. 11,}¹⁹^{54, afte}^{r Congress}^rec^{onvened for t}^{he second s}^ession^{of the 8}³^{Congress. The}^refore,^{although the}^{interval bet}^{ween t}^h^e^{starting date (Sept. 8, 1}⁹⁵^{3, as}
^{shown in}^Ta^{ble 1}^{) and annou}^nce^{ment date (Jan.}^{11, 1}⁹⁵^{4) is 1}²⁵^{days, and the en}^{tire interval from}^{the starting}^{date u}^{ntil final Senate action (}^{Mar. 1, 1}⁹⁵^{4) is 17}^{4 day}^s,
^{the President’s actual decision-making timetable could also be classified as 24 days, or the}^{interval b}^{etween Vinson’s death (S}^ept.^{8, 1}^{953) a}^{nd Eise}^{nhower’s rec}^ess
^appointment^{of Chief J}^{ustice Wa}^{rren (Oc}^{t. 2, 19}^{53). Both inter}^{vals are us}^{ed to calculate the media}^{n elapsed time from}^vacancy^t^{o n}^{omination announce}^ment.
^{Nonetheless, the}^{long intervals h}^{ave a minimal impact on comp}^uti^{ng the}^{median durations}^between^{stages in the}^proces^{s beca}^{use t}^h^e^{median is less sensitive tha}^{n the}
^{mean to ext}^{remely high or}^{low values.}
^q.^{Congress was}^{not in session w}^h^eⁿ^Ju^{stice Minton s}^u^b^{mitted his re}^{tirement letter to the}^President^{on Sept. 7, 19}⁵⁶^{(U.S. Congres}^{s, Joint Committee on Printing,}^2003-^th
^{2004 Official}^{Congressional Directory: 108}^Cong^ress^,\^{(Washington: GPO), p. 51}^{9). President Eisen}^{hower recess-a}^{ppointed William J.}^Brenna^{n as Associate J}^{ustice on}
^{Oct. 15, 1}⁹⁵^{6, and nominated}^{him to the Court, on Ja}^{n. 1}^{4, 19}^57,^{after Congres}^{s conve}^{ned for t}^h^e^{first session of th}^{e 8}⁵^th^Congr^es^{s. Therefore, although t}^{he inter}^va^l
^{between t}^{he sta}^{rting date (Sept.}^{7, 19}^{56, as s}^{hown in}^T^{able 1}^{) and annou}^ncemen^{t date (Jan. 1}^{4, 1}⁹^{57) is 1}^{29 days, a}^{nd the e}^{ntire int}^{erval from the}^{starting date}^until
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^{final Senate action (Mar. 1}^{9, 19}⁵⁷^{) is 193 days, t}^{he President’s act}^u^{al decision-making timetable coul}^{d also be classified as 3}^{8 days, or}^{the interval}^{between B}^ren^nan’s^{retirement a}^nnou^nceme^{nt (Sept.}^{7, 19}^{56) a}^{nd Eisen}^{hower’s reces}^s^appointme^{nt of J}^{ustice Bren}^{nan (}^{Oct. 15, 1}⁹⁵^{6). Both intervals}^are^{used to calculate the}^median
^g/w^{elapsed time from vaca}^{ncy to no}^{mination annou}^nceme^{nt. Nonet}^h^{eless, the long intervals have}^{a minimal impact on comp}^{uting the}^m^e^{dian durations betwee}^{n stages}ⁱⁿ
^s^.or^{the p}^{rocess be}^cause^{median is less sensitive tha}^{n the}^mean^{to extr}^{emely high or low values.}
^le^ak
^r.^{Whether P}^{resident Eise}^nhower^{first learned of J}^{ustice Reed’s retir}^{ement t}^hrough^the^press^confe^re^{nce or a letter}^{from Reed is u}ⁿ^{clear. Contemporary}^media
^://wiki^{coverage mentioned a}^press^conf^{erence a}^{nd a letter to Eise}^nhowe^{r (Edward T. Foll}^{iard, “Reed Is R}^{etiring From High Court,”}^Wa^{shington Post}^{, Feb.}^{1, 19}^{57, p. A}^1).^{However, political scientist Artemus Ward’s accou}^{nt assert}^{s that}^{Reed announ}^{ced his retireme}^{nt t}^hrough^{a p}^{ress con}^feren^{ce (War}^d^,^{Deciding to Leave}^{, pp. 162-1}^63).
^h^ttp^{Regardless, both events occ}^urred^{on Jan. 3}^{1, 1}⁹⁵^{7. For the Ja}^{n. 31}^corresponde^{nce bet}^{ween Reed a}^{nd Eisen}^{hower, see “Lette}^{r to S}^{tanley Reed Regarding His}
^{Retirement From Active Service}^{as An Associate Ju}^{stice of the S}^u^{preme Cou}^{rt,” U.S. National Arc}^{hives and Records Administration}^{, Office of th}^{e Federal Register,}
^{Public Papers of the Pre}^{sidents of th}^{e United States: Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1957}^(Wash^{ington: GPO, 19}^{58), pp.}¹⁰^9-11^0.
^s.^{Congress was}^{not in session w}^h^eⁿ^Burton^su^{bmitted his retireme}ⁿ^t^{letter to the President on}^Oct.^{6, 19}^{58 (U.S. Congress, Joint}^{Committee on Printing,}^2003-2004^th
^{Official Cong}^{ressional Directory: 108}^Congress^{(Washington: GPO), p. 51}^{9). President Eisen}^{hower re}^{cess-appointed Potter Stewart as}^{Associate Justice on Oc}^{t. 14, 1}⁹^58,
^{and nominated him to th}^{e Court,}^{on Jan. 1}^{7, 1}⁹⁵^{9, after Congre}^ss^{convened for t}^{he first}^{session of}^{the 8}⁶^th^Cong^{ress. There}^{fore, although t}^{he inter}^{val betwee}^{n the}
^{starting date (Oct. 6, 1}⁹⁵^{8, as sh}^{own in}^{Table 1}^{) and nomination date (Jan. 17,}¹⁹^{59) is 1}⁰³^{days, and the e}^{ntire interval f}^{rom the}^s^{tarting date u}^{ntil final Senate action}
^{(May 5, 1}⁹⁵^{9) is 21}^{1 days, the}^Pr^{esident’s actual decision-making timetable could also be classified a}^s^{eight days, or the inte}^{rval betw}^{een Burto}^{n’s retirement}
^annou^nceme^{nt (Oct. 6, 1}⁹⁵^{8) an}^{d Eisenhower’s re}^{cess a}^ppointme^{nt of Ju}^{stice Stewart (Oct. 1}^{4, 19}^{58). Both intervals are}^{used to}^ca^{lculate the median elapsed time}
^{from vacanc}^{y to nomination an}^nounceme^{nt. Nonet}^{heless, the long}^{intervals have a}^{minimal impact}^{on computing t}^{he median d}^uration^{s betw}^{een stage}^{s in th}^{e p}^rocess
^because^the^{median is less sensitive than}^{the m}^{ean to e}^xtremely^{high or low values.}
^t.^{This information is based on e-m}^{ail communication between CRS}^{Information Specialist Dana Ely a}^{nd Kennedy}^Library^Refere^{nce T}^e^c^{hnician Sha}^{ron Kelly, Sept. 14,}
²⁰⁰^5.
^u.^{Aug. 28, 1}⁹⁶^{2, is the only definitive date which ca}ⁿ^{be esta}^{blished based on available data, as the ea}^{rliest point at which Pre}^{sident Kennedy lear}^{ned of Justice}
^Frankfu^{rter’s inte}^{ntion to retire. However, President Ken}^{nedy’s q}^{uick nomination of Goldberg, and}^{Justice Fra}^nkfu^{rter’s poor}^he^alth^{in the week}^{s leading up to}^his

^{retirement, sugge}^{st that}^Presiden^{t Kennedy was}^{considering p}^rosp^{ective nominees well before Fra}ⁿ^kfurte^{r step}^{ped down. Kennedy’s}^{letter to Justice Fra}^nkfu^rter
^accepting^{his retiremen}^{t refe}^renc^{es a visit the President}^{paid to Frankfu}^{rter to c}^{heck on}^{his health}^s^{ometime during the s}^umme^r^{of 1}⁹⁶²^{(U.S. National Archives and}
^{Records Administration, Office of the Federal Register,}^{Public Pape}^{rs of the Presidents of the}^{United States: John F. Kennedy, 1962}^{, (Washington: GPO, 1}⁹⁶^{3), p. 65}^6).
^{According to Kennedy Lib}^{rary R}^eference^Tech^{nician Sharon Kelly, Kennedy’s office files suggest t}^h^{at corresponde}^nce^between^Fran^kfurte^{r, Special Assistant for}
^{National Security Affairs M}^cGeor^{ge Bundy, and t}^{he President woul}^{d have alerted Ken}^{nedy to Frankf}^{urter’s declining health}^arou^nd^M^{ay 17,}¹⁹^{62 (e-mail}
^{communication betwee}^{n CRS Inf}^{ormation Specialist Dana Ely and Kennedy Lib}^{rary Refe}^rence^Tech^{nician Sharon Kelly, Sept. 14, 2}⁰⁰⁵^).
^v.^{President Lyndon B. Joh}^nson^une^{xpectedly nominated}^Justice^{Goldberg to be}^{U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations following the}^d^{eath on J}^{uly 14,}¹⁹^{65, of the}
^{previous am}^{bassador, Adlai E. Ste}^{venson. See Carroll Kilpatrick, “}^{Goldberg is Named to Stevenson}^Post,”^{Washington Post}^{, J}^{uly 21,}¹^965,^{p. A1.}
^w.^{Despite the fact}^that^{Justice Clar}^{k annou}^{nced his}^{forthcoming r}^{etirement on}^{Feb. 2}^{8, 19}^67,^{historical evidence suggests t}^{hat Jo}^h^nson^{might have}^prom^{pted Clark’s}
^{retirement as}^{early as Ja}^{n. 19}^67,^{when t}^{he President}^pre^{pared to}^{nominated Justice Clark’s son, Ra}^{msey, to be Attorney}^Ge^neral.^{“On Ja}^nuar^{y 2}^{5, 19}^{67, Jo}^{hnson tol}^d
^{Ramsey that}^{he could only be}^na^{med the pe}^rman^{ent attor}^{ney ge}ⁿ^{eral if his fathe}^{r step}^{ped down f}^r^{om the Court” (Ward,}^{Deciding to Leave}^{, p. 17}^0).
^x.^{Although President Jo}^{hnson did n}^{ot announ}^{ce Chief J}^{ustice Warr}^e^{n’s retirement}^u^{ntil June}^26,^{he r}^{eceived Warren’s retireme}^{nt le}^tt^{er on J}^une^{13, 1}⁹⁶⁸^{(U.S. National}
^{Archives and Records Administra}^{tion, Office of the Federal Register,}^{Public Papers of the}^{Presidents o}^f^{the United States: Lyndon B. Johnson, 1968-69}^{, vol. 1 (Washington:}
^{GPO, 19}^{66), p. 7}^46).
^y.^A^{lthough a s}^{pecific opport}^{unity t}^o^{name a new}^{Associate Justice d}^{id not arise until the Fortas Chief}^Justice^{nomination on Ju}^ne²^{6, 1}^{968, it was}^{reported t}^{hat “[s]om}^e
^{Texans at t}^{he Capitol are su}^{re th}^{at Mr. John}^{son ha}^{s plan}^{ned for t}^h^e^{last four year}^{s to name T}^horn^b^{erry to the}^Supr^{eme Court}^bef^or^{e he [Joh}^{nson] left office,”}
^{(Richard L. Lyons, “Homer Thor}^nber^{ry: ‘Constructive Lib}^{eral,’ Cl}^{ose LBJ friend,”}^{Washington P}^ost,^J^une^{27, 1}⁹⁶^{9, p. 1).}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}^z.^{Jan. 20,}¹⁹^{69 (t}^{he date of Richard}^{M. Nixon’s inaug}^{uration), is used}^{as the sta}^{rting date for t}^{he vaca}ⁿ^{cy beca}^{use it marks}^the^beginni^ng^{of President Nixon’s official}
^g/w^{decision-making powers. After th}^{e Abe Fortas Chief}^Justice^nomin^{ation failed, Presi}^{dent Johnson a}ⁿ^{nounced on}^{Oct. 2, 1}⁹⁶^{8, that}^he^{would not name anot}^her^nominee^(U.S^{. National Archives and Records Administration, Office of the}^{Federal Register,}^{Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: L}^{yndon B. Johnson, 1968-69}^{, vol. 2}
^s^.or^{(Washington: GPO, 19}^{66), p.}⁵⁰⁹^{). Eight days later, Johnson elabor}^{ated on his decision. The President wrote that}^although^{he wo}^uld^{have made a}^nother^{nomination in}
^le^ak^{“ordinary times,” the situation w}^{as extraordinary}^{and that, “U}^{nder the circ}^umsta^{nces, the}^foundati^{ons of governme}^{nt would be}^be^tt^{er served}^{by t}^{he p}^resent^Chief
^{Justice [Ea}^{rl Warren]}^{remaining [}^{in office] until emotionalism subsi}^{des, reason and fairn}^{ess p}^{revail (U.S. Nati}^{onal Archives an}^{d Recor}^{ds Administration, Office of the}
^://wiki^{Federal Register,}^{Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: L}^{yndon B. Johnson, 1968-69}^,^{vol. 2 (Washington: GPO, 1}⁹⁷^{0), p. 10}²^{4). On Dec. 3, 1}⁹⁶^{8, Chief J}^ustice
^h^ttp^{Warren infor}^{med President-elect Richard M. Nixon t}^{hat he}^{was wi}^{lling to continue serving}^{until a su}^{ccessor was con}^{firmed (“Stat}^{ement by}^{the C}^{hief Ju}^{stice,” Dec. 4,}
¹⁹⁶^{8, Earl War}^{ren Pa}^{pers, Ma}^nus^{cript Division, Library of Congres}^{s, Washington, DC). In a May}¹⁹^{69, conver}^{sation with re}^porters^,^{President Nixon offe}^{red an}
^unu^{sually detailed discussion of his decision-making process s}^urrou^{nding the Bu}^rger^{nomination. Nix}^{on reported t}^{hat he}^thoug^ht^“it^{would not be a p}^{roper ma}^{rk of}
^respect^{for the Cou}^{rt and}^{for the}^{Chief Justice to}^{have a}^{nomination go down, say, in Februar}^{y or}^{March, a}^{nd the}^{n have}^possibly^th^{e Senate hea}^{rings and t}^{he like at}^a
^{time that the Cou}^{rt was sitting,”}^{and that}^{his target date for a}^no^{mination decision was between}^{May 1 a}^{nd J}^une^{1, 19}⁶⁸^{(U.S. N}^{ational Archives and Records}
^{Administration, Office of the Federal Register,}^{Public Papers of the}^{Presidents of the United States:}^{Richard Nixon, 1970}^{, (Washington: GPO, 197}^{1), p. 39}^0).
^aa.^{Chief Justice War}^{ren B}^urger^rep^{ortedly “hint[ed] at a possible va}^{cancy” on t}^{he Court}^{in a letter t}^o^{President Gerald Ford on No}^{v. 10, 1}⁹⁷^{5, and offer}^{ed “factors fo}^r
^{[the President] to consider w}^hen^{appointing a}^{new justice” (e-mail communication betw}^{een CRS In}^f^{ormation Specialist Dana Ely an}^{d Ford Library Arc}^{hivist Technician}
^{Joshua Coch}^{ran, Sept. 1}^{2, 20}^05).^{Justice Douglas’s health}^{had bee}ⁿ^{in que}^{stion since Dec. 3}^{1, 19}^74,^when^{he s}^uffe^{red a stroke (}^Johⁿ^{P. MacKenzie, “Douglas Retires}
^{From Court,”}^{Washington Po}^st^{, N}^{ov. 13, 19}^{75, p. A}^{1). However, President Ford would have had r}^{elatively litt}^{le time to consider a replacement J}^{ustice since}^{he did no}^t
^{assume t}^{he p}^residency^{until Aug.}^{9, 19}^{75, and a}^vacanc^{y did not official}^{ly arise until Justice Douglas’s Nov. 12, 1}⁹⁷⁵^retirem^e^{nt letter.}
^bb.^{Although J}^{ustice Stewart’s decision to retire was not made}^pu^{blic until Ju}^{ne 1}^{8, 1}⁹⁸^{1, Stewart delivered a letter, stating his}^{desire to}^{retire, to President Ronald Reag}^an
^{on May}^{18, 1}⁹⁸¹^{(U.S. National A}^{rchives a}^{nd Records Administration, Office of the Federal Register}^,^{Public Papers of the Presidents}^{of t}^{he United States: Ronald Reagan,}
¹⁹⁸¹^{(Washington: GPO, 19}^82),^{p. 53}^9).
^cc.^{Although Chief J}^{ustice Bu}^{rger offi}^{cially notifie}^{d President Reagan of his desire to retire, by letter o}ⁿ^June^17,¹⁹^{86, Burg}^er^p^{rivately informed Reagan of his}^{plans on}
^{May 2}^{7, 19}⁸⁶^{(“Remarks on t}^he^{Resignation of Supreme Cou}^{rt C}^{hief Justice Wa}^rren^{E. Burge}^{r and}^{the Nominations of William H. Reh}^nq^{uist To Be Chief Justice a}ⁿ^d

^{Antonin Scalia To Be an Associate Justice,” U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, Off}^{ice of the Federal Register,}^{Public Papers of the President}^{s of the}
^{United States: Ronald Reagan, 1986,}^{vol. 2 (Washington: GPO, 19}⁸^{9), p. 78}^1).
^dd.^{The May}^{27, 1}⁹⁸^{6, date is used}^b^{ecause Chief}^{Justice B}^{urger’s inte}^{ntion to retire (known to Preside}^{nt Reagan on}^May^{27) alerted}^th^e^{President of the}^forthcoming
^opportu^{nity to elevate Rehn}^quist^{from Associate Justice to C}^{hief J}^{ustice, and in tu}^{rn, of the}^opport^{unity to nominate someone}^t^{o su}^{cceed Rehn}^{quist as a}ⁿ^Associate
^Justice.
^ee.^{President Reagan re}^{portedly “ha}^{d no advance war}^{ning of t}^{he resi}^{gnation” (Al Kamen, “Nixon-App}^{ointed Democrat Cites Age, Heal}^th,^”^{Washington P}^ost^{, Ju}^ne^{27, 1}⁹⁸^7,
^{p. A1).}
^ff.^{Judge Gins}^bu^{rg withdrew}^{his nam}^{e from consideration before}^bein^{g officially nominated, but after P}^{resident Reagan had a}^nnou^nced^h^{is intention to nominate Gins}^bu^r^g.
^{Among other cont}^{roversies su}^rr^{ounding the}^{nomination, Ginsb}^ur^{g admitted shortly before withdr}^{awing that h}^e^{“had smoked ma}^rijuan^{a w}^{hile a Harvard law}
^{professor” (Lou Ca}^{nnon a}^{nd Rut}^{h Mark}^{us, “J}^{udge Kennedy}^{Likely Choice,”}^{Washington Post}^{, Nov. 9,}¹⁹^{87, p. A}^6).
^gg.^{On th}^{e details of transfe}^{rring J}^ust^{ice White’s retirement letter to t}^{he President}^{beginning o}ⁿ^Mar.¹^{8, 19}^{93, see De}^{nnis J. H}^u^t^chi^nson^,^T^{he Man Who Was Once}^Whizzer
^{White: A Portrait of Justice Byron R.}^White^{(New York: Free Press ,}¹^998,^{p. 43}^{7) and Ward,}^{Deciding to Leave,}^{p. 1}^{83, n.}¹⁸^{3. One of}^Jus^{tice White’s former law clerks, b}^y
^{then working i}ⁿ^{the W}^{hite Hous}^{e, delivered the letter on the}^Mar^{. 19, 19}^93.
^hh.^{Jan. 1, 1}⁹⁹^{4, is an estimation, sinc}^{e Justice Blackmu}^{n re}^{portedly “told President Bi}^{ll C}^{linton at Renaissance Weekend over}^the^New^{Year’s holiday in Hilt}^{on Head, S.}^C.,
^{that this would be}^{his last term (}^{Tony Mauro, “How Blackmu}^{n Hi}^{d Retirement Plans,”}^{New Jersey L}^{aw Journal,}^{Apr. 25, 19}^94,^{p. 18. ). Clinton publicly an}^nounced
^{Blackmun’s retireme}^{nt on A}^{pril 6}^,¹⁹⁹^{4. (U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, Office of the Federal Register,}^{Public P}^{apers of the Presidents}^{of the Unite}^d
^{States: William J. Clinton, 1994,}^{vol. 1 (Washington: GPO), 19}^95,^{p. 597).}
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}
^g/wTable 3. Median Duration in Days Between Major Events in the Supreme Court Nomination-and-Confirmation Process, 1900-
^s^.or 2006
^le^ak
^{Median number o}^f^{days elaps}^{ed from}^...^a
^://wiki
^h^ttp^Time^period^{President Apparently}^Learned^{of Actual or}^Nomination^{First Hearing to}^{Committee F}^inal^Nomination^{President Apparently}^Learned^{of Actual or}
^{Prospective Vacancy to}^Anno^{uncement to}^{First Hearing}^Committee^{Final Action}^{Action to Final}^{Senate Action}^Anno^{uncement to}^{Final Senate Action}^{Prospective Vacancy to}
^{Nomination Ann}^oun^cement^{Final Senate Action}
¹⁹⁰^0-^{34 12.5}⁶³¹⁷⁵⁹
¹⁹⁸⁰
¹⁹⁸^1-^{12 52}¹⁴⁷⁸⁴¹¹³
²⁰⁰⁶
¹⁹⁰^0-^{28 15}⁹⁵²²⁷⁶
²⁰⁰⁶
^Sources:^{Durations for}^{major intervals in the}^{nomination-and-confirmation proces}^{s were com}^put^{ed by the}^{CRS authors. As descri}^{bed in the}^t^{ext, this r}^esearc^{h relied on}
^{historical newspape}^{rs, official presidential papers, and CRS corres}^{pondence with}^{Presidential Libra}^{ries. Artemus Ward’s,}^{Deciding to Leave: The Politics}^{of Retirement from the}
^{United States Supreme Court}^{(Albany: State University of New}^{York Press, 20}^{03) was}^{especially usef}^u^l^{in compiling data on the reasons}^{why J}^{ustices left t}^h^{e be}^nc^h.

^Note:^{For a l}^{isting of all Supreme Court nominations made du}^rin^{g the 1}⁹⁰^0-2⁰⁰^{6 pe}^{riod and, for each nomination, the dates}^{of the}^“maj^{or events” accou}^{nted for in}^the
^{columns in}^Ta^{ble 3}^{, see the pre}^c^eding^{Table 1}^{. For a l}^{isting, for each nomination, of the d}^{uration in days bet}^{ween major eve}^{nts in t}^{he Sup}^{reme Court}^{nomination-and-}
^{confirmation process, see}^{Table 2}^.
^a.^In^{Table 3}^{, the median amou}^nt^{of time from vacanc}^{y to final Sen}^{ate action within each time}^{period does not necessarily eq}^{ual the}^{sum of t}^{he medians for ea}^{ch stag}^{e in}
^{the nomination-and-confirmation}^{process. Likewise, the median le}^{ngth of time for all Senate actions}^(i.e.^{, from nomination anno}^u^nce^{ment to final Senate action) withi}ⁿ
^{each time pe}^{riod does not equal}^{the su}^{m of the}^{medians for eac}^h^{stage. The median identifies the}^{mid-point for individual sets}^{of o}^{bservations. Because}^each^stage^of
^{the p}^{rocess can}^{have a}^different^num^{ber of obs}^{ervations, and b}^e^c^{ause the}^{data are also not a “nor}^{mal” (i.e}^{., “bell-shaped”) dis}^{tribution, the sum of t}^{he medians for}
^{individual stages generally is not equal to the median}^{for the}^entire^{period. For more information, see chapte}^{r 4}^{in Ya-lun Cho}^u,^Statis^{tical Analysis for Business and}
^Economics^{(New York: Elsevier, 1}^{989). Due to}^{updated data in}^Ta^{ble 1}^and^{Table 2}^{, some of the summary}^{statistics in}^{Table 3}^ha^{ve cha}^{nged from p}^{revious ver}^sions
^{of this report. This ver}^{sion of the}^{report does not include, w}^{hen c}^{alculating the interval for total Senate action (nomination}^an^nounc^{ement to final Senate action), cas}^es
^{in which}^{nominations lingered in}^{the Senate, b}^{ut on w}^{hich t}^{he Sen}^{ate took no final vote (e.g., the nomination was withdrawn, re}^com^{mitted, etc.)}^{. If the J}^udiciary
^{Committee held hearings or}^{held a final vote, those dates are inclu}^{ded in median calculations.}

ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL33118}
^g/w
^s^.or
^le^ak
^://wiki
^h^ttp

^R^.^S^a^m^Garret^t ^Cur^tⁱ^s^W^.^Co^p^e^la^nd
^An^al^y^s^{t i}ⁿ^Am^erican^Natⁱ^on^al^Gov^e^rnm^e^nt^Sp^{ecialist i}ⁿ^Am^er^ican^Natioⁿ^a^{l Go}^v^e^rⁿ^m^eⁿ^t
^rg^arret^t^@^crs^.^l^o^c.g^o^v^,^7-⁶⁴⁴³^c^w^copel^aⁿ^d^@^c^rs^.l^oc.g^ov^{, 7-}⁰⁶³²
^D^eⁿⁱ^{s St}^e^v^eⁿ^Rut^k^us
^Specialis^{t on}^t^h^{e Federal J}^u^diciar^y
^s^r^u^t^k^u^s@^crs^.^l^o^c.g^o^v^,^7-⁷¹⁶²