University of Richmond Law Review Volume 39 Issue 3 Allen Chair Symposium 2004 Federal Judicial Article 8 Selection 3-2005 Judicial Confirmation Wars: Ideology and the Battle for the edeF ral Courts Sheldon Goldman University of Massachusetts ta Amherst Department of Political Science Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.richmond.edu/lawreview Part of the American Politics Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, Courts Commons, Judges Commons, Law and Politics Commons, and the Supreme Court of the United States Commons Recommended Citation Sheldon Goldman, Judicial Confirmation Wars: Ideology and the Battle for the Federal Courts, 39 U. Rich. L. Rev. 871 (2005). Available at: https://scholarship.richmond.edu/lawreview/vol39/iss3/8 This Symposium Articles is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Richmond Law Review by an authorized editor of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact
[email protected]. JUDICIAL CONFIRMATION WARS: IDEOLOGY AND THE BATTLE FOR THE FEDERAL COURTS * Sheldon Goldman ** Over the past two decades, there have been highly contentious battles over the confirmation of federal court judges, battles that have been increasing in intensity and number-virtual judicial confirmation wars.' In this Article, I explore why this has come about, focusing on the role of ideology in judicial selection as well as the empirical reality of the confirmation process as it has evolved over the more than a quarter century since Jimmy Carter was elected president. I also explore ways to end these so-called confirmation wars while offering an alternative take on these phenomena.