The Rise of the Religious Right in the Republican Party

Senate Democrats Erect Shield to Obstruct "Nuclear Option", LA Times, March 16, 2005

Senate Work May Come to Halt If GOP Bars Judicial Filibusters, Washington Post, March 16, 2005

Democratic Leader Harry Reid's Letter to Bill Frist, Senate Democratic Communication Center, March 15, 2005 (about the "nuclear" option)

Clash on Judicial Nominees Could Spill Into Lawmaking, New York Times, March 7, 2005

The Senate on the Brink, New York Times, March 7, 2005

Filibuster a Tool Used by Both Parties, People for the American Way, January, 2005

Advice and Dissent by Jeffrey Toobin, appeared in the New Yorker Annals of Law, May 26, 2003. The article gives a thorough history of the process of selecting federal judges. It also quotes senators of the current Senate Judiciary Committee, and explains the dynamics of judicial review. The article is long, but well worth reading.

Reflections on the U.S. Constitution by Adam Cohen, New York Times Editorial, August 18, 2003.

The Supreme Court to Consider Ten Commandments displays, from CNN.Com, October 12, 2004.

About Filibusters

A Senate filibuster uses delaying tactics, such as long, pointless speeches, in an attempt to interfere with or obstruct passing a law by preventing a vote. Senate Democrats have been filibustering a number of Bush's most extreme judicial nominations. Republicans have been unable to raise the sixty votes necessary to end the filibusters. Republicans have talked about changing the rules so that a simple majority rather than the required sixty votes can end a filibuster. This effort raises some constitutional questions.

The following two columns originally appeared on Findlaw.com on June 13, 2003, and were linked to the Yurica Report. They discuss the constitutional questions for changing the rules on filibusters.

This is Part One of a two-part series by Professor Amar on the Constitution and the filibuster.

This is Part Two on the Constitution and the filibuster.