The Democrats’ Revisionist History-Redux

In 1979, Senator Ted Kennedy—Eastland’s successor to the chairmanship—disposed of Eastland’s approach and returned to the policy that had been in effect from 1917-1956, which was that “an unreturned or negative blue slip wouldn’t prevent the Committee from conducing a hearing on a nominee.”  This was also the approach adopted by subsequent chairmen, including Senators Thurmond, Biden, and Hatch.  While Senator Leahy reinstated Senator Eastland’s single-veto approach during his tenure as chair, even Senator Leahy said “he wouldn’t stand for senators abusing the blue slip to delay or block nominees.”

As for Senator Grassley, he has been clear and consistent in articulating his approach to the blue slip since assuming the chairmanship.  In a February op-ed in the Washington Examiner, Senator Grassley said: “My policy, which is based on the policies of the vast majority of my predecessors, is that the lack of two positive blue slips will not necessarily preclude a circuit-court nominee from receiving a hearing unless the White House failed to consult with home-state senators.  I am unlikely, however, to hold hearings for district court nominees without two positive blue slips.”  One could fairly call Senator Grassley’s approach “The Biden Approach,” as Grassley’s policy is identical to the one that Senator Biden followed when he was chair from 1987-1995.  Senator Grassley has repeated his policy numerous times in op-eds, statements, and floor speeches since assuming the chairmanship (see examples here and here).

With respect to Mr. Bounds’ nomination, Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley of Oregon have been nothing but hypocritical and obstructionist.  Immediately following Bounds’ nomination last September, they announced that they would oppose his nomination because Bounds had not been approved by Wyden and Merkley’s bipartisan judicial selection commission.  Then in February, when the very same commission recommended Bounds as one of its four highest-ranking candidates for the Court of Appeals vacancy in Portland, Wyden and Merkley had to find a new purported reason to oppose Bounds.  As my NRO colleague Ed Whelan detailed yesterday, Wyden and Merkley embarked on a smear campaign, disingenuously accusing Bounds of not disclosing materials that he hadn’t been asked to provide in the first place, and attacking him for what blogger David Lat (and a former co-clerk of Bounds) described in a Wall Street Journal op-ed as “pok[ing] fun at the excesses of political correctness.”

Senator Grassley’s decision to hold a hearing for Ryan Bounds this week was measured and appropriate.  It is also consistent with the Senate Judiciary Committee’s historical approach to the blue slip.  This is not a case where the White House failed to consult home state senators about a nominee.  On the contrary, the White House actually nominated a candidate recommended by the senators’ own mechanism for identifying nominees.  Wyden and Merkley’s opposition is based purely on politics and ideology, and I commend Senator Grassley for scheduling a hearing and permitting the Committee to consider Bounds’ nomination.

Read National Review Article