20.2.2 Factors influencing the president's choice of nominee.

Ideological Alignment

Presidents often choose nominees whose judicial philosophy aligns with their own ideological views to ensure that future rulings may reflect their stance on key legal and constitutional issues. For example, President Trump nominated Amy Coney Barrett (ACB) to solidify a conservative majority on the Court due to her conservative judicial philosophy. However, ideological alignment does not guarantee consistent rulings in line with the president's views. Justice David Souter, appointed by President George H.W. Bush, was expected to be a conservative but often sided with liberal justices on issues like abortion rights and affirmative action, earning the label of a "stealth justice."

Senate Confirmation

The likelihood of the nominee being confirmed by the Senate is a crucial factor, especially in a divided government. Presidents may opt for a moderate candidate to increase the chances of confirmation. For instance, President Joe Biden nominated Ketanji Brown Jackson, who was seen as a choice that could appeal to both moderates and progressives in a closely divided Senate.

Legal Qualifications

Presidents consider the nominee's legal qualifications to ensure they possess the necessary knowledge and expertise for the role. This includes a distinguished legal career and a strong reputation in the legal community. President Obama's nomination of Elena Kagan capitalized on her reputation as a brilliant legal scholar, reflecting the importance of legal qualifications in the nomination process.

Demographic Considerations

Reflecting the diverse nature of the U.S. population, presidents may also consider the demographic background of the nominee to ensure that the Supreme Court reflects a broader range of perspectives. President Biden's nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first Black woman nominated to the Supreme Court, was a historic move aimed at bringing greater racial and gender diversity to the Court.

Composition of the Supreme Court

Presidents may also consider the current composition of the Supreme Court when making their nominations. They might choose a younger justice to ensure a long-lasting impact on the Court or select someone with expertise in a specific area of law that is under-represented. For example, Amy Coney Barrett was only 48 years old at the time of her nomination, indicating a strategic decision to secure a long-term influence on the Court's decisions.

Effective and Not Effective Aspects of the Nomination Process

Effective	Not Effective
Oversight: Nominated by the president but needs Senate approval (simple majority). For example, Harriet Miers (who was not an expert and had no experience) was not elected.	Politicization of the process: The appointment process has become politicized, with examples like 'Trump judges.' Trump was seen to want to replace a swing justice with a conservative justice like Brett Kavanaugh.
American Bar Association (ABA): The ABA gives ratings to nominees. Clarence Thomas is the only one who is just 'qualified,' while Roberts was rated 'well qualified.'	Influence of movements and pressure groups: The "Me Too" movement and pressure groups have become more invasive, questioning not the nominee's experience but rather where they stand on certain issues.
Not elected, no political bias: Justices are not politically aligned with a party.	ABA ratings' influence: ABA ratings do not have a huge influence, as seen with Clarence Thomas, who was rated 'qualified' but not 'very qualified.'
Experts in their fields: Most recently, there have been extremely good justices. Nominees are not elected if they are not experienced, as in the case of Miers.	Presidential influence on ideology: Presidents often look at previous rulings and pick nominees based on their ideological stance.
Length of process: Hearings involve harsh scrutiny. For instance, Ketanji Brown Jackson was deemed to not be harsh enough on sexual assault accusations. Samuel Alito's process lasted 82 days.	Process becoming personal: The process has become too personal, as seen with Brett Kavanaugh's sexual assault accusations. The focus has shifted away from expertise.
Rejection of nominees: 12 nominees have been rejected since 1789, often because some were too ideologically aligned with one party.	Senate power and influence: The Senate can have too much power and influence over the process. For instance, Merrick Garland and Obama's nomination process was blocked, leaving only 8 justices instead of 9, causing the branch to not function for nearly a year. Meanwhile, Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed in just 27 days in the last days of Trump's presidency.
	Partisan voting: Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation vote was 50-48, with one Republican and one Democrat breaking from their parties, showing that voting can often follow party lines rather than focus on expertise.