The Constitution specifies that the President nominates judges and the Senate confirms them. In every place where a super majority is required, such as the ratification of treaties, the Constitution is explicit about the requirement. There is no Constitutional requirement for more than a simple majority vote to confirm judges. Since 55 Senators voted to end the fillibuster and have expressed their willingness to approve the nominee, the requirement of a 60 vote supermajority in this case is unconstitutional.

But then, you don't have to take my word for it. Read Senate Math.

A portly British statesman once famously said that "democracy is based on reason and fair play." But there's nothing reasonable or fair about what's been happening in the Senate recently. The filibuster against Bush nominee Miguel Estrada is not just an expensive waste of time and taxpayer money, it's also an affront to majority rule, the principle that democracy operates on everywhere.



Everywhere, that is, but the Senate.

The Senate is the only place I know where 59 votes out of 100 cannot pass anything because 41 votes out of 100 can defeat it. Last week, and again on Thursday, 55 senators--a clear majority--voted to end a filibuster against Mr. Estrada and still lost the day. Try explaining that at your local Rotary Club or to a constituent in the Wal-Mart parking lot or, for that matter, to the college freshman in Poly Sci 101. You can't because it stands democracy on its head.