Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s death at 90 creates a vacancy on the powerful Judiciary Committee. Democrats will need 60 votes to replace her, leaving controversial judicial nominees in limbo until then.
Back in April, Republicans were unwilling to allow a temporary replacement for Feinstein as she was ailing with shingles and unable to return to Washington for months. But many GOP senators said the temporary nature of Feinstein’s absence this spring was a key element of their objection.
If she were to leave the Senate permanently, they implied, opposition to a replacement would not be so fierce.
Rules of replacement: Democrats will need 60 votes to appoint a senator to fill Feinstein’s role on the Judiciary panel, meaning at least 10 Republicans would need to vote in favor of filling Democrats’ majority on the panel, assuming they move to do so before someone is appointed to the California Senate seat.
Senators are typically assigned to committees by unanimous consent, but such orders are subject to debate and can be filibustered. Republican senators could slow, or stop, Democrats from filling the Judiciary roster.
The panel, under Democratic control, has been advancing scores of judicial nominations that Republicans object to. Leaving the panel short one Democratic vote would hamper the majority’s steady confirmation of President Joe Biden’s nominees.
In April, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer had chosen Maryland Democrat Ben Cardin, who has since announced his plans to retire at the end of this Congress and been named Senate Foreign Relations chair. It’s unclear if Schumer would still pursue that resolution, which Republicans panned at the time.
South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, the top Judiciary Republican, said repeatedly in the spring that if Feinstein had left her Senate seat he would advocate “following the precedent of the Senate” and staying consistent with how the chamber has approached vacancies.
While the Senate has blocked committee appointments in the past, it is relatively rare and far from standard practice. But Democrats are still smarting from then-Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s decision to allow a Supreme Court vacancy to remain open and fear that he could take the same approach to the Judiciary vacancy.
