19
Ideological Holds, the first type of Nominee-Based Holds, are based solely on an
objection to the nominee in question. A senator may block the nominee because of positions the
nominee holds on specific controversial issues or due to the nominee’s overall judicial
philosophy. Senator Howard Metzenbaum (D-OH), Alan Cranston (D-CA) and others placed
holds on the confirmation of Edward Carnes to the 11
th
Circuit Court in 1992. Carnes served as
Assistant Attorney General for the state of Alabama, and his main duty was to prosecute
defendants in capital cases. Death penalty opponents and civil rights leaders loudly protested his
confirmation, arguing both that the death penalty was applied disproportionately to blacks in
Alabama and that Carnes had defended a biased judicial system which unfairly kept blacks off
death penalty juries.
Similarly, Senator Robert Smith (R-NH) placed a hold in 1999 on 9
th
Circuit Court
nominees Marsha Berzon and Richard Paez (and Senator Jeffrey Sessions (R-AL) was rumored
to have as well). Both Berzon and Paez drew heavy fire from conservative Senators and interest
groups due to their positions on a myriad of issues. Smith’s spokeswoman explained: “He has
slapped a hold on them because their answers to questions on abortion, the death penalty and
guns do not meet with the senator’s approval and that he believes there should be a litmus test for
federal judges on abortion.”
34
Smith himself later claimed, “They are activist judges. They are
out of the mainstream of American thought, and I don’t think either one should be on the
court.”
35
These two examples highlight how senators at times decide to block nominees whose
record and personal ideology they oppose, especially when they fear that the nominees may be
confirmed otherwise.
34
Quoted in Washington Post Editorial (1999).
35
Quoted in Abrams (2000).
Convention