Replication Data for: The Purpose of Senatorial Grandstanding During Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings

U.S. Supreme Court confirmation hearings provide senators with an opportunity to engage a potential justice on a nationwide stage. Senators probe for information about the potential justice’s future behavior on the bench. Nominees bob and weave through the tangle of questions, oscillating between forthcoming and vague responses. Such behavior encourages popular narratives that characterize this intricate dance as a “vapid and hollow charade” or an “exercise in obfuscation.” We challenge this wisdom and argue that senators use these hearings to provide meaningful representation to their constituents while simultaneously supporting co-partisan efforts to contest or champion the nominee. We examine the exchanges in 185 senator-nominee pairings that span nearly 30 years of confirmation hearings. Our results show that senators from both parties increase their question-asking activity during divided government, when confirmation success is more dubious. Senators from the president’s party will ask fewer questions when their constituents support the nominee, however, suggesting that popular support can attenuate this general effect for senators expecting a successful confirmation.

美国最高法院大法官提名确认听证会为参议员提供了在全国性平台上质询潜在大法官人选的契机。参议员会借此探寻这位潜在大法官未来履职行为的相关信息。提名人选会在繁杂的质询间周旋躲闪，在坦诚作答与模糊回应之间摇摆不定。这类表现催生了大众叙事，将这场复杂的互动形容为"空洞乏味的闹剧"或是"刻意混淆视听的作秀"。本研究对这一主流观点提出质疑，并提出：参议员借由这些听证会，既能为其选民提供具有实质意义的代议服务，同时也能协同同党议员，为提名人选展开拥护或反对活动。本研究分析了跨越近30年提名确认听证会的185组参议员-提名人互动样本。研究结果显示：在分治政府时期，两党参议员的质询活跃度均会提升——此时提名确认的成功概率更难预判。但当总统所在政党的参议员的选民支持该提名人选时，他们的质询次数会有所减少，这表明：若参议员预期提名可顺利通过，民众的支持会削弱这一普遍效应。