Federal Courts and Nominations

After Srinivasan Confirmation, ‘Mass Filibuster’ Of Three Vacancies Looms

Washington, DC – On news that  Srikanth “Sri” Srinivasan was confirmed unanimously by the U.S. Senate to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Constitutional Accountability Center Vice President Judith E. Schaeffer released the following comment:

 

“We applaud the Senate’s confirmation today of Sri Srinivasan to the D.C. Circuit in a vote that crossed partisan and ideological lines.  Mr. Srinivisan will fill one of four vacancies on the second most important court in the Nation. The question now is whether Republican Senators will continue this spirit of bipartisan cooperation, or – as some have threatened – resort to what is effectively a mass filibuster of President Obama’s future nominees to this court. 

 

“Make no mistake: a proposal by Senator Charles Grassley to eliminate the three remaining vacant seats on this critical court, under the pretext of re-balancing judicial workloads, is no more than a hypocritical, partisan ploy to keep President Obama from fully staffing the D.C. Circuit with qualified judges.  Senator Grassley and his Republican colleagues had no qualms about filling vacancies on this court during the George W. Bush Administration, when the Circuit’s caseload was even lower than it is today.” 

 

#

 

Resources:

 

Constitutional Accountability Center letter in support of Srikanth “Sri” Srinivasan’s confirmation to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, May 17, 2013: http://theusconstitution.org/sites/default/files/briefs/CAC_Letter_to_Senate_in_Support_of_Srinivasan_Confirmation.pdf 

 

“It’s Not Packing, Just Filling the D.C. Bench,” Judith E. Schaeffer, May 24, 2013:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324787004578497511399066342.html

 

“Did Senator Grassley Not Check His Inbox? — His Proposal to Gut the D.C. Circuit Ignores the Judicial Conference,” Judith E. Schaeffer, April 17, 2013: http://theusconstitution.org/text-history/1959/did-senator-grassley-not-check-his-inbox-his-proposal-gut-dc-circuit-ignores 

 

“While Acclaiming Srinivasan, Senate Republicans Propose A Mass Filibuster By Another Name,” News Release, April 10, 2013: http://theusconstitution.org/media/releases/while-acclaiming-srinivasan-senate-republicans-propose-mass-filibuster-another-name 

 

“Let’s Try This Again – Judiciary Committee Hearing for Srinivasan the Next Step to Fixing the D.C. Circuit,” Judith E. Schaeffer, April 3, 2013: http://theusconstitution.org/text-history/1940/let%E2%80%99s-try-again-%E2%80%93-judiciary-committee-hearing-srinivasan-next-step-fixing-dc 

 

##

 

Constitutional Accountability Center (www.theusconstitution.org) is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history.

 

###

More from Federal Courts and Nominations

Rule of Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Jackler v. Merit Systems Protection Board

In Jackler v. Merit Systems Protection Board, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is considering whether the Trump administration can ignore critical civil service laws when removing Immigration Judges.
Rule of Law
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Comey v. Department of Justice

In Comey v. Department of Justice, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is considering whether the Attorney General can fire an Assistant U.S. Attorney in contravention of legal protections...
Civil and Human Rights
July 18, 2026

Arnie Arnesen Attitude July 16 2026

Attitude with Arnie Arnesen
CAC’s David H. Gans joined The Attitude with Arnie Arnesen to discuss the Reconstruction Amendments. Listen...
Access to Justice
----- Supreme Court -----

Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia

In Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, the Supreme Court is considering whether employees of federally funded educational institutions can bring Title IX suits for sex discrimination.
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Wridt v. City of New York

In Wridt v. City of New York, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is considering whether the NYPD’s mass surveillance system is unconstitutional.
Federal Courts and Nominations
July 16, 2026

CAC Release: Todd Blanche’s Record Disqualifies Him From Serving as America’s Lawyer

WASHINGTON, DC – In response to this week’s confirmation hearings on Todd Blanche’s nomination to...
By: Praveen Fernandes