what percent of the senate is needed to confirm a supreme court justice
Appointment and confirmation to the Supreme Court of the United States Once the Committee reports out the nomination, the whole Senate considers it. A simple majority vote is required to confirm or to reject a nominee. Prior to 2017, a successful filibuster threat could add the requirement of a supermajority of 60 needed in favor of cloture, which would allow debate to end and force a final vote on confirmation. Rejections are relatively uncommon; the Senate has explicitly rejected twelve Supreme Court nominees in its history. The most recent rejection of a nominee by vote of the full Senate came in 1987, when the Senate refused to confirm Robert Bork.
Supreme Court of the United States Critic Larry Sabato wrote: "The insularity of lifetime tenure, combined with the appointments of relatively young attorneys who give long service on the bench, produces senior judges representing the views of past generations better than views of the current day."[226] Sanford Levinson has been critical of justices who stayed in office despite medical deterioration based on longevity.[254] James MacGregor Burns stated lifelong tenure has "produced a critical time lag, with the Supreme Court institutionally almost always behind the times."[210] Proposals to solve these problems include term limits for justices, as proposed by Levinson[255] and Sabato[226][256] as well as a mandatory retirement age proposed by Richard Epstein,[257] among others.[258] However, others suggest lifetime tenure brings substantial benefits, such as impartiality and freedom from political pressure. Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 78 wrote "nothing can contribute so much to its firmness and independence as permanency in office."[259]
Supreme Court of India Judges used to be appointed by the president on the advice of the union cabinet. After 1993 (the Second Judges' Case), no minister, or even the executive collectively, can suggest any names to the president,[27][28] who ultimately decides on appointing them from a list of names recommended only by the collegium of the judiciary. Simultaneously, as held in that judgment, the executive was given the power to reject a recommended name. However, according to some,[who?] the executive has not been diligent in using this power to reject the names of bad candidates recommended by the judiciary.[29][30][31]
Filibuster On November 21, 2013, the Democratic controlled Senate voted 52 to 48 to require only a majority vote to end a filibuster of all executive and judicial nominees, excluding Supreme Court nominees, rather than the 3/5 of votes previously required. [57] On April 6, 2017, the Republican controlled Senate voted 52 to 48 to require only a majority vote to end a filibuster of Supreme Court nominees.[58] A 3/5 supermajority is still required to end filibusters on legislation.