Senate Dems renew call for filibuster reform
© Thinkstock

Sens. Jeff MerkleyJeff MerkleyTrump Cabinet pick: Obama inauguration had bigger crowd Dem asks Trump budget pick if he'll give 'alternative facts' Live coverage: Trump budget chief faces two Senate panels MORE (D-Ore.) and Tom UdallTom UdallHaley breezes through Senate panel Senate committee approves Commerce nominee Paul, Lee call on Trump to work with Congress on foreign policy MORE (D-N.M.) renewed their call for filibuster rule reforms Wednesday.

“This situation in which the Senate Minority undermines executive judicial branches is unacceptable,” Merkley said on the Senate floor. “The Senate must act to restore its traditional role. … We have to do by rule what has not been done by simple cooperation.”

ADVERTISEMENT
Merkley and Udall have urged Senate Majority Leader Harry ReidHarry ReidCabinet picks boost 2018 Dems Franken emerges as liberal force in hearings GOP eyes new push to break up California court MORE (D-Nev.) to use the “nuclear option” — a rare move to change the Senate rules through a simple-majority vote.

On Monday, Republicans filibustered President Obama’s third judicial nominees to the D.C. District Court.

Republicans have blocked up-or-down votes on Robert Wilkins, Cornelia Pillard and Patricia Millett. And Caitlin Halligan withdrew her nomination because of GOP threats to block her confirmation. GOP senators said it wasn’t because the judicial nominees weren’t qualified but because the D.C. Circuit Court has a low caseload and doesn’t need additional judges despite the fact that there are three vacancies on the court.

Earlier this year, lawmakers avoided the “nuclear” face off when Republicans vowed to only block nominees in “extraordinary circumstances.” But Democrats say the GOP has reneged on that agreement. 

“The only extraordinary circumstance has been continual obstruction,” Udall said. “A minority in the Senate should not be allowed to block nominees.”

Republicans have warned Democrats not to change the filibuster rules because it would set a precedent that would allow the GOP to do the same thing if it becomes the majority party in the Senate.