Of the 160 nominations for the Supreme Court, 12 never reached the floor and 13 others never received a final vote, although they were debated on the floor. The emphasis of this report is on the 148 nominations on which some form of formal proceedings took place on the Senate floor, not on the ways in which the nominations might have been handled in committee or other pre-floor stages. A study of the 160 nominations sent to the Senate finds that the Senate's floor consideration of Supreme Court nominations breaks down relatively naturally into five patterns over time. Nominations neither approved nor rejected by the Senate during the session at which they are made shall not be acted upon at any succeeding session without being again made by the President; and if the Senate shall adjourn or take a recess for more than thirty days, all nominations pending and not finally acted upon at the time of such adjournment or recess shall be returned to the President and shall not be afterwards acted upon, unless again submitted to the Senate by the President; and all motions pending to reconsider a vote upon a nomination shall fall on such adjournment or recess; and the Secretary of the Senate shall thereupon make out and furnish to the heads of departments and other officers the list of nominations rejected or not confirmed, as required by law. The remaining 10 nominations which saw floor action came up on the floor more than two days after the committee reported, sometimes significantly more than two days later. Three live quorum calls were taken during consideration of the nomination. Unanimous Consent Agreements, 1968 to present

In the modern era, Senate practices of floor consideration generally have come to be dominated by the use of unanimous consent agreements, under which Senators agree to limit their rights to debate and to take procedural actions. The present study focuses chiefly on three that are readily identifiable and often referred to
the kind of vote (or other action) by which the Senate disposed of the nominations; the amount of time the Senate spent considering them on the floor; and the forms of procedural action that occurred during their consideration. Well over half the 124 confirmations (73, or 59% of the 124 confirmed) took place by voice vote, and the remaining 51 (41% of confirmations) by roll call. Combining these 26 nominations with the 11 that were rejected, it may be said that just 37 of the Senate's 135 votes on confirmation indicated the presence of "significant" opposition. From this perspective, accordingly, it can be held that just about two-thirds of the 148 Supreme Court nominations reaching the Senate floor have met no more than scattered opposition. Proceedings on 78 of the 148 nominations were procedurally simple in the sense of involving no optional procedural actions. Again as Table 4 shows, procedural roll calls occurred on 26 of the 70 nominations on which any optional procedures were used (18% of the total 148 nominations on which floor action occurred). This percentage is comparable to the 62% of nominations reaching the floor that faced no significant opposition and the 68% that received action on only a single day. No departure from these routine forms of proceeding occurred before 1835, when the nominations of Taney and Barbour, though eligible for the normal procedures, were called up instead by a roll call vote on a motion to proceed to consider. Some of these motions continued to be adopted by voice vote, but others were either adopted or rejected on roll call votes. 1890-1967

After 1890, the frequency of optional procedural action during consideration declined further; from then through 1967, such action appeared on just 14 of the 50 nominations that reached the floor.
From 1789 through 2009, the President submitted to the Senate 160 nominations for positions on the Supreme Court. Of these nominations, 148 received action on the floor of the Senate, and 124 were confirmed. On August 5, 2010, the Senate confirmed the nomination of Solicitor General Elana Kagan to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, making her the 124th Justice on the Court.
The forms of proceeding by which the Senate considered the 148 nominees to reach the floor break down relatively naturally into five patterns over time. First, from 1789 through about 1834, the Senate considered the nominations on the floor on the day after they were received from the President. The second period (1835-1867) was distinguished by the beginning of referral of nominations to the Committee on the Judiciary. The third period (1868-1921) was marked by rule changes that brought about more formalization of the process. During the fourth period (1922-1967), the Senate began using the Calendar Call to manage the consideration of Supreme Court nominations, and the final time period, 1968 to the present, is marked by routine roll call votes on confirmation and the use of unanimous consent agreements to structure debate.
Of the 124 votes by which the Senate confirmed nominees, 73 took place by voice vote and 51 by roll call, but on only 26 of the roll calls did 10 or more Senators vote against. Of the 36 nominations not confirmed, the Senate rejected 11 outright, and 12 others never received floor consideration (some, apparently because of opposition; others were withdrawn). The remaining 13 nominations reached the floor but never received a final vote, usually because some procedural action terminated consideration before a vote could occur (and the President later withdrew some of these). Including those that received incomplete consideration, were rejected, or drew more than 10 negative votes, just 50 of the 160 total nominations experienced opposition that might be called "significant."
Of the 148 nominations that reached the floor, 100 received one day of consideration, while 26 received more than two days, including four on which floor action took seven days or more. Of these 148 nominations, optional procedural actions that indicate the presence of an attempt to delay or block a confirmation vote occurred on 58, of which 26 involved procedural roll calls. Among a wide variety of procedural actions used, the more common ones have included motions to postpone, recommit, and table; motions to proceed to consider or other complications in calling up; live quorum calls, and unanimous consent agreements.
Neither extended consideration, the presence of extra procedural actions, nor the appearance of "significant" opposition affords definitive evidence, by itself, that proceedings were contentious. For example, some nominations considered for one day still faced procedural roll calls, some considered for three days or more faced no optional procedures, and some opposed by more than 10 Senators were still considered only briefly and without optional procedures. Of the 148 nominations to reach the floor, however, 76 were confirmed in a single day of action with neither optional procedural actions nor more than scattered opposition.
This report will be updated to reflect action on additional nominations to the Court.