1.  What issue is the topic of this commentary.  Be specific.

2.  Identify Ms. Parker's position (opinion) on this issue.

3.  Define "advice and consent".  Where in the U.S. Constitution is this term located?  What does Ms. Parker say is the point of advice and consent regarding judicial nominees?

4.  What 3 reasons does Ms. Parker give to support her opinion?  (paragraphs 6-7, 8, 9)

5.  How does Ms. Parker suggest the issue should be settled? (para. 7)  Do you agree with her suggestion?  Why or why not?

5.  Before reading this article, did you share Ms. Parker's opinion?  After reading the article, did you change your mind?  Explain your answer.

NOTES ON PROCEDURE FOR NOMINATING AND CONFIRMING FEDERAL AND SUPREME COURT JUDGES:

*The President nominates a person, and sends the name to the Senate Judiciary Committee,
*The nominee is questioned by the Senate Judiciary Committee (confirmation hearings). If confirmed,
*The name goes to the Senate for a vote.
*If the full Senate votes to confirm a nominee by 51 votes (a simple majority) or more, the nominee is confirmed.
*The current nominees in question do have support from 51 Senators.  However, the Democrats (currently the minority party) are filibustering.  Since it takes more than a majority (60 votes) to end a filibuster, the Democrats are in effect blocking the confirmation of these nominees.
*Filibusters are traditionally used with legislation (bills being voted into laws, which require 60 of the Sentors to vote for them to pass.) 
*Democrats say Republicans have used filibusters in the recent past to prevent voting on some nominees.
*Republicans say they have never used the filibuster on judges.
*The Republicans are considering attempting to change the Senate rules to end filibusters for judicial nominees.  It is important to note, Republicans say that they only want to end filibusters of judicial nominees, not filibusters used with legislation.  Republicans support the traditional filibuster used with legislation, as do Democrats.