In Federalist No. 76, Alexander Hamilton explained why the Senate does not have the power to appoint nominees for the Supreme Court. In contemporary debate it is easy to forget the founders’ intent for the process of nominating and confirming federal judges.

…in every exercise of the power of appointing to offices, by an essembly of men, we must expect to see a full display of all the private and party likings and dislikes, partialities and antipathies, attachments and animosities, which are felt by those who compose the assembly. The choice which may at any time happen to be made under such circumstances, will of course be the result either of a victory gained by one party over the other, or of a compromie between the parties. In either case, the intrinsic merit of the candidate will be too often out of sight. In the first, the qualifications best adapted to united the suffrages of the party, will be more considered than those which fit the person for the station. IN the last, the coalition will commonly turn upon some interested equivalent: ‘Give us the man we wish for this office, and you shall have the one you wish for that.’ This will be the usual condition of the bargain. And it will rarely happen that the advancement of the public service will be the primary object either of party victories or of party negotiations.

The founding fathers were keenly aware of the pressures and personal relationships that Senators had and felt that the President would use impartiality and merit better then the Senate would.

Americans for Tax Reform has called on the Senate to meet its constitutional obligations and ensure a speedy confirmation process with an up or down vote on all judicial nominees.