Not at all. The Senate plays a minor advisory role and has the ability to block confirmation, a power they've exercised in one way or another 36 times in the history of the Court. Twelve US Supreme Court nominees were rejected outright, by Senate vote; the others received so much resistance from the floor that their names were withdrawn or their nominations died in committee.
The minority party (currently the Republicans) can filibuster if they can't muster enough votes to prevent an appointment. This tactic was applied successfully when Justice Abe Fortas' name was advanced as a potential successor to Chief Justice Earl Warren, who retired in 1969. Fortas' name was withdrawn, and Warren Burger was nominated in his place. Burger proved acceptable to both parties.
For more information, see Related Questions, below.
false
No, the Senate actually has very much influence in regard to the appointment of Supreme Court justices. The president of the United States submits his choices of individuals to hold these seats to the Senate for their consent and advice.
Very little. The Roman senate was not an elected body. Its members came for the the city's oligarchy. It did not vote on bills. This was done directly by the people in popular assemblies. It represented the conservative interests and privileges of the top elites.
Verb - I think John influenced some of his friends.Noun - That had very little influence on our decision.Jim is a bad influence.
Little Richard
kyrans court
John Marshall :)!
age limit for supreme court judge
no
The water cycle has very little influence on the weather anywhere.
John Marshal !
Little Richard. He was a big influence in Elvis.