民主党人因重新夺回参议院控制权而欣喜若狂，原因多种多样，但排在接近首位的是对确认程序的掌控权：从行政部门职位到司法提名，参议院多数党地位意味着天壤之别。
There are all sorts of reasons Democrats are thrilled to take back control of the Senate, but near the top of the list is the power over the confirmation process: From executive branch roles to judicial nominations, a Senate majority makes all the difference.
唐纳德·特朗普对此心知肚明。“美国参议院确认我们所有161项待定提名至关重要，其中包括25名联邦法官，”总统本周早些时候在其社交媒体平台上写道。“感谢你们对此事的关注！”这一信息在国会山并未被忽视。《华盛顿太阳报》报道：总统唐纳德·特朗普和参议院共和党人周二开始加紧行动，力争在明年1月失去多数党地位之前确认尽可能多的司法提名人，其中包括宣布三名新提名人。
This isn’t lost on Donald Trump. “Very important for the U.S. Senate to confirm all of our pending 161 Nominations, including 25 Federal Judges,” the president wrote to his social media platform earlier this week. “Thank you for your attention to this matter!”The message did not go unnoticed on Capitol Hill. The Washington Sun reported: President Donald Trump and Senate Republicans started a rush Tuesday to confirm as many judicial nominees as possible before they lose their majority in January, including the announcement of three new nominees.
参议院司法委员会投票决定将四名司法提名人推进至参议院全院表决，为另外六名待定法官人选安排了更多委员会投票，并为另外四人举行了确认听证会。
The Senate Judiciary Committee voted to advance four judicial nominees to the Senate floor, teed up more committee votes on six other pending bench picks and held a confirmation hearing for another four.
这一情况本身就值得关注，但同样值得强调的是它正在发生：据《赫芬顿邮报》报道，来自艾奥瓦州的共和党参议员查克·格拉斯利——参议院司法委员会的即将离任主席——本周“摒弃了该委员会的若干标准做法”。报道称：在共和党于中期选举中惨败后的委员会首次听证会上，格拉斯利表示计划本周和下周举行提名听证会，这违反了该委员会两党惯例——此类听证会间隔不得少于两周。
The fact that this is happening is notable in its own right, though it’s also worth emphasizing it’s happening: As HuffPost reported, Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, the outgoing chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, “ditched a number of the panel’s standard practices” this week. From the report: In the committee’s first hearing since the GOP’s drubbing in the midterm elections, Grassley signaled plans to hold nomination hearings this week and next week, violating the panel’s bipartisan practice of holding such hearings no closer than two weeks apart.
这位艾奥瓦州共和党人将两名司法提名人加入下周的听证会日程，而他们的问卷分别在仅10天和14天前才交回委员会，这违反了委员会28天规则。格拉斯利还在提名人选的FBI背景调查尚未经工作人员审核通过的情况下就召集听证会，并计划在一次听证会上安排多达七名提名人。
The Iowa Republican added two judicial nominees to next week’s hearing whose questionnaires were returned to the panel just 10 and 14 days beforehand, respectively, which violates the committee’s 28-day rule. Grassley is also calling up nominees for hearings even though their FBI background checks have not yet been cleared by staff, and plans to tee up as many as seven nominees for a single hearing.
这里并没有什么太大的谜团——格拉斯利是个党派人物，他想帮助总统继续把司法系统向右推——但这位即将卸任的主席为自己的努力所作的辩护让我感到意外。
There’s no great mystery here — Grassley is a partisan who wants to help the president continue to move the judiciary to the right — but I was struck by the outgoing chairman’s defense of his efforts.
“一些民主党人如此憎恨特朗普总统，以至于他们计划阻挠总统任命法官的能力，这在我国历史上尚属首次，”这位艾奥瓦州人对路透社说。
“Some Democrats so despise President Trump that for the first time in our nation’s history they’re planning to stonewall a president’s ability to appoint judges,” the Iowan told Reuters.
听着，我理解格拉斯利在做什么以及为什么这么做，但他必须意识到，他为自己的行径所作的辩护有多么愚蠢。
Look, I understand what Grassley is doing and why, but he must realize how foolish his defense is for his antics.
即将上任的民主党参议院多数党很可能在明年1月到总统任期结束之间，阻挠推进特朗普的司法提名人。但认为这将是“我国历史上首次”出现参议院多数党采取此类步骤的说法是荒谬的：参议院共和党人在2015年和2016年阻挠了巴拉克·奥巴马的司法提名人，他们在2023年和2024年对乔·拜登的司法提名人做了同样的事。
It is quite likely that the incoming Democratic Senate majority will balk at advancing Trump’s judicial nominees between January and the end of the president’s term. But the idea that this will be “the first time in our nation’s history” that a Senate majority took such a step is absurd: Senate Republicans stonewalled Barack Obama’s judicial nominees in 2015 and 2016, and they did the same thing to Joe Biden’s judicial nominees in 2023 and 2024.
格拉斯利不是新手。这位93岁的现任议员已在参议院任职超过44年，是美国历史上任职时间第二长的共和党人。
Grassley is not a rookie. The 93-year-old incumbent has been in the chamber for more than 44 years, making him the second-longest-serving Republican in American history.
当他的政党阻挠奥巴马和拜登的司法人选时，他就在那里，而且他从未对正当性或规范提出任何担忧。
He was there when his party stonewalled Obama’s and Biden’s picks for the judiciary, and he never raised any concerns about propriety or norms.
认为格拉斯利不知何故别无选择，只能赶紧把特朗普的提名人送进联邦法官队伍，因为民主党人可能会以前所未有的方式对共和党白宫不客气，这种想法不可能被认真对待，而他自己本当明白这一点。
The idea that Grassley somehow has no choice but to rush Trump’s nominees onto the federal bench because Democrats might be mean to the Republican White House in unprecedented ways is impossible to take seriously, as he really ought to know.
无论如何，尽管特朗普安插法官的能力即将实际上终结，但对于那些担心司法系统激进化的人来说，这不过是微不足道的安慰。正如《政治报》本周的一篇报道所指出的，“特朗普在其两个任期内已经任命了近300名法官，这些人合在一起将在未来一代人的时间里把联邦法官队伍向右拉。尤其是他第二任期任命的法官，常常被证明即便在保守派司法队伍中也属于异类。”
Regardless, while Trump’s ability to stack the courts is poised to effectively end, it’s cold comfort for those concerned about the radicalization of the judiciary. As a Politico report noted this week, “Trump has already, over the course of his two terms, appointed nearly 300 judges who, collectively, will pull the federal bench to the right for a generation. His second-term judges, in particular, have often proven to be outliers even among the conservative judiciary.”