Resolution Agreed to (46-45)
46 Yea45 Nay9 Not voting1/2 required
SRES-690-119
Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 46 - 45. Record Vote Number: 114. (text: CR 4/27/2026 S2056-2057)
Sponsored by John Thune (R-SD)
What it does
This resolution authorizes the Senate to consider 49 presidential nominations together in a single "en bloc" vote during Executive Session, rather than voting on each nominee individually. The nominations span U.S. Attorneys, U.S. Marshals, Ambassadors, and senior agency officials across departments including Defense, State, Commerce, Transportation, Energy, and others. The resolution was agreed to by the Senate on a 46–45 party-line vote.
Who benefits
The 49 individual nominees, who would be confirmed more quickly than if each required a separate floor vote. The executive branch, which gains confirmed personnel in key law enforcement, diplomatic, and regulatory positions. Districts and regions served by the U.S. Attorneys and Marshals named, which would have confirmed leadership in place. The majority party, which can move nominations through more efficiently. Federal agencies with vacancies, which would gain confirmed leadership.
Who is hurt
The minority party, which loses the ability to force individual floor debates or delay votes on specific nominees it opposes. Individual nominees who might otherwise receive focused scrutiny may receive less public attention. Constituents or advocacy groups who oppose specific nominees and would prefer individual votes that allow targeted opposition. Senate norms favoring deliberation on individual nominees could be weakened as a precedent.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that en bloc consideration is a well-established Senate procedural tool that allows the chamber to fulfill its constitutional advice-and-consent role efficiently when nominees are uncontroversial or have already cleared committee review. They contend that with dozens of critical vacancies in U.S. Attorney offices, diplomatic posts, and regulatory agencies, prolonged individual floor votes leave the executive branch understaffed and impair government functions that directly affect public safety and national security.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that bundling 49 diverse nominees — spanning law enforcement, diplomacy, defense, energy regulation, and space policy — into a single vote prevents meaningful individual scrutiny and effectively strips senators of their ability to register targeted objections to specific nominees. They contend that the 46–45 vote margin reflects genuine substantive disagreement about individual nominees, and that using procedural packaging to bypass that disagreement undermines the Senate's constitutional role as a check on executive appointments.
Constitutional context
The Appointments Clause (Art. II, §2, cl. 2) requires Senate advice and consent for principal officers. This resolution governs the internal procedure by which the Senate exercises that role; it does not raise a Commerce Clause or agency-authority issue. No active Supreme Court doctrine directly constrains how the Senate structures its own floor procedures for nominations.
Checks and balances
The executive branch gains confirmed personnel across multiple agencies and districts; the Senate retains the formal advice-and-consent check but exercises it collectively rather than individually for these nominees, reducing the practical leverage of individual senators to block specific appointments.
Historical precedent
The Senate has used en bloc consideration of nominations routinely throughout its history, particularly for lower-level or uncontested nominees; the practice is a standard procedural mechanism rather than a novel departure.
Resolution Agreed to (46-45)