Could the Maine Senate confirm several executive or judicial nominees in one vote?

Plain-English summary

A Maine senator asked whether the Senate could exercise its confirmation power on more than one executive or judicial nominee at the same time. Attorney General James Tierney concluded that the state constitution allowed a combined vote when the vote of each senator was recorded.

Article V, Part 1, Section 8 made a legislative committee's recommendation final unless two-thirds of senators present and voting overrode it. The provision required a vote by yeas and nays but did not require a separate roll call for every nomination.

The opinion suggested a procedure in which the presiding officer announced a group of nominees for simultaneous confirmation and allowed any senator to set aside an opposed nominee for an independent vote. That approach preserved the required recorded vote on each nomination.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1986. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Who this opinion addressed in 1986

State senators

A senator's yea or nay had to be recorded for each nomination, but one recorded vote could cover several unopposed nominees.

Senate officers

The opinion's example allowed notice that nominations would be grouped unless a senator requested a separate vote for an opposed nominee.

Executive and judicial nominees

Combined consideration did not reduce the constitutional requirement that each nomination be the subject of a recorded Senate vote.

Common questions

Q: Did the Constitution require a separate vote on each nominee? A: No. The opinion found only a requirement that each nomination receive a Senate vote with yeas and nays recorded.

Q: Could an opposed nominee remain in the group vote? A: The suggested procedure allowed any senator to set that nominee aside for an independent vote.

Q: What vote made the committee recommendation final? A: The recommendation became final unless two-thirds of those present and voting overrode it.

Background and constitutional framework

Article V, Part l, Section 8 of the Maine Constitution governed Senate review of committee recommendations on executive and judicial officers. It specified the override threshold and a yea-and-nay vote but otherwise left the Senate room to choose its procedure.

Citations and references

Constitution:

• Article V, Part l, Section 8 of the Maine Constitution

Source

• Landing page: https://www.maine.gov/legis/lawlib/lldl/agops/agops.htm
• Original PDF: https://lldc.mainelegislature.org/Open/AG/Opinions/1986/ag_19861117.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

86-20
JAMES E. TIERNEY
ATTORNEY GENERAL

STATE OF MAINE
DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
STATE HOUSE STATION 6
AUGUSTA, MAINE 04333

November 17, 1986

Senator Richard L. Trafton
200 Court Street
Auburn, Maine 04210
Dear Senator Trafton:
You have ·inquired whether there is any constitutional impediment to the exercise of the confirmation power by the Maine Senate, pursuant to Article V, Part l, Section 8 of the ·Maine Constitution, on more than one nominee for executive or judicial office simultaneously. For the reasons which follow, it is the opinion of this office that the Senate may exercise its confirmation power in this manner, so long as the vote of each member is recorded.
The provision of the Maine Constitution just cited provides that the recommendation of the appropriate legislative committee on executive and judicial officers shall be reviewed by the Senate and shall become final unl~s~ overridden by a vote of two-thirds of those present and voting. Except for providing that the vote "shall be by the yeas and nays," the provision is silent as to the procedure which the Senate may employ. You have asked whether, in those instances where several nominations are coming before the Senate on the same day, it would be permissible for the Senate to vote on all such nominations simultaneously, having determined in advance that no Senator wishes to object thereto. It would seem clear that, -2-

so long as the yeas and nays of such a joint vote were recorded, there would be no prohibition in the Constitution for the Senate to act in such a manner. The constitu:ional provision in question does not require that a separate vote pe taken on each nomin- ation, but only that each no~ination be the subject of a vote of the Senate on which the yeas and nays are recorded. Thus, it would be constitutionally acceptable, for example, for the chair to advise the Senate t~at it proposed to entertain confirmation votes on a groJp of nominees simultaneously unless any Senator wished to have one o: the nominees set aside for an indepe~dent vote because there was opposition thereto.
I hope the foregoing answers your question. Please feel free to reinquire if further clarification is necessary.
Sincerely,

~---- ~ -~---
/ .... i

JA.'11'.ES E. TIERNEY
I
Attorney General
V
JET/ec
(
cc: Hon. Charles P. Pray
President, Maine Senate