[Jim Noble]

The Senate has the sole power to make its rules: Art I, s. 5, second clause.

The extended debate rule (Senate rule XXII) is legal and constitutional.

There is NO CHANCE that the "consent of the Senate" will ever be deemed to be anything other that what Senate rules say it is.

[Mike10542]

Yeah, constitutional for legislation, but not constitutional for presidential nominees. How can you argue filibusters are constitutional for nominees with the passage from the constitution I just posted.

[Congressman Billybob]

Your conclusion is dead wrong. The filibuster has been ruled constitutional for LEGISLATION only. It has never been tested regarding judicial nominees. The Constitution is, as it says, "the supreme Law." Therefore if a Senate Rule contradicts a constitutional provision, the Rule loses and the constitution wins.

And it has long since been ruled that where the Constitution calls for a decision and does not specify a supra-majority, the usual rule applies, that it requires only a simple majority.

John / Billybob