Published July 7, 2026
Just in time for the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, the president reiterated his call to abolish the legislative filibuster. He was echoed by Senator Mike Lee, who posted on X, “Nuke The Friggin’ Filibuster Already Best Birthday Present For America.”
A senior Republican senator, not long ago, saw things differently. He opposed changing the Senate Rules to advance the president’s agenda, saying of them, “They facilitate the compromise and accountability that are essential to the governing of a large, diverse nation.”
As you may have guessed, this senator was the very same Mike Lee, albeit back in 2019. The occasion was then–Majority Leader Mitch McConnell changing the rules to reduce post-cloture time for most nominees from 30 hours to two hours. This was a necessary change by which Senate Republicans responded to the Democratic tactic of filibustering nearly all district-court nominees as well as subcabinet officials they opposed.
Senator Lee stuck to his guns and voted against the Senate Republican Conference on the rule change. Only he and Senator Susan Collins broke ranks and voted with the Democrats. Senators like Lisa Murkowski, Rob Portman, Lamar Alexander, and, indeed, McConnell, voted to his right.
His point on compromise and accountability applies with force to the legislative filibuster. Frankly, it was somewhat out of place in the debate about district judges and subcabinet nominees. The filibuster historically applied to them only by accident and is a poor fit because you can’t amend a nominee. But he had his view and he stuck to it.
While the executive filibuster may have been a historical aberration, for some time it did force compromise when it came to nominations packages. Traditionally the minority would trade its assent to the confirmation of a package of the president’s as long as it included the few that they themselves favored, often members of bipartisan, “independent” agencies.
Ironically, it was Lee who essentially put a stop to bipartisan packages with his opposition to Chai Feldblum’s nomination to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in the first Trump administration. Feldblum was a radical and a menace, but with Lee filibustering her, Democrats had no interest in dropping their filibuster of the Republican nominees to that agency or elsewhere. As a result, Feldblum was stopped but only along with various Republicans. The only realistic path forward was a change in the rules to allow the president’s nominees to be forced through without Feldblum.
Lee’s position in 2019 was principled going and coming. He could not assent to a nominee like Feldblum and nor could he assent to the expedient proposed to address it given his views on the Senate Rules and their importance. It’s a worthy example for the many senators today who refuse to abandon their firmly held position on the legislative filibuster.
Michael A. Fragoso is a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in the Constitution, the Courts, and the Culture Program, where he writes and speaks on issues relating to the law, the federal judiciary, and Congress. An attorney in private practice, he served in all three branches of the federal government, including most recently as chief counsel to the Senate Republican Leader, Mitch McConnell (R-KY). His writing has appeared in The Wall Street Journal, National Review, The Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy: Per Curiam, and elsewhere.
