On October 6, 2018, the United States Senate confirmed Brett Kavanaugh as an associate justice of the Supreme Court by a vote of 50–48. This tally reflected a narrow partisan divide, with all Republicans present voting in favor and all Democrats voting against confirmation, joined by three dissenting Republicans on a subset of procedural steps. The outcome capped a highly contentious confirmation cycle that tested institutional norms, investigative processes, and the Senate’s role in providing advice and consent. This evergreen explainer details how the vote unfolded, breaks down the final tally by subgroup where relevant, and contextualizes the score within enduring debates about judicial confirmations.
What was the final Kavanack vote tally?
The Senate’s final vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the nomination, which effectively determined whether the confirmation would proceed to a final up-or-down vote, was 50–48 in favor of cloture. On the subsequent confirmation vote itself, the result was identical: 50 yeas, 48 nays, with one senator not voting. No Democratic senator voted to confirm Justice Kavanaugh, while every Republican senator present at the time voted to confirm, producing a clean party-line outcome at the final stage.
| Vote Type | Yea | Nay | Not Voting | Date | Context |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cloture (Motion to End Debate) | 50 | 48 | 0 | October 5, 2018 | Invoked to proceed to final confirmation |
| Final Confirmation | 50 | 48 | 1 | October 6, 2018 | Resulting in Kavanaugh’s confirmation |
Not voting: one absence on final confirmation
One senator did not vote on the final confirmation: Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), who had announced her intention to be absent for the vote. Because the vote remained effectively party-line, her absence did not change the outcome, but it left the final tally at 50–48–1 rather than a clean 50–48 on the recorded vote.
How votes broke down by party
The vote followed strict party alignment in the chamber at the time of the confirmation. Republicans held a slim majority after two independents who caucus with Democrats were sworn in, but the confirmation proceeded under a simple majority without overcoming a Democratic filibuster, thanks to the cloture vote and a narrow Republican majority. Each Republican present supported moving forward and later supported final confirmation, while each Democrat present opposed both procedural and final steps.
- All present Republican senators: voted for cloture and final confirmation.
- All present Democratic senators: voted against cloture and final confirmation.
- Independents caucusing with Democrats: aligned with Democratic votes against confirmation.
- One Republican (Murkowski): not present for the final vote, producing a 50–48–1 result on confirmation specifically.
Context and significance of the narrow margin
The 50–48 margin placed the confirmation among the narrowest in modern history for Supreme Court nominees confirmed in the final decades of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. The closeness amplified debates about legitimacy, process, and the role of the Senate in high-stakes appointments. It also highlighted how shifts in political control and strategic use of parliamentary procedures, such as the motion to invoke cloture, can determine whether a nominee moves forward regardless of broader opposition. The vote tally therefore matters not only as a historical result but also as a reference point for understanding how future confirmations may unfold under divided government.
Key procedural steps reflected in the tally
Understanding the Kavanaugh vote tally requires noting which votes occurred and when. A cloture vote ended debate and required a simple majority to proceed. The subsequent confirmation vote was an up-or-down Senate decision on whether to finalize the appointment. While the final vote count is the most-cited figure, the cloture tally captures the same numeric result and underscores that the path to confirmation required only a majority to move past a threatened filibuster, not a supermajority to end extended debate in this context.
Cloture vs confirmation distinction
Cloture is a motion to end debate and proceed to a final vote; confirmation is the actual Senate decision to approve the nominee. In Kavanaugh’s case, both recorded tallies were 50–48, with one senator absent only on the final confirmation vote. The procedural step made clear that securing a simple majority was sufficient under the rules in place at the time to confirm a Supreme Court justice.
Long-term implications of a 50–48 outcome
Because the margin was so narrow, the Kavanaugh confirmation reinforced expectations that future nominations could be confirmed along strict party-line votes when the chamber is closely divided. It also intensified discussions about institutional reforms, transparency in the vetting process, and the extent to which a justice’s confirmation score should or will shape perceptions of their legitimacy or the durability of their jurisprudence. For analysts, the tally remains a baseline example of how party control, procedural strategy, and chamber composition intersect in high-stakes confirmations.
Comparisons with recent confirmation tallies (contextual)
Placing the Kavanaugh result alongside other recent Supreme Court confirmations helps clarify its distinct profile. While each nomination occurs under unique political conditions, seeing the numbers side by side highlights how close the margin was and how it fits broader patterns of increasingly polarized confirmations in the Senate.
| Nominee | Year | Final Confirmation Tally | Margin | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Neil Gorsuch | 2017 | 54–45 | +9 | Exercised nuclear option to overcome filibuster |
| Brett Kavanaugh | 2018 | 50–48 | +2 | Narrowest margin in modern confirmation history at the time |
| Amy Coney Barrett | 2020 | 52–48 | +4 | Confirmed close to election with unified party support |
| Ketanji Brown Jackson | 2022 | 53–47 | +6 | Confirmed with modest bipartisan support |
The table shows that Kavanaugh’s 50–48 result was notably tighter than several recent confirmations, underscoring the contested environment and the importance of chamber dynamics in shaping outcomes.
Evergreen takeaways for understanding confirmation tallies
The Kavanaugh vote tally remains instructive because it illustrates how parliamentary rules, timing, and chamber composition shape confirmation results. Key takeaways include: cloture and confirmation votes can align numerically when debate limits are reached; a narrow majority in the chamber can produce slim margins; and absentees or procedural strategies can alter recorded counts without changing outcomes. For long-term analysis, the tally serves as a benchmark for comparing future nominations and for evaluating how institutional norms evolve under divided government.
As a reference point, this evergreen explainer can be updated as historical context expands, but the factual record of the October 2018 vote and its alignment with Senate procedure remains stable. The score reflects a specific moment in institutional practice, and its implications continue to inform expectations about how similar political environments may handle future Supreme Court confirmations.