When Orin Hatch struck down a judicial filibuster and the nominees got a vote. Remember that, Mr. Schumer? Mis-remembers is more like it: there was a vote. That can’t be disputed; the nominees are now judges!
Blame it on Bob Smith?
And a hold is not a fake-out filibuster, as Schumer contends. Holds are part of the “cordiality” of the Senate. Filibusters are not. They can have similar effects but are different in ends, generally, duration, and durability.
Hutchinson explains the difference: holds involve negotiations and sometimes lead to filibusters, but not usually. As C-SPAN notes, holds are “not binding.” And, as Chambliss notes, if you equate holds and filibusters, then there are a lot more than 4 filibuster victims (e.g., the “Michigan 4″).
Is a supermajority requirement for appointments anywhere in the Constitution? Of course not. One need consider precedent, which is uniformly negative.