The term “Bork” originated from the unsuccessful 1987 United States Supreme Court nomination of Robert Bork. Robert Bork, a conservative legal scholar and judge, was nominated by President Ronald Reagan to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court. However, his nomination faced strong opposition from liberal groups and lawmakers.
During the confirmation process, Bork’s judicial philosophy and his past positions on several controversial issues, such as civil rights and privacy rights, came under intense scrutiny. Critics argued that Bork’s views were outside of mainstream legal thinking and could potentially roll back important civil rights advancements.
The opposition to Bork’s nomination was fierce and led to a highly contentious and polarizing confirmation battle. Various interest groups launched a media campaign against Bork, painting him as an extremist and a threat to civil liberties. The Senate ultimately rejected his nomination, making him the first Supreme Court nominee to be rejected since the 1960s.
Following the defeat of Bork’s nomination, the term “Bork” entered the political lexicon as a verb meaning to obstruct or defeat a nominee or candidate through a concerted campaign of public criticism and opposition. It was used to describe the intense and often ruthless tactics employed by interest groups and politicians during confirmation processes.
The term “Borking” or “to Bork” has since been used in subsequent nomination battles to describe the contentious and often highly politicized nature of the confirmation process. It has become a shorthand way of referring to the intense scrutiny and opposition faced by nominees, particularly those who hold controversial or unconventional views.
To summarize, the term “Bork” originated from the unsuccessful 1987 Supreme Court nomination of Robert Bork. It refers to the intense opposition and campaign of criticism that led to his rejection, and has since been used to describe similar confirmation battles.