Does the US Constitution set rules for filibustering?

No, that is left up to the legislative bodies.

No. There is nothing in it about filibustering.

So it’s just a stalling tactic to avoid whatever action is being considered by the legislative body?

@Sunny2 Yup.

Nope. It is a procedural rule. They vote on the procedural rules.

My “yup” was for Sunny’s reply and not the initial question which is a nope.

It is a Rule of the Senate. Those rules are agreed upon by the members on how to proceed. Filibustering is a long tradition in the Senate, and it is seen as a way to enhance the ability to compromise and reach consensus.

The problems is that the Senate Rules have been adapted over the years so that a single Senator can put a hold on certain legislation and on certain appointments without even having to justify it. And out of it has also grown the cloture rule which requires a 60 vote approval to end debate.

But both parties are reluctant to change the rules because it might come back to haunt them if they lose power and the other party imposes the same changes on them.

I think the only rule is you have to be standing the entire time

I actually don’t see it as a stalling tactic, and I’m somewhat in favor of it. What the filibuster does it makes sure that there isn’t tyranny of the majority, and is another check in the system.

Harry Reid had an opportunity to change the rules when the 2013 congress went into session. Because he was a afraid that some day the dems would not be in power be chose not to.
Right now they don’t even have to actually filibuster, just threaten to do it and they kill a bill. I think it’s crazy that you now have to get 60% just to get a freakin’ vote!!

I agree with you @Judi. I think it is criminal that they have to get 60 votes to override the mere threat of a veto.