Sean Hannity called the Senate's passage of filibuster reform a “lawless maneuver” despite having supported it in 2005 under Republican President George W. Bush.

After the Senate voted to change the rules on judicial nominees to allow confirmation with a simple majority vote, Hannity called the move a “lawless maneuver,” saying “Democrats break the rules”:

But in 2005, under a Republican president and Republican-controlled Congress, Hannity called judicial nominations one of the “specific instances in the Constitution where they call for a supermajority,” arguing that it was “unconstitutional to filibuster”:

HANNITY: Senator [John McCain], one last question before we let you go here.

There are seven specific instances in the Constitution where they call for a supermajority. I believe it's unconstitutional to filibuster. It is not about advice and consent now to ask for a supermajority on judicial nominations. I believe that is not constitutional.

There's been a lot of talk about what we describe as the “constitutional option,” which is that the Republicans would unite and vote, and there would be an up-or-down vote on all of the judicial nominations. Do you think that's the right thing to do? Will you support [then-Senate Majority Leader] Senator [Bill] Frist if he does it?

As Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid pointed out, of the 168 filibusters of executive and judicial nominations that have occurred in the history of the U.S. Senate, half have occurred during the Obama administration.