The continued use of the panels during the Reagan administration suggests that senators have found them useful in fulfilling their own political and administrative needs, and it further suggests that the nominating panels have found a permanent place in the selection of district court judges. While differences between panel and nonpanel nominees were strong in only a few cases, the data indicate that the emphases of panelists in screening applicants for Federal judgeships were reflected in differences between the nominees. In both administrations, panel nominees were more likely than nonpanel nominees to have had judicial experience, service as a government attorney, and law professor experience. They were also more likely to have high ratings from the American Bar Association. The differences in background characteristics were more dramatic in the Reagan administration than in the Carter administration. For the circuit courts, the difference between Carter panel and Reagan nonpanel selections did not follow the expectations derived for comparing district court nominees with a single administration. This may be attributed to the differences in the goals and screening procedures of the two administrations. Tabular data and 81 footnotes are provided.