The drumbeat of names put forward by President Trump to staff his administration offers a moment to mark the role of the Senate in the Framers’ constitutional scheme. The upper chamber serves as a check not only against intemperate legislation from the House, but also against ill-advised nominees by the president to serve as “Heads of Departments,” as the parchment puts it — that is to say, members of the Cabinet.

Trump’s decisive win on Election Day would appear to suggest the wisdom of the solons of the upper chamber giving the new president a wide berth in filling out the personnel of the executive branch. After all, the president’s discretion in the choice of his own officers is one of the critical powers that are vested in the president alone and enable him to ensure “that the Laws be faithfully executed.” On this could hang Trump’s whole agenda.

To that end, Trump has already made several promising choices to fill his executive team. Senator Rubio, Congressman Mike Waltz, and Congresswoman Elise Stefanik, tapped for state secretary, national security adviser, and United Nations ambassador, are excellent foreign policy picks. They will “add muscle to Trump’s ‘America First’ theme by helping allies win for America, rather than micromanage wars from afar,” these columns have noted.

Choices like Congressman Lee Zeldin to head the Environmental Protection Agency and Governor Huckabee as America’s envoy to Jerusalem also appear to be sound picks for these posts. It is hard to anticipate any turbulence as these nominees sail through the senate for approval. Then there are the cases of Pete Hegseth for defense secretary, Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence, and Congressman Matt Gaetz for Attorney General. 

We’re going to maintain an open mind on all of these, but there clearly are going to be questions in need of sorting out. Senator Collins of Maine has already raised qualms about Mr. Gaetz, who is currently the target of an ethics probe in the House. “This is why the Senate’s advise and consent process is so important,” Mrs. Collins says. “I’m sure that there will be many, many questions raised at Mr. Gaetz’s hearing.”

The Senate has a venerable history of thwarting presidential nominees for cabinet posts. This hasn’t always meant a formal rejection — as was the case in 1989 with President George H.W. Bush’s defense nominee, Senator Tower, or in 1959 when the solons denied President Eisenhower his pick for Commerce secretary, Lewis Strauss. President Coolidge’s choice for Attorney General, Charles Warren, was turned down by the solons twice.

A more common fate for nominees who fail to pass muster with the senate is to see the nomination languish, and ultimately be withdrawn. That was the case with President Clinton’s pick for Attorney General, Zoe Baird, and President George W. Bush’s Homeland Security choice, one Bernard Kerik. President Obama’s nominee for Health and Human Services, Senator Daschle, met the same result.

The decision of the Republican caucus to name Senator Thune as majority leader signals that the Senate is aware of its constitutional duties. Mr. Thune vows to support Trump’s agenda while also guarding the senate minority’s rights — including the filibuster. He has defended that tactic as a check on the majority. The framers, he said, “knew that majorities could be tyrants, so they wove protection for minority rights into our system of government.”

Mr. Thune, though, suggested openness to letting Trump make recess appointments, a constitutional route around confirmation. While it’s not clear if Democrats would cooperate — they could thwart efforts to recess the chamber — Mr. Thune’s suggestion raises concerns about the Senate abdicating its constitutional duty to provide “Advice and Consent” to presidential appointments. That responsibility will loom brightly in the months ahead.