Let's have the same rule for both parties on filibustering judicial nominees

Speaking of the editorial board of the New York Times, are its members for or against the use of the filibuster in confirmation fights against judicial nominees?  Well, as the indispensable Ed Whelan of the Ethics and Public Policy Center shows, it all seems to depend on whether the president making the appointments is a Republican or a Democrat:  http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/289719/nyt-goes-full-circle-filibusters-ed-whelan.  Like Ed Whelan, I'm no fan of the use of the filibuster in judicial confirmation proceedings.  But I think the same rule---whatever it is---should apply to Republicans and Democrats.  It matters less, I think, what that rule is, than that it apply in the same way to both parties.  The editors of the New York Times should settle on a principled position, one way or the other---a position they are willing to stick to whether a Republican or a Democrat occupies the White House.