DOJ Blocks Access to American Bar Association (ABA) Ability to 'Vet' Critical Info on Federal Judicial Nominees
Now the DOJ is attacking the ABA's vetting of federal judge nominees - an attack on the Judicial Branch - and the vetting of 'lifetime appointees' - hampering advice and consent
Below is a reprint in full from the American Bar Association. As you read this, you will see the AG Bondi’s DOJ has launched a blatant attack on the ABA and lady justice - on the vetting process for ‘lifetime appointments’ for federal judges. It is a process that has been in place for nearly 80 years - serving 18 administrations, both Democrat & Republican. Such nonpartisan vetting by the ABA is critical for Senators to fulfill their role: 'advise and consent’ regarding judicial nominees put forth by a president.
By appearances, it looks like the current DOJ is interfering in the longstanding vetting process: misrepresenting the work of the ABA claiming bias without evidence. It is also obvious the effect will be to prevent Senators from obtaining full records and information on those who come before them seeking lifetime appointments to the federal judiciary.
As the Federal Judiciary is currently the only branch of government now standing up to the Trump administration, it is now under attack from within by the Executive Branch and AG Bondi - willfully binding and gagging the ABA and lady justice - egregiously misrepresenting the ABA’s stellar vetting record over the past eighty years.
_______________________________________________________________________
CHICAGO, June 10, 2025 — Today, the American Bar Association sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi rebutting claims of bias in the association’s longstanding processes of evaluating judicial nominees. The letter expressed disappointment and surprise that the Justice Department has decided to block access by the ABA Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary (“Standing Committee”) to judicial nominees and restrict access of the Standing Committee to information that is relevant in evaluating judicial nominees.
For the last seven decades through 18 administrations (seven Republican presidents and six Democratic presidents), the Standing Committee has conducted extensive peer evaluations of the professional qualifications of a president’s nominees to become federal judges. The results of those evaluations are offered for consideration during the confirmation process.
A letter from Attorney General Bondi changes this process, asserting claims of bias in the ratings process. Historical data does not support the letter’s claims.
The Standing Committee has issued Well Qualified or Qualified ratings to 96.9% of the rated nominees in each administration during the last two decades, including the first Trump administration.
It rated all three of President Trump’s nominees to the Supreme Court of the United States as Well Qualified.
ABA President Bay said that the “restrictive efforts reduce transparency and deprive the Senate of necessary information it needs to meet its constitutionally required duty to provide advice and consent to the president concerning nominees for lifetime appointments to the federal judiciary. Restricting access to information and candidates for lifetime appointments also undermines the public’s confidence in the judiciary.”
In the letter, Bay urges Bondi to reconsider the DOJ’s decision to change the longstanding procedures in the judicial confirmation process and give the Standing Committee at least the same access to information on a post-nomination basis that it has had since President Trump first assumed office in 2017. Although the Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary is a part of the ABA, its operations are separate and independent, and its process is transparent.
The Standing Committee’s work is insulated from all other activities of the ABA to ensure its independence and impartiality. The ratings of nominees are confidential and not shared outside of the committee until after they are presented to the White House, Department of Justice, and the chair and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Not even the officers, leaders or members of the ABA know the ratings until they are made public.
In the letter Bay notes that “unlike other organizations, the Standing Committee does not select or even suggest the nominees to federal judgeships as doing so would compromise its independent evaluative function, and it does not consider a nominee’s philosophy, political affiliation or ideology as criteria for its rating. Its role is strictly advisory. The White House and Senate are free to consider the Standing Committee’s rating of a nominee or to disregard it completely, as has been done at times over the years, including during the first Trump administration.”
The ABA remains committed to supporting the judicial system. One way to do this is by having an independent Standing Committee continue to evaluate the professional qualifications of nominees to the federal judiciary. Moreover, once a judge is confirmed to the bench, the ABA continues to defend judges against unfair and personal attacks that threaten their safety and the integrity of the judicial system. It is one of the key principles underlying our legal profession. The ABA has done that and calls on all to do the same. It does not matter whether one agrees with an opinion of a court or not. It is never appropriate to make unfair and personal attacks on judges. The ABA has spoken on this many times, regardless of whether Republicans or Democrats have engaged in such comments. Unfortunately, the frequency of attacks on judges has become a daily occurrence. It must stop.
Read a full copy of the ABA’s letter to AG Bondi here.
Updated 6/16/25 - The American Bar Association Files Suit Against the DOJ and Others in Trump Administration. For more on this filing, click here.
Original letter from the American Bar Association attached.
The ABA is one of the largest voluntary associations of lawyers in the world. As the national voice of the legal profession, the ABA works to improve the administration of justice, promotes programs that assist lawyers and judges in their work, accredits law schools, provides continuing legal education, and works to build public understanding around the world of the importance of the rule of law. View our privacy statement online. Follow the latest ABA news at www.americanbar.org/news and on X (formerly Twitter) @ABANews.
___
Notes:
https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2025/06/aba-sends-letter-re-judicial-evaluation/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkedin&utm_campaign=dcprescomm&spredfast-trk-id=sf226858873
Reproduced in full as published by the American Bar Association, 2025.
Mary Kay Elloian, MBA JD, Esq. - The Legal Edition - Legal, Business & Policy News - TheLegalEdition.com
Everyone should be outraged that our judiciary are being attacked: the only branch of government standing up to authoritarianism.