ABA calls Bondi's decision to curtail judicial nominee vetting 'disturbing'

By Nate Raymond

June 11 (Reuters) - The American Bar Association called the U.S. Department of Justice's decision to curtail its ability to vet President Donald Trump's judicial nominees "deeply disturbing" in a letter to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi released late on Tuesday.

ABA President William Bay said the nonpartisan lawyer organization was "surprised and disappointed" by the department's recent decision to restrict its access to judicial nominees and information about them for the first time in seven decades.

"The changes the Justice Department is apparently imposing will likely result in less transparency in the process of confirming nominees to lifetime appointments on the federal bench and appear to be based on incorrect information," Bay wrote.

He urged Bondi to reconsider, saying the ABA's past access to nominees helped U.S. senators receive important insights about them during the confirmation process and "helps bolster the public’s trust and confidence in our federal courts."

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Starting in 1953 during Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower's tenure, the ABA through its 15-member Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary has vetted judicial nominees before they were sent to the Senate, which must confirm them.

Republicans have long claimed the organization is biased against conservatives. In 2001, Republican President George W. Bush ended the tradition of giving the ABA a first look at nominees.

While Democratic President Barack Obama revived the practice, Trump ended it again in 2017 in his first term, and Democratic President Joe Biden did not revive the practice.

The Justice Department's May 30 decision to cease directing nominees to fill out questionnaires from the ABA and provide waivers allowing it access to their bar and disciplinary records marked a further diminishment of the group's vetting role.

In a May 29 letter to the ABA, Bondi contended that the ABA "no longer functions as a fair arbiter of nominees’ qualifications, and its ratings invariably and demonstrably favor nominees put forth by Democratic administrations."

During the first Trump administration, the ABA rated 10 of Trump's judicial nominees as "not qualified." He secured confirmation of 234 judicial nominees.

Senate Democrats and Trump's critics say several of his 11 announced second-term judicial picks fall short of the ABA's typical standard that a nominee should have at least 12 years of experience in the practice of law.

Among the young nominees to life-tenured positions on the bench who fall short of that metric is Whitney Hermandorfer, 37, who only graduated law school 10 years ago. She is nominated to join the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Bay, in his letter, said the ABA's Standing Committee does not advocate for nominees and had issued "Well Qualified" or "Qualified" ratings to no less than 96.9% of the nominees in each presidential administration during the last two decades, including during the first Trump administration.

Read more:

Justice Department curtails ABA role in vetting Trump's judicial nominees

Trump nominates his former defense attorney Emil Bove to serve as appellate judge

Trump readies to name 'fearless' conservative judges in second term