Attorney General Pam Bondi has informed the American Bar Association, or ABA, that the Department of Justice will no longer take part in their assessment process for candidates nominated for judicial positions. This development follows earlier reports of criticism of the ABA by Bondi, alleging a partial rating system that disproportionately dismisses Republican nominees.
Bondi stated in a letter to ABA President William Bay, “Unfortunately, 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.” She further outlined that the ABA could still express opinions on judicial nominations, akin to other activist organizations, but it would not be treated any differently from them by the Department of Justice.
Bondi specified that the Office of Legal Policy will henceforth not instruct nominees to grant waivers that allow the ABA access to non-public records, including bar records. Additionally, nominees will refrain from responding to ABA questionnaires or participating in interviews with the organization. This is not the first time the Trump administration has restricted the ABA’s engagement with judicial nominees, having adopted a similar stance in the President’s first term.
Turning now to the broader implications of President Donald Trump’s 264 nominees, the ABA rated 187 as “well-qualified,” 67 as “qualified,” and 10 as “not qualified”, according to Ballotpedia. Comparatively, the organization deemed a significantly smaller number of nominees unqualified during other recent administrations. This raises important questions about the future interaction between the Justice Department and the ABA.
President Trump has steadily challenged the ABA since his return to office, including through an executive order instructing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to consider suspending the ABA as a law school accreditor. The ABA filed a lawsuit against the Department of Justice after the cancellation of grants funding services for victims of domestic and sexual violence. Judge Christopher R. Cooper ruled that the administration had breached the ABA’s First Amendment rights by revoking the grants.
There is a clear severance of the Justice Department’s collaboration with the ABA in the vetting process of judicial nominees. The significance of this should not be overlooked, as it alters the landscape of judicial nominations.