Posted on: Saturday, March 24, 2001

Ideology goes first in new Bush policy

At first blush, the new Bush administration policy on the nomination of federal judges makes good sense.

Spurred on by conservatives, the administration will no longer use the American Bar Association to pre-screen potential nominees. It is a practice that has been in place for a half-century, in Republican and Democratic administrations.

But why should a lawyer's association have a first cut at vetting the men and women who will sit on our federal benches? After all, these are supposed to be jurists for all of us, not just for other lawyers.

The answer is that the Bar is uniquely qualified to pass judgment on the soundness of a prospective nominee's quality of character and legal reputation. And it is a judgement best passed early in the game.

By the time a nominee is before the U.S. Senate for confirmation, it would take a brave lawyer indeed to stand up against someone who might preside over a future case.

Conservatives argue that the Bar tends to favor liberal judges and oppose those with strict conservative views. They cite unsuccessful Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork as example No. 1.

But even Bork was rated "well qualified" by a majority of the ABA panel that reviewed him.

Any number of ideologically conservative judges have made it through this process and now sit on the federal bench. In short, the process worked well through both conservative and liberal administrations.

By ending it, the Bush administration has clearly signaled that its first priority in filling the federal bench will be ideology.