Sotomayor Gets ABA's Highest Rating, Unanimously

WASHINGTON — Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor earned a "well-qualified" rating from the American Bar Association on Tuesday as she prepared for Senate hearings next week.

The ABA committee that reviewed her qualifications came out with that unanimous rating of the federal appeals court judge and released it in a letter to White House lawyer Greg Craig.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is set to begin hearings Monday on President Barack Obama's choice to replace retired Justice David Souter.

Sotomayor has been rated twice before by the ABA _ as a trial judge and appellate judge.

As a U.S. District Court nominee, she was deemed "qualified" by a substantial majority of the committee and "well qualified" by a minority. The last time the ABA reviewed Sotomayor's qualifications _ when she was up for the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals _ a majority rated her "well qualified," but that was not unanimous.

For more than 50 years, the ABA has evaluated the credentials of nominees for the federal bench, though the nation's largest lawyers' group has no official role in the process. Supreme Court nominees get the most scrutiny.

"The American Bar Association's unanimous, well-qualified rating of Judge Sotomayor is further evidence of the outstanding experience she will bring to the Supreme Court," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who heads the Senate Judiciary Committee.

"The ABA's rating _ an evaluation of integrity, professional competence, and judicial temperament _ should eliminate the doubts of naysayers who have questioned Judge Sotomayor's disposition on the bench."

Story continues below

ABA ratings are "well-qualified," "qualified" and "not qualified." The committee's members interview hundreds of colleagues _ confidentially _ and scours pages of a nominee's writings before coming up with the rating.

"The ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary has completed its evaluation of the Honorable Sonia Sotomayor and is of the unanimous opinion that Judge Sotomayor is 'well-qualified' for appointment as an associate justice to the United States Supreme Court," said Kim J. Askew, the committee's head.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito also got unanimous a "well-qualified" rating from the ABA before their Senate hearings.

White House lawyer Harriet Miers, nominated to the high court by President George W. Bush, withdrew before the ABA released its rating.

The ABA had a rocky relationship with Bush. In 2001, Bush ended the ABA's preferential role in checking prospective judicial nominees and decided the administration would not give the group advance word on names under consideration.

Conservatives had been bitter ever since the ABA's mixed review of the qualifications of failed Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork in the Reagan administration.

In March, the Obama administration asked the ABA to resume its historical role in evaluating judicial nominees.

___

On the Net:

ABA committee: http://www.abanet.org/scfedjud/

Comments

[TCDon]

This is a highly misleading headline. The ABA did not give Sotomayor any rating "unanimously." Thousands of ABA members oppose her confirmation. Rather, she received a unanimous rating from "a committee" of the ABA -- a committee, by the way, to which Pres. Obama recently restored power. They owed him for the power grab.

[Eoin45]

No one is going to assume by the headline that every ABA member approves of Sotomayer. I'm not a lawyer and I assumed there was some sort of committee that does the approving. You just don't like the outcome and you have no idea of what the committee's motivation was.

[pixiepotpie]

a Reversal of the previous administrations "power grabbing" does not a power-grabber make.

[DonJM]

This is just like a unanimous vote in the U.S. Senate. I'm sure not everyone in the country agrees with the vote, but it's still unanimous.

[DDK]

This will not matter a whit to the GOP, who will continue to oppose Judge Sotomayor for political reasons. That the judge was "well-qualified" was obvious long before this was released.

And, to be fair, John Roberts and Samuel Alito were similarly rated by the ABA, yet were still opposed by a number of Senate Democrats, Barack Obama among them.

[nk007]

I think it is perfectly o.k. for Republicans to oppose Judge Sotomayor "for political reasons." But they should do so honestly instead of trying to claim that she is not qualified.

[pixiepotpie]

. . . . for which the repugs are clearly not qualified.

[roshni]

Exactly. The person who is not qualified is Clarence.

[demimckingwoodtx]

Good for them I am happy that she is getting what she deserves from the ones that count. Congrats to you and your many years of service in our judicial system.

[BigAl72]

Take that to the bank, McConnell.

[icemilkcoffee]

Hahaha the republicans lose again.

[labman57]

The GOP's opposition of Sotomayor is another example of their obstructionist philosophy: It's a decision in search of a rationale.

[roshni]

Agree. They are opposing her just because our president chose her.

[dogwatch]

Every time I think of congress interrogating supreme court nominees, I remember Long John Silver. Those were the days. Every time I see an opinion where Justice Thomas blindly follows a political line without reason, I remember Long John Silver and the courage of the lady who testified about it.

[williamina]

weird

[Eoin45]

You have a short memory, didn;t pay attention or weren't around at the time.

[andyg]

So you like fiction then.

[Eoin45]

Proof it was fiction?

[TruEngineHearing]

I remember that too. Those hearings were a powerful public education; where a great number of citizens got to meet people previously unknown to them, and watch a fantastic woman do the right thing.

[roshni]

Anita Hill is a hero to me and always will be for showing the courage to testify against Clarence. I will never forgive Arlen Specter for the way he treated her and will support his opponent in the PA primaries.

[IncredulousGeezer]

I believe your recollection is slightly faulty.
The reference should be to Long D0ng Silver, by Anita Hill concerning the predilections of Clarence Thomas at his Senate confirmation hearings :)

[dogwatch]

Going by your erudite reply, John worked pretty well.

[roshni]

Me too. I have no respect at all for Clarence.

[fcsakes]

The party of NO will turn this into another negative. Doesn't matter, they're going to lose. Again.

[salamanca1]

Why does the American Bar Association hate America?

[kareemachan]

Why does the ABA speak the truth?

[demimckingwoodtx]

Ding-a-ling are you dense?

[WestofSabine]

To do otherwise, the ABA would be branded as racist.

[noudidnt]

no...stu__pi d

[salamanca1]

Did you read the article, and notice that in other reviews for other posts, she has rated lower than "well qualified?" If you observe the facts, you see the ABA rating a judge who has grown in the job.

[tiredofthesameoldstuff]

Still qualified though. Most judges don't really grow that much in expertise.

[Mexitli]

Racism in America?

No way.

[roshni]

They correctly opposed Clarence as unqualified.

[espressobeans]

That's refreshing.

[Grac]

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1820151/sonia_sotomayor_and_the_objectivity.html?cat=9

[DestinationsUnknown]

It does not matter

what does the ABA know

the repugs know best

[KYJurisDoctor]

Good for the judge, and soon to be, justice of SCOTUS.

[Json]

"The ABA's rating _ an evaluation of integrity, professional competence, and judicial temperament _ should eliminate the doubts of naysayers who have questioned Judge Sotomayor's disposition on the bench."

LOL. I'm sure all the republicans will be on board now.