In a decisive shift, the Justice Department has clipped the wings of the American Bar Association’s long-standing role in screening federal judicial nominees, particularly those put forward by former President Trump. For decades, the ABA — a powerhouse legal group — acted as gatekeeper, assessing candidates before they faced Senate confirmation. Now, that influence is sharply curtailed.
Attorney General Pam Bondi spelled it out bluntly in a letter: the ABA is no longer a neutral judge. According to her, the organization’s ratings skew heavily in favor of Democratic nominees, undermining the fairness of the vetting process. The Justice Department won’t be directing Trump’s judicial picks to cooperate with ABA questionnaires or to grant access to their bar records, cutting off the association’s privileged peek behind the scenes.
This comes hot on the heels of Trump’s announcement of six new judicial candidates, including Emil Bove — a figure deeply entwined with the former president’s legal battles. Bove, once Trump’s defense lawyer in a high-profile criminal case, is now slated for a life seat on the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, a nomination that raised eyebrows and drew sharp criticism from Democrats.
The ABA’s formal role began in 1953 under President Eisenhower, survived decades as a key vetting checkpoint, but has seen its influence rise and fall with political tides — sidelined under George W. Bush, resurrected under Obama, and then again marginalized under Trump and left untouched by Biden.
Conservatives have long charged the ABA with a partisan tilt, pointing to instances where it labeled qualified Republican nominees as “not qualified.” Even Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas faced that stamp from the ABA early in his career, underscoring the political undertone critics say pervades the group’s ratings.
As Trump prepares to push forward with a fresh slate of judges in his second term, starting with hearings scheduled for early June, the Justice Department’s move signals a clear message: the ABA’s gatekeeping days over Republican nominees are over. The battle over who controls judicial vetting is now firmly in Washington’s political arena.
