11. FEDERAL JUDICIARY COMMITTEE EVALUATES QUALIFICATIONS OF TWO NOMINEES FOR U.S. SUPREME COURT, DOZENS OF NOMINEES TO LOWER FEDERAL COURT SEATS
During the 2005-2006 bar year, the Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary, composed of 15 lawyer-members of the ABA who are appointed or reappointed by the ABA president each year, faced the challenge and time commitment of evaluating the professional qualifications – competence, integrity and judicial temperament – of not one but two Supreme Court nominees – John Roberts Jr. and Samuel Alito Jr.
In evaluating federal judicial nominees, the standing committee examines legal writings and conducts extensive confidential interviews with a broad spectrum of individuals in a position to evaluate a nominee’s professional qualifications. In addition, committee members interview the judicial candidates; write a formal report on each nominee; and rate the candidate “well qualified,” “qualified” or “not qualified.” During the average year, the standing committee rates some 60 federal judicial nominees each year.
Each standing committee member typically donates 600-800 hours of his or her time each year to conduct the work of the committee; given this extraordinary year with the two Supreme Court justice nominees – including evaluating Roberts when he was nominated as an associate justice and then re-evaluating his qualifications when he was nominated to be Chief Justice of the United States – the time commitment was likely close to double those hours.
Year in Reivew is published by the
American Bar Association • 321 N. Clark Street • Chicago, IL 60610
© Copyright 2006 American Bar Association
www.abanet.org