A new study by Richard L. Vining Jr., Amy Steigerwalt, and Susan Navarro Smelcer, confirms that, yes, ABA evaluations of federal judicial nominees tend to tilt toward more politically liberal candidates (it's discussed in a WSJ editorial today). Jonathan Adler @ Volokh has many more links, including to a NY Times editorial which concludes, ever-so-Timesishly, that the bar raters aren't being liberal enough. Earlier here (among many other mentions).
Judicial selection and the ABA, cont'd
Related Entries:
- Medical malpractice reform passes House
- NY Times partisan hackery department: filibuster division
- Reuters fact check
- Where Newt's wrong--and where he's right
- Around the web, December 15
- Rejection of D.C. Circuit nominee may shift judicial nomination practices
- ABA opposes substantial number of Obama Administration's potential judicial nominees
- Around the web, October 31
- In defense of Eric Holder
- Department of Labor seeks to narrow "advice exception" to disclosure laws
- ABA "Blawg 100"
- "Politicization of Justice Department Worsens"
- Around the web, August 16
- What media bias? Debt-ceiling edition
- Boycotting CPAC
![]() |
Rafael Mangual Project Manager, Legal Policy rmangual@manhattan-institute.org |
![]() |
Communications Manhattan Institute communications@manhattan-institute.org |