THE WEEK

Poor liberals! They’ve barely got used to saying “Reagan Administration,” and now they have to live with “Rehnquist Court.”

Someone is finally challenging the power wielded by the American Bar Association in the choice of federal judges. In the 34 years it has been screening candidates, Presidents have defied the ABA less than 1 per cent of the time, and even Reagan has pushed through just one nominee rejected by the ABA. Now, the Washington Legal Foundation has filed suit, charging that the ABA, in exercising a virtual stranglehold on judicial appointments, is acting as a government body. As such, its closed-door review process violates the 1972 “sunshine law” requiring such bodies to operate under public scrutiny. The ABA claims it suffers from no ideological bias, but the facts, as usual, speak for themselves: Ten of Reagan’s 28 second-term appeals-court appointees received the organization’s lowest rating, while only three of Carter’s 56 judges got a low rating—that’s 36 per cent disapproval versus 5 per cent. If you believe ideological bias to be inoperative here, well, phone the tooth fairy.

Featured Tags

Poor liberals! They’ve barely got used to saying “Reagan Administration,” and now they have to live with “Rehnquist Court.”

Someone is finally challenging the power wielded by the American Bar Association in the choice of federal judges. In the 34 years it has been screening candidates, Presidents have defied the ABA less than 1 per cent of the time, and even Reagan has pushed through just one nominee rejected by the ABA. Now, the Washington Legal Foundation has filed suit, charging that the ABA, in exercising a virtual stranglehold on judicial appointments, is acting as a government body. As such, its closed-door review process violates the 1972 “sunshine law” requiring such bodies to operate under public scrutiny. The ABA claims it suffers from no ideological bias, but the facts, as usual, speak for themselves: Ten of Reagan’s 28 second-term appeals-court appointees received the organization’s lowest rating, while only three of Carter’s 56 judges got a low rating—that’s 36 per cent disapproval versus 5 per cent. If you believe ideological bias to be inoperative here, well, phone the tooth fairy.