Democrats: We'll Still Consult ABA

The American Bar Association on Tuesday got encouragement from Democratic senators to continue vetting judicial nominees following last week's negative nudge from the Bush administration.

"If it slows down the process, well, it's better to have a qualified judge slowly than an unqualified judge quickly," said Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, a member of the subcommittee that would get the first crack at judging the judges.

ABA officials met with Schumer and fellow Democratic Sens. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Joseph Biden of Delaware and Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts. The senators, who all serve on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said they would still use the ABA recommendation to help decide whether a judge would move on to a full Senate vote.

The meeting came less than a week after President Bush decided the lawyers' association would not get advance word on names under consideration.

The White House took note of the ABA's advocacy work on policy, which includes support for abortion rights and a call for a death penalty moratorium.

Republican officials also said the administration's move was partly driven by conservatives still bitter about President Reagan's failed Supreme Court nomination of Robert Bork. Many conservatives see the ABA as liberal-leaning and blame its mixed review of Bork for his Senate rejection.

The ABA began reviewing prospective judicial nominees at President Eisenhower's request in 1953.

Of the 26 judicial nominees found "not qualified" since 1960, all but three were nominated by Democratic presidents, ABA President Martha Barnett said after Tuesday's meeting.

She said the group would have continued doing its investigation into judicial nominees even without the Democratic senators' blessing. "It is a service to the public," she said.

The organization will do its usual investigation and then give its recommendation to both the White House and the Senate. "What they do with the information is up to them," Barnett said.

But not getting the names confidentially from the White House before the nominations are made public will change the dynamic of interviews with the judges' peers, Barnett said. "We don't know if it will chill candor," she said.

"It remains to be seen exactly how this will work," she said.