Barack Obama's judge nominees considered unqualified by even the liberal American Bar Association? And revelations of how the Obama administration is pushing diversity and "life experiences" over an authentic record of judicial excellence? Indeed, revelations too of how Team Obama is using behind-the-scenes pressure on the supposedly independent ABA to get better ratings for their nominees?
Here's a story that the folks at the White House certainly didn't want to see come to light. And especially in the New York Times.
The American Bar Association has secretly declared a significant number of President Obama’s potential judicial nominees “not qualified,” slowing White House efforts to fill vacant judgeships — and nearly all of the prospects given poor ratings were women or members of a minority group, according to interviews...
The number of Obama prospects deemed “not qualified” already exceeds the total number opposed by the group during the eight-year administrations of Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush; the rejection rate is more than three and a half times as high as it was under either of the previous two presidencies, documents and interviews show...
Administration officials are perplexed about the reasons for some of the low ratings, and in discussions with bar panel leaders, they have expressed growing frustrations, people familiar with those conversations said. In particular, they have questioned whether the panelists — many of whom are litigators — place too much value on courtroom experience at the expense of lawyers who pursued career paths less likely to involve trials, like government lawyers and law professors.
Mr. Obama has made it a policy goal to diversify the bench in terms of race, gender and life experiences...
The bar association is also said to have deemed at least two other potential minority or female judicial nominees “not qualified,” but upgraded them to “qualified” after the White House asked it to take a second look...
To protect the confidentiality of people interviewed about the candidate, the committee often identifies only general categories of concern. According to a person familiar with the ratings, in discussions with the administration, the panel cited concerns about experience for six of the 14 candidates found “not qualified.” It also cited concerns over temperament for five, competence for three and ethics for three...
Officials of Mr. Obama’s legal team have met several times with the chairman of the bar association panel over the last year to raise concerns over the number of negative ratings, and have raised the possibility that the panel’s emphasis on trial experience may have a disparate impact on female and minority lawyers because they may have been less likely to become litigators...
The committee has been more likely to deliver a harsh verdict about Mr. Obama’s prospects than it was during either the Clinton or Bush administrations. It has rejected about 7.5 percent of his prospects, compared with about 2 percent of the potential judges under each of the two previous presidents...