US bar reviews judge’s rating

Kavanaugh’s temperament under scrutiny after testimony

The American Bar Association said yesterday it would re-evaluate its high rating of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh after his combative, tear-streaked Senate testimony last week, signalling doubts about the judge’s temperament.

“New information of a material nature regarding temperament” during the hearing prompted the reopening, the ABA said yesterday.

The ABA committee that reviews federal judges awards ratings based on three criteria: integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament.

The ABA and committee declined to comment further about what parts of the testimony raised concerns.

Regarding temperament, the ABA says judges should have “compassion, decisiveness, openmindedness, courtesy, patience, freedom from bias and commitment to equal justice under the law”.

Kavanaugh was combative with Senate Democrats throughout his testimony, claiming Christine Blasey

Ford’s allegation he sexually assaulted her when both were teens was “revenge on behalf of the Clintons” and responding angrily to questions about his drinking habits.

The group had given Kavanaugh a rating of “well qualified” — the highest of three possible ratings (the others are “qualified” and “not qualified”), the ABA committee’s chairman told Congress last month.

Ford went public with her accusations a week later.

In 2006, before his nomination to

the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, Kavanaugh had a “well qualified” rating, but investigators had concerns about his “professional experience and the question of his freedom from bias and open-mindedness”. The committee downgraded him to “qualified”.

His current high and unanimous rating is lauded by Senate Republicans. South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham called the ABA rating the “gold standard” for evaluating judges. — Washington Post