Attorney General Pam Bondi told the American Bar Association (ABA) Thursday that the Trump administration would no longer cooperate as the organization vets its judicial nominees.
In a letter, the Department of Justice (DOJ) accuses the bar association of failing to “fix the bias in its rating process,” a claim that follows the organization labeling some of President Trump’s nominees as unqualified for the bench.
“Unfortunately, the ABA no longer functions as a fair arbiter of nominees’ qualifications, and its ratings invariably and demonstrably favor nominees put forth by Democratic administrations,” Bondi wrote in the letter to ABA President William Bay.
“Accordingly, while the ABA is free to comment on judicial nominations along with other activist organizations, there is no justification for treating the ABA differently from such other activist organizations and the Department of Justice will not do so. Specifically, the Office of Legal Policy will no longer direct nominees to provide waivers allowing the ABA access to non-public information, including bar records. Nominees will also not respond to questionnaires prepared by the ABA and will not sit for interviews with the ABA,” she added.
The ABA did not respond to a request for comment.
The White House took a similar stance during Trump’s first term in office.
According to Ballotpedia, the ABA rated 264 of Trump’s nominees: 187 were rated “well-qualified,” 67 were rated “qualified,” and 10 were rated “not qualified.”
Though a small figure, that stands in contrast with other recent administrations, which had at most three unqualified picks during their time in office.
The Trump administration has taken a number of actions targeting the ABA.
An executive order from Trump directed Education Secretary Linda McMahon to consider whether to suspend the ABA’s role as a law school accreditor.
The organization also sued over the stripping of grant funding that limited its training programs abroad, as well as another at the Justice Department for victims of domestic and sexual violence.
In the DOJ case, the judge found the targeting of the ABA violated the group’s first amendment rights.
“The government does not meaningfully contest the merits of the ABA’s First Amendment retaliation claim. It points to no deficiencies in the ABA’s performance of its grant obligations,” Judge Christopher Cooper, a former President Obama appointee, wrote in the opinion.
“It concedes that similar grants administered by other organizations remain in place. It agrees that bringing a lawsuit is protected by the First Amendment. And it suggests no other cause for the cancellation apart from the sentiments expressed by Deputy Attorney General [Todd] Blanche in his memorandum,” he added.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.
