But Thomas was massively unqualified for the court.
John, when I read that I did a little checking to find out what the American Bar Association rating was for Justice Thomas. I assume this rating was done at the time he became a nominee.
This is what I found at a blog:
=====================================================
While most recent Supreme Court nominees have been deemed "well-qualified" by the American Bar Association (ABA), the rating for Judge Thomas was split between "qualified" and "not qualified."
" Clarence Thomas, picked by Bush's father in 1991, received the lesser "qualified" rating. Two committee members voted to give Thomas a "not qualified" designation."
"The ABA scrutiny does not deal with ideology. It involves three areas that relate to fitness to be a judge: integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament.
A 15-member ABA committee handles the work, including a review of opinions and legal briefs. The committee ratings are well qualified, qualified and not qualified."
======================================================
So, 13 committee members voted him "qualified"; 2 voted him "not qualified"; none voted him "well-qualified".
So, when comparing his rating with other SC nominees, most of whom according to this record are rated "well-qualified", his relative rating is, IMO, poor. I admit I was disappointed. And I can see why you might feel as you do.
Nevertheless, apparently 13 of 15 committee members disagreed with your assessment, which thus appears to me to be a little extreme. |
