I have posted the letter from the American Bar Association’s Committee on the Judiciary concerning Brett Kavanaugh’s 2006 nomination to be a federal judge. Beginning on page 8, we find this:
[T]he 2006 interviews raised a new concern involving his potential for judicial temperament. Unlike the earlier 2003 final report and 2005 updated report, the recent supplemental evaluation contained comments from several interviewees with more recent experience with the nominee, which caused them to characterize the nominee as “insulated.” One interviewee suggested that much of his concern about the nominee being insulated was due, understandably, to the nominee’s current position as Staff Secretary to the President. However, this interviewee remained concerned about the nominee’s ability to be balanced and fair should he assume a federal judgeship. And another interviewee echoed essentially the same thoughts: “(He is) immovable and very stubborn and frustrating to deal with on some issues.” Both issues—his professional experience and the question of his freedom from bias and open-mindedness—were brought up (along with others) with the nominee during his 2006 interview, and he was provided a full opportunity to address them in detail as part of our supplemental evaluation material.
The ABA judicial review process had been subject to criticism because it was allegedly too liberal. During the Bush Administration, there was some concern that the ABA had pulled its punches to avoid such criticism.
I pulled the ABA letter from the Washington Post story which outlines Kavanaugh’s history in greater detail.