American Bar Association dropped Brett Kavanaugh's ratings in 2006 after concerns about his temperament and honesty
When Brett Kavanaugh was preparing for his second confirmation hearing for a seat on a federal appeals court in 2006, he got some unwelcome news. The American Bar Association, which had earlier given him its highest rating, had reconsidered.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
When Brett Kavanaugh was preparing for his second confirmation hearing for a seat on a federal appeals court in 2006, he got some unwelcome news. The American Bar Association, which had earlier given him its highest rating, had reconsidered.
The revised rating, the group explained, was prompted by new concerns about Mr Kavanaugh’s demeanour and veracity, foreshadowing some critiques of his testimony last week before the Senate Judiciary Committee in response to accusations of sexual misconduct.
The group’s 2006 statement, based in large part on confidential interviews, has received renewed attention in light of recent questions about Mr Kavanaugh’s temperament and truthfulness.
“The 2006 interviews raised a new concern involving his potential for judicial temperament,” Stephen Tober, the chairman of the bar association’s standing committee on the federal judiciary, told the Judiciary Committee at the time.
Mr Tober summarised a handful of unflattering comments from unnamed judges and lawyers to support that conclusion. One judge called Mr Kavanaugh simultaneously unprepared and sanctimonious.
A lawyer said he had dissembled in his handling of a case.
A third interviewee questioned Mr Kavanaugh’s “ability to be balanced and fair should he assume a federal judgeship.”