A Dec. 14 editorial asks whether the merit selection commission appointed by Sens. Carol Moseley-Braun and Dick Durbin to recommend three finalists for vacancies for federal judgeships and U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Illinois has “become a smokescreen for political appointments.”
As chair of that commission, speaking for all nine members of the commission, I can assure you that the answer is no.
Traditionally, these appointments have been made by a state’s senior senator from the president’s party without regard to any fixed criteria. By turning to a merit selection commission, the senators have done their best to ensure that professional distinction now becomes the focus.
The members of the commission, all practicing attorneys, were appointed in February 1997. Our bylaws are based upon procedures endorsed by the American Judicature Society. The commissioners have 265 years of practice and represent a cross-section of the bar. We include two women, two African-Americans, a Latino and an Asian-American. Two former federal judges, one a former chief judge, and a former U.S. attorney serve.
When we were appointed, the senators assured us that there would be no interference in our deliberations–and there was none. The selection criteria that we pledged to follow for U.S. attorney–much like those utilized earlier for judge–included integrity, legal ability, experience, impartiality, temperament, diligence, social awareness, administrative skill, reputation, diversity and health.
We made extensive efforts to encourage the widest range of qualified applicants. We wrote to more than 40 local bar associations, urging them to identify outstanding candidates for U.S. attorney. When the senators extended the application period, we repeated those requests and personally contacted highly regarded attorneys who had not applied initially.
We then conducted intensive investigations of every applicant. For each candidate who reached our finalist group, we conducted more than 50 telephone interviews of adversaries, colleagues, judges and co-workers. The applicants were then personally interviewed before the entire commission.
Our deliberations were strictly confidential, and we voted by secret ballot. Commissioners with conflicts because of their relationship with an applicant took no part in the investigation, deliberation or vote on that candidate.
We have the greatest confidence in all those whose names we forwarded to the senators for consideration for the U.S. District Court and U.S. attorney. At no time did we seek or consider information about an applicant’s political background or views, nor did the senators ever ask us to do that.
Without the commission, the senators would have made their selections for these important positions without the benefit of a screening process that looked solely to merit, as tested by established criteria and verified by a broad sampling of opinions in the legal community. Our single goal was to serve the best interests of the citizens of our area.
