Non-Responsive! On Professor Lindgren's Reply to Saks and Vidmar
21 Pages Posted: 11 Feb 2003
Date Written: December 2002
Abstract
This paper responds to James Lindgren's defense of his research which purported to find that differences between ABA ratings of prospective judicial nominees were attributable to political bias. Saks & Vidmar explain (again) why Lindgren's conclusions are unsupported by the data. (For example, the data show that using Lindgren's own criteria, of those nominees with the weakest qualifications, 56% were proposed by the Bush compared to 29% from Clinton. Of those with the strongest qualifications, only 28% were Bush nominees compared to 42% Clinton nominees.) Moreover, Saks & Vidmar explain why, even if Lindgren's data did support his claim of bias, his proposed solutions misconceive the judicial "hiring" process.
Keywords: judicial selection, judicial nominees, ABA, social science, methodological flaws
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation