WASHINGTON – Senate Republicans voted Tuesday to confirm Katie Lane to a lifetime federal judgeship in Montana, despite Lane earning a rare and embarrassing 'not qualified' rating by the American Bar Association. This marks the first of President Donald Trump's court picks to be confirmed with this rating in his second term.
Lane was confirmed 52 to 46, along party lines. The 34-year-old lawyer, who most recently served as senior legal counsel at the Republican National Committee, will now serve on the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana.
ABA Rating and Experience Concerns
The ABA has for decades rated the professional qualifications of hundreds of federal judicial nominees for presidents in both parties. Prior to Trump's presidency, it was very unusual for the nonpartisan legal organization to evaluate someone as 'not qualified' for the job. None of President Barack Obama's or Joe Biden's judicial nominees got this rating, nor did President George H.W. Bush's or Ronald Reagan's picks.
Ten of Trump's 234 judicial nominees in his first term were rated 'not qualified,' but Republicans went on to confirm eight of them anyway.
Lane, who previously served as deputy solicitor general under Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen and as an associate at Consovoy McCarthy PLLC in Virginia, earned the abysmal rating due entirely to her lack of experience: She has only practiced law for about nine years, well below the ABA's 12-year minimum standard. She has less than eight years of experience in trial courts and less than seven years as a litigator. She has never tried a case as lead counsel, whether civil or criminal.
'The experience that is acquired by a practicing lawyer over time–in terms of years and courtroom and trial experience–prepares him or her for the tremendous responsibility of presiding over a courtroom, where he or she will handle a spectrum of issues in matters with the highest of stakes, and garners public confidence and respect in the legal community in which he or she sits,' Pamela Roberts, who chairs the ABA panel that reviews judicial nominees, said in an April letter to leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
'For those reasons, after a thorough peer review evaluation and careful deliberation, a majority of the Standing Committee has concluded that Ms. Lane presently does not meet the requisite minimum standard of experience necessary to be Qualified for the high office of a federal trial judge,' Roberts said.
The ABA's review process is exhaustive. The group routinely interviews dozens of people who know a nominee professionally and seeks feedback on nominees from dozens more people with judicial and legal expertise. In Lane's case, it got feedback from nearly 200 people who are sitting judges or have relevant legal backgrounds. Senate Republicans sometimes try to dismiss the ABA as a lefty group, but they're just as happy to tout the ABA's positive ratings for nominees they like.
Political Reactions
A White House spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, knocked Lane as the 'least qualified judicial nominee' of Trump's second term.
'There are more than 3,000 licensed attorneys in the state of Montana. You would believe that the White House, in finding a federal judge for a lifetime appointment, would be able to find one among those with experience,' Durbin said Monday night on the Senate floor. 'Instead, President Trump has selected Ms. Lane. Ms. Lane is not remotely qualified to serve as a district court judge in the federal system.'
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.), who recommended Lane to the White House for this court seat, said nothing about the ABA's bad rating in remarks before her Tuesday vote. Instead, he hailed Lane's qualifications and highlighted her record of defending gun rights and the coal industry.
'Her values are rooted in Montana and grounded in the Constitution,' Daines said on the Senate floor. 'Katie's distinguished record of public service and experience in both the federal and state judiciary makes her well-qualified to serve on the federal bench.'
Loyalty Questions and 2020 Election
Ironically, Democrats have been pressing Trump's court picks on where their loyalties lie — with the Constitution or with Trump — and virtually all have demonstrated they lie with the latter. They routinely refuse to answer the basic question of who won the 2020 presidential election, apparently afraid of looking disloyal to Trump by stating the fact that Joe Biden won. Instead, they give bizarre and convoluted answers about the electoral certification process.
'Who won the 2020 election?' Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) asked Lane in her March hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
'The Constitution outlines the process, and as a judicial nominee, I'm here to talk about what the Constitution requires, which is an electoral vote and certification by Congress,' she replied.
Like Trump's other judicial picks, Lane also declined to describe the events of Jan. 6, 2021, when Trump incited a mob of his supporters to storm the U.S. Capitol with plans to hurt or even kill members of Congress to stop them from certifying Biden as the winner of the 2020 election. They were motivated by Trump's baseless lie that the election was stolen from him.
'I condemn all violence, including on January 6,' Lane said in written responses to Durbin's follow-up questions after her hearing. 'To the extent this question asks me to characterize the events that took place on January 6, 2021, that is an issue of ongoing political debate and litigation, and it would be inappropriate for me as a judicial nominee to provide comments that could implicate issues or parties that may come before me.'
