The American Bar Association Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary has rated U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice nominee Elena Kagan as “well-qualified,” the highest mark the committee offers.

Since 1953, the ABA has had a role in reviewing the qualifications of federal court nominees, including Supreme Court nominees.  A committee of 15 members — two from the Ninth Circuit, one from each of the 12 other federal judicial circuits and one who serves as chair — measures the individual’s integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament. 

While the standing committee insulates its work from all other activities of the association, ABA president Carolyn Lamm is familiar with the procedures used to evaluate a nominee’s qualifications.  Lamm served as chair of the committee from 1995 to 1996. 

Lamm explained, “In terms of legal competence, you’re looking at legal, analytical ability.  You’re looking at what they’ve written, how they’ve argued, whether they’ve argued — how they’ve done it.  We listen to opponents, or from those on the same side and from judges to find out, how did they do as lawyers and what is their legal ability?”

A comprehensive evaluation is conducted by interviewing a broad spectrum of the legal community, reviewing pertinent materials written by the nominee, and interviewing the nominee personally.  After the evaluation is complete, the findings are assembled into a report which is reviewed by each member of the standing committee who then individually rates the nominee as either “well-qualified,” “qualified” or “not-qualified.”  The majority vote constitutes the official rating of the ABA standing committee.

To merit a “well-qualified” rating, a Supreme Court nominee must be a preeminent member of the legal profession, have outstanding legal ability and exceptional breadth of experience, and meet the highest standards of integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament.  Kagan’s well-qualified rating was unanimous with one abstention.

Investigations of nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court differ in respect to other federal nominees in that they are conducted after the president has selected a nominee; they involve all members of the standing committee; a team or teams of law professors examine the nominee’s legal writings; and a group of practicing lawyers with Supreme Court experience also examines the writings.

Kagan currently serves as solicitor general of the United States.  She was nominated to fill the seat of John Paul Stevens, who will step down at the end of the 2009-2010 Supreme Court term.

When asked how the standing committee evaluates nominees who may not have had prior judicial experience, standing committee chair Kim Askew noted, “There are many, many judges who have served on courts who have never been judges and are very effective judges.  We look at what they do and we go to the three criteria — professional competence, integrity, and temperament — and we look at what they have done in their legal careers in the practice of law, which may or may not be on a bench.”

The past five U.S. Supreme Court nominees were also found well-qualified by the committee.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to begin its confirmation hearing for Kagan on June 28.  Kim Askew, the chair of the Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, has been invited to testify relating to the standing committee’s rating.

“The gaining of full ABA approval is a major achievement and comes after five and half years of dedicated work by the students, staff and faculty of Phoenix School of Law,” says Gene Clark, Interim Dean.  “This national accreditation also validates in an evidenced- based way what we have all worked so hard to achieve and sustain over a period of years —

a school and new model of legal education that is focused on achieving great student outcomes, preparing excellent lawyers who are ready for practice, and committed to serving the underserved.”

The ABA Accreditation Committee gave its positive recommendation to its Council of the Section on Legal Education and Admission in May of 2010.  The school was granted provisional approval by the ABA in 2007, meaning it was in compliance with ABA standards and had a plan to bring the school into full compliance. A school is only granted provisional approval for a maximum of five years.  In order to be granted full approval, a school must demonstrate that it has established full compliance with each of the Standards.

There are only three fully accredited law schools in Arizona:  Phoenix School of Law, the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Arizona State University and the James E. Rogers College of Law at the University of Arizona.  PSL is Arizona’s only stand-alone law school – not affiliated with a university.  

The Phoenix School of Law demonstrated high benchmarks to win the approval of the ABA’s Accreditation Council, including achieving the highest Bar Exam passage rates in the State for February’s exam; a career placement rate of 97% within nine months of graduation; and receiving the Law School Admissions Council’s “2010 Diversity Matters Award” for its efforts to attract students from racial and ethnic groups underrepresented in the legal profession.

PhoenixLaw is located in one of only 4 major cities (Phoenix, Boston, Denver, and Atlanta) where the law school is situated in the heart of what are a major state’s financial and legal center, entertainment and sports center, state capital and international airport.  

According to the ABA, standards for approval are founded on the fact that law schools are the gateway to the legal profession. There are minimum requirements designed, developed, and implemented for the purpose of advancing the basic goal of providing a sound program of legal education.   The graduates of approved law schools can become members of the bar in all United States jurisdictions, representing all members of the public in important interests.  Law schools must ensure that its graduates understand their ethical responsibilities as attorneys for the quality and availability of justice; receive a basic education of legal theory, legal analysis, reasoning, research, problem solving and other fundamental skills needed for the legal profession; understand the basic principles of public and private law; and understand the law as a public profession calling for performance of pro bono legal services. 

Jon Atzen has joined the Los Angeles/Downtown office of Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP as a partner in the firm's Corporate practice group and member of the Emerging Companies practice.  Atzen most recently was a partner at DLA Piper in Los Angeles.  

Atzen has devoted virtually his entire career to working with leading entrepreneurs and innovators, as well as emerging and established companies, primarily in the southern California region.  He focuses his corporate practice on representing emerging growth and established companies, and venture capital and private equity funds, in such technology sectors as life sciences, semiconductors, wireless communications, internet, software and clean/alternative energy technologies.

"Jon has an impressive emerging growth company background, which includes private practice and corporate counsel for both a tech company and a venture capital firm.  His practice dovetails well with our existing emerging growth/venture capital practices throughout California, while broadening our existing corporate practice capabilities in Los Angeles," said Guy N. Halgren, chairman of the firm. 

In addition to private practice, Atzen previously held the positions of Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary at Advanced Cell Technology, Inc. 

"I am excited about joining Sheppard Mullin, a top-notch full service firm with a strong corporate practice in Los Angeles and throughout the state," Atzen commented.  "I am impressed with firm management's dedication to growing the Corporate practice group, and excited to be part of a partnership that values teamwork and fosters collegiality."  

In addition to his venture capital and private equity practice, Atzen provides corporate and strategic counsel to publicly-traded companies with respect to securities offerings including initial public offerings, secondary offerings, PIPEs and spin-offs, and reporting and compliance matters under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  He also has significant experience in public and private company mergers and acquisitions.

Atzen received a J.D. from Loyola Law School Los Angeles in 1990 and a B.A. from University of California at Santa Barbara in 1987. 

Sheppard Mullin has 200 attorneys based in its Los Angeles offices.  The firm's Corporate practice group includes 100 attorneys firmwide. 

In April, Kevin Rooney joined the firm's Silicon Valley office as a partner in the Corporate practice group.  Rooney most recently practiced at Hayden Bergman & Rooney in San Francisco, as a name partner.  Previously, Rooney was an attorney with Wilson Sonsini in Palo Alto and Davies Ward Phillips & Vineburg in Toronto.  

About Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP

Sheppard Mullin is a full service AmLaw 100 firm with 550 attorneys in 11 offices located in the United States and Asia.  Since 1927, companies have turned to Sheppard Mullin to handle corporate and technology matters, high stakes litigation and complex financial transactions.  In the U.S., the firm's clients include more than half of the Fortune 100.  For more information, please visit www.sheppardmullin.com.