作者：亚历克·舍梅尔 | 福克斯新闻
发布时间：2026年3月26日 美国东部时间下午12:34
一个保守派监督组织正为一场辩论添柴加火——美国律师协会（American Bar Association，简称ABA）是否已沦为一个偏向左翼的政治化机构。
由特朗普核心顾问之一斯蒂芬·米勒（Stephen Miller）联合创立、与特朗普阵营相关的法律战组织”美国优先法律”（America First Legal）发布的一份新报告称，ABA的法庭之友简报常设委员会在过去十年中，提出的论点有80%倾向左翼自由派，20%立场中立，而保守派立场的简报数量为零。
与此同时，在ABA提交涉及特朗普的所有六起法庭之友简报案件中，该协会均与总统或其盟友持相反立场。
特朗普总统的第二个任期内，他曾多次抨击美国律师协会，称其将认证权政治化，并在审查司法提名人选时偏袒民主党支持的候选人。美国律师协会的规模和历史使其成为法律界首屈一指的行业协会，但一些保守派人士担心该组织的权力正演变为一种”垄断”。
美国优先法律组织在一份新报告中揭露了美国律师协会的左翼偏见。（贾斯汀·沙利文/盖蒂图片社）
AFL的一份新闻稿称：”美国律师协会要求法庭之友简报必须经其董事会授权，并必须符合现有ABA政策，或涉及’对律师或法律行业具有特殊意义的事项’。”而”关于出生地公民权、未成年人变性医疗以及得克萨斯州心跳法案的简报，均完全超出了这一要求范围。”
根据AFL对2016年4月至2026年2月提交的简报进行的审计，总共有87份简报。AFL认为，其中70份”倾向于自由派或进步派结果”，而该组织未发现任何”保守派立场”的简报，其余则涉及AFL所谓的中立议题，如专利法案件。
美国律师协会回应福克斯新闻数字版称：”美国律师协会不会将其法庭之友简报归类为保守或自由派，而是依据法律立场。ABA提交的法庭之友简报反映了经众议院代表大会辩论并通过的官方ABA政策。”
“众议院是ABA的政策制定机构，由来自全国各州律师协会的数百名代表以及广泛的ABA主题实体组成，只有经过审慎且具有代表性的程序后才会通过政策。在这整个过程中，捍卫法治始终是我们的北极星。”
审计还发现，在涉及特朗普或其官员的案件中，只要ABA提交了法庭之友简报，其立场每次都与特朗普官员或特朗普本人相反。
2024年1月11日，特朗普总统在纽约州最高法院的民事欺诈审判中坐在法庭内。（迈克尔·M·圣地亚哥）
“美国优先法律”主席吉恩·汉密尔顿（Gene Hamilton）表示：”美国律师协会将其法庭之友项目标榜为促进法律界利益和法治。”
“但数据讲述了截然不同的故事，”汉密尔顿继续说道，”超过五分之四的简报推动进步议程，移民倡导已成为该项目的主要焦点，而且在十年间、两个特朗普政府任期内，该组织从未提交过一份可被视为支持保守派法律立场的简报。美国律师协会并非中立仲裁者，应当与其他自由派倡导组织一视同仁。”
在特朗普总统第二任期内，特朗普政府已采取多项措施反击ABA据称存在的偏见。2025年2月，联邦贸易委员会主席安德鲁·弗格森（Andrew Ferguson）宣布一项新政策，禁止联邦贸易委员会的政治任命人员担任美国律师协会的领导职务、参与ABA活动或续展其会员资格。
此后，司法部于2025年5月致函ABA主席帕姆·邦迪（Pam Bondi），表示司法部将不再参与其传统的司法提名人审查合作关系，理由是”尽管受到批评，但仍拒绝纠正其评级流程中的偏见”。
4月，特朗普签署了一项行政命令，特别针对ABA和其他强大的认证组织，警告称任何参与非法歧视的组织都将被拒绝联邦认可。
GOP Watchdog says American Bar Association’s amicus brief program littered with bias | Fox News
By Alec Schemmel | Fox News
Published March 26, 2026 12:34pm EDT
A conservative watchdog group is adding fodder to the debate over whether the American Bar Association has become a politicized institution favoring the left.
A new report released by Trump-aligned lawfare group America First Legal, co-founded by one of the president’s top advisors, Stephen Miller, claims the ABA’s Standing Committee on Amicus Curiae Briefs over the last decade has produced 80% of left-leaning liberal arguments, 20% neutral and zero that are conservatively-aligned.
Meanwhile, in all six cases the ABA has filed amicus briefs involving Trump, the ABA went against the president or his allies.
President Donald Trump’s second term has included attacks against the ABA, arguing it has politicized its accrediting power and has favored Democratic Party-backed candidates when vetting judicial nominees. The ABA’s size and legacy make it the premier trade association for the legal sector, but some conservatives fear the group’s power is becoming a “monopoly.”
America First Legal exposes the American Bar Association’s left-wing bias in a new report.(Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
“The ABA requires that amicus briefs be authorized by its board of governors and must be consistent with existing ABA policy or involve matters of ‘special significance to lawyers or the legal profession,’” a press release from AFL argued. “Briefs on birthright citizenship, transgender healthcare for minors and the Texas heartbeat law fall well outside that mandate.”
According to AFL’s audit, which scanned briefs filed between April 2016 and February 2026, there were a total of 87 filed. Seventy of them “favored a liberal or progressive outcome,” AFL argues, while none it came across were “conservative-aligned,” the group added. The remaining covered what AFL described as neutral issues, such as a patent law case.
“The ABA does not categorize its amicus briefs as conservative or liberal but base them on the law. The ABA files amicus briefs that take positions that reflect official ABA policy that has been debated and adopted by the House of Delegates,” the ABA told Fox News Digital.
“The House is the ABA’s policy-making body comprising hundreds of delegates from state bars across the country and a wide range of ABA subject-matter entities and adopts policy only after engaging in a deliberative and representative process. Throughout it all, defending the rule of law is our North Star. “
The audit also found in cases where Trump, or a Trump official, was named, and the ABA filed an amicus brief, they argued every time in the direction contrary to the Trump official or Trump himself.
President Donald Trump sits in the courtroom during his civil fraud trial in the New York Supreme Court Jan. 11, 2024, in New York City.(Michael M. Santiago)
“The ABA presents its amicus program as advancing the interests of the legal profession and the rule of law,” said Gene Hamilton, president of America First Legal.
“The data tells a different story,” Hamilton continued. “More than four in five briefs push a progressive agenda, immigration advocacy has become the program’s dominant focus and the organization has not once — in ten years and across two Trump administrations — filed a brief that could be characterized as supportive of a conservative legal position. The ABA is not a neutral arbiter and should be treated no differently than any other liberal advocacy group.”
In President Trump’s second term, the Trump administration has taken several steps to push back against what it says is bias at the ABA. In February 2025, Federal Trade Commission Chairman Andrew Ferguson announced a new policy prohibiting FTC political appointees from holding leadership roles in the American Bar Association (ABA), participating in ABA events or renewing their ABA memberships.
That early action was also followed by several others, such as a May letter to the ABA’s president from Attorney General Pam Bondi indicating the Department of Justice would no longer be engaging in its traditional partnership related to vetting judicial nominees, citing “refusal to fix the bias in its ratings process, despite criticism.”
In April, Trump signed an executive order that singled out the ABA and other powerful accrediting groups, warning that anyone engaging in unlawful discrimination would be refused federal recognition.
发表回复