American Bar Association

American Bar Association
Basic facts
Location:	Chicago, Illinois
Type:	501(c)(6)
Top official:	Michelle A. Behnke, President
Year founded:	1878
Website:	Official website

The American Bar Association (ABA) is a nationwide voluntary professional association of attorneys. Its headquarters are in Chicago, Illinois, and it maintains an office in Washington, D.C. The ABA is a 501(c)(6) tax-exempt business league.

The ABA provides resources for legal professionals, accredits law schools, establishes a code of ethics, and publishes both scholarly and professional materials. The ABA also advocates for legislation and policy. According to the ABA website, the association's advocacy priorities include access to legal services, immigration reform, independence of the judiciary, international rule of law, national security, and civil liberties.

Background

A group of 75 lawyers from 20 states and the District of Columbia founded the ABA in 1878. As of September 2025, the group described its mission as "to serve equally our members, our profession and the public by defending liberty and delivering justice as the national representative of the legal profession." It outlined four specific goals it sought to uphold:

“

Goal I: Serve Our Members. Goal II: Improve Our Profession. Goal III: Eliminate Bias and Enhance Diversity. Goal IV: Advance the Rule of Law.

”

Leadership

As of September 2025, the following individuals held positions of leadership at the American Bar Association:

• Michelle A. Behnke, president
• Barbara J. Howard, president-elect
• Jonathan Cole, chairman of the House of Delegates
• Marvin S. C. Dang, secretary
• Frank "Fritz" Langrock, treasurer
• Andrew M. Schpak, treasurer-elect
• William R. Bay, immediate past president
• Alpha M. Brady, executive director

Work and activities

Member services

As of October 2016, the American Bar Association had 400,000 members. Membership is open to U.S. licensed lawyers, non U.S. licensed lawyers, law students, university students, paralegals, law librarians, economists, and others. Services available to members include job services, such as a program to partner young lawyers with those who do not traditionally have access to legal representation, continuing education, and events like annual meetings, forums, and conferences.

Publications

The American Bar Association annually publishes approximately 100 law-related books and approximately 60 periodicals. Most of the periodicals are tailored towards specific parts of the law, such as human rights, law practice, and criminal justice. Periodicals include journals, magazines, and newsletters. Full lists of periodicals can be found here.

Professional standards

Ethical standards for lawyers and judges

In 1983, the ABA adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct; these rules have been adopted by the District of Columbia and all states except California. The current rules evolved from the Model Code of Professional Responsibility, adopted in 1969, and the earlier 1908 Canons of Professional Ethics. The ABA also has a code of conduct for the judiciary; a list of its cannons can be found here.

Accreditation of law schools

The accrediting body of the American Bar Association is the Council and the Accreditation Committee of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar. The council is recognized by the United States Department of Education as the official accrediting body and is considered to be a separate organization from the ABA.

The council is composed of 21 ABA members, of which no more than 10 can be deans or faculty of law schools. The rest of the council is composed of judges, practicing attorneys, one law student, and no less than three public members.

Accreditation process

All law schools seeking accreditation must be in operation for at least one year prior to submitting their application. Schools wishing to apply are encouraged to reach out to the American Bar Association to receive information on the Standards for Approval of Law Schools, the Rules of Procedure and the accreditation process. Once the school has applied, the first step is a site evaluation that begins with a questionnaire that sets a base understanding for a site evaluation team. After the evaluation team visits the school, they construct a fact-finding report that is presented to the Accreditation Committee. The Accreditation Committee will then assess the information gathered and report it to the full council, which isn't bound by the Accreditation Committee's findings and recommendations. The council decide if provisional accreditation will be granted.

The transition from provisional to full accreditation usually takes places between three and five years after the initial provisional accreditation. During this time, there will be more on-site visits which will be taken into account when deciding whether or not to award full accreditation. Fully accredited schools must complete annual questionnaires. Three years after accreditation the school is reviewed. Following that, the school is reviewed every seven years. If during these evaluations a school is found to be non-compliant with the standards they will be required to fix the dependency by a certain date or face further action. For a more in-depth look at the accreditation process, see the American Bar Association Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar: The Law Accreditation Process.

Legislative and policy work

Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary

On the Ballot Episode 197: The ABA’s historical role in vetting federal judges

Beginning in 1948, the ABA's Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary conducted vetting of federal judicial nominees for the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary. On May 29, 2025, Attorney General Pam Bondi announced that, going forward, ABA recommendations would be treated the same as those from other interest groups and that the Department of Justice would no longer instruct nominees to allow the ABA access to non-public information or to participate in ABA interviews or questionnaires. In her memo, Bondi said the "ABA's steadfast refusal to fix the bias in its ratings process, despite criticism from Congress, the Administration, and the academy, is disquieting."

The committee is made up of 15 members: two from the Ninth Circuit, one from each of the other federal circuits, and the chair of the Committee. The members are appointed by the president of the ABA to staggered three-year terms.

The ABA has rules in place to help protect the impartiality and independence of the committee. No member may be a part of the government structure of the ABA, they are not allowed to seek or accept a federal nomination, and they must disclose if that they were a member of the committee if they ever appear before a judge they evaluated.

Members of the Committee on the Federal Judiciary can rate a nominee one of three ways: Not Qualified, Qualified or Well Qualified. The evaluation process is performed by a committee member from the same circuit from which the candidate is nominated. The evaluator then prepares a report from a Personal Data Questionnaire (collected by the United States Department of Justice), extensive readings of the candidate's legal writings, confidential interviews of those the candidate has worked with and a personal interview. The report is presented to the Chair of the Committee who verifies if it is complete. If the White House wishes for the Committee to offer a rating on the candidate all of the evaluation materials will be packaged and presented to the Committee for a vote and rating. After each member goes over the materials they issue their vote on the nominee. Each member votes, with the tiebreaker vote going to the Chair of the Committee. The three ratings can also be accompanied by a Majority (eight to nine votes), Substantial Majority (ten to thirteen votes) or Unanimous designation. The rating from the majority of the panel is presented as the committee's official rating. A description of the three possible ratings can be found on page six of the Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary: What it is and How it works.

Most presidents have consulted with the American Bar Association on judicial nominee prospects since 1953, with the exceptions of presidents George W. Bush (R), Donald Trump (R), and Joe Biden (D).

Amicus brief activity

The ABA standing committee reviews all amicus curiae briefs filed on behalf of the ABA.

The following are the U.S. Supreme Court cases for which ABA has filed amicus briefs from 2010 to 2016, according to the ABA website.

Amicus briefs filed by ABA in the U.S. Supreme Court, 2010-2016
2010
Textron, Inc. and subsidiaries v. United States Christian League Society Chapter of University of California, Hastings College of the Law v. Leo P. Martinez, et al. Carlos Rashad Gould v. United States Kevin Abbott v. United States Peter H. Beer, U.W. Clemon, Terry J. Halter, Jr., Thomas F. Hogan, Richard A. Paez, Laurence H. Silberman, and A. Wallace Tashima v. United States Costco Wholesale Corp. v. Omega, S.A. Gov. A. Schwarzenegger et al. v. M. Plata and R. Coleman, et al. J.D.B. v. State of North Carolina Troy Barbour v. State of Louisiana
2011
Michael E. Turner v. Rebecca L. Rogers, et al. White & Case LLP v. United States Albert W. Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of The County of Burlington et al. Blaine Lafler v. Anthony Cooper and State of Missouri v. Galin Edward Frye Laurence Golan et al. v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of the United States et al. Luis Mariano Martinez v. Charles L. Ryan, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections Juan Smith v. Burl Cain, Warden Steve A. Filarsky v. Nicholas B. Delia
2012
Evan Miller v. State of Alabama and Kentrell Jackson v. Ray Hobbs State of Arizona et al. v. United States Esther Kiobel on behlaf of her late husband Dr. Barnhiem Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. Ryan v. Gonzales and Tibbals v. Carter Supap Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. John Ferguson v. Kenneth S. Tucker
2013
Shelby County, Alabama v. Eric H. Holder, Jr. United States v. Edith Schlain Windsor, In Her Capacity as Executor of the Estate of Thea Clara Spyer, et al. Association for Molecular Pathology, et al. v. Myriad Genetics, et al. Kerri L. Kaley and Brian P. Kaley v. United States John Ferguson v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections Executive Benefits Ins. Agency v. Peter H. Arkinson, Trustee Freddie Lee Hall v. Florida
2014
Paul A. Howell v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, Inc. and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al. v. Sandoz, Inc. et al. Wellness International Network Ltd., et al. v. Richard Sharif Lanell Williams-Yulee v. The Florida Bar
2015
April DeBoer et al. v. Rychard Snyder Luis v. United States Montgomery v. State of Louisiana Loden v. Fisher Abigail Noel Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, et al. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission
2016
Gray v. Zook Moore v. Texas

Lobbying efforts

The Governmental Advocacy Office (GAO) of the American Bar Association is responsible for promoting the interest of the bar before various government entities. The GAO acted only at the federal level until 1986 when it expanded its efforts to include state legislatures.

According to the ABA website, it's advocacy priorities are:

• Access to legal services
• Criminal justice system improvements and protection of rights
• Eliminating discrimination and protecting civil liberties
• Healthcare law and tort reform
• Immigration
• Independence of the judiciary
• Independence of the legal profession
• Promoting the international rule of law

In 2016, the ABA spent $535,000 in lobbying. The ABA has lobbied for or against 80 bills before the 114th congress, as of October 15, 2016. These bills covered issues related to finance, guns, foreign relations, health, immigration, law enforcement and crime, budget and appropriations, civil liberties, copyright, patent and trademark, defense, education, Medicare and Medicaid, taxes, trade, veterans affairs, family, labor, antitrust, and the workplace.

Judicial selection advocacy

The American Bar Association is an advocate for merit based judicial selection. The ABA's Judicial Selection: The Process of Choosing Judges expresses that the key to an independent judiciary is to remove partisan influence on judges. They also believe that elections inherently create ethical dilemmas for judges if they ever have to hear a case that election donors are involved in.

Government sector lobbying

The American Bar Association submits federal lobbying reports. Local governments, like Peoria County, Illinois, pay membership dues to the association.

Notable endorsements

See also: Ballotpedia: Our approach to covering endorsements

This section displays endorsements this organization made in elections within Ballotpedia's coverage scope. Know of one we missed? Click here to let us know.

Affiliations

As of September 2025, the following organizations were affiliated with the American Bar Association and were represented in the ABA House of Delegates:

• The Association of Life Insurance Counsel
• The Maritime Law Association of The United States
• American Immigration Lawyers Association
• The Federal Circuit Bar Association
• The American Law Institute
• Energy Bar Association
• Hispanic National Bar Association
• National Association of Attorneys General
• American Judicature Society
• Association of American Law Schools
• Conference of Chief Justices
• The Federal Bar Association
• Federal Communications Bar Association
• Judge Advocates Association
• National Asian Pacific American Bar Association
• National Association of Bar Executives, Inc.
• National Native American Bar Association
• National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Inc.
• National Association of Women Judges
• National Association of Women Lawyers
• National Bar Association Inc.
• National Conference of Bar Examiners
• National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws
• National Conference of Women's Bar Associations
• National District Attorneys Association
• National Legal Aid and Defender Association
• National LGBT Bar Association
• National Organization of Bar Counsel, Inc.

Finances

The following is a breakdown of the American Bar Association's revenues and expenses from 2004 to 2024. The information comes from ProPublica.

American Bar Association financial data 2004-2024

Year	Revenue	Expenses
2004	$138.9 million	$132.1 million
2005	$143.4 million	$131.5 million
2006	$142.4 million	$133.9 million
2007	$155.3 million	$136.8 million
2008	$154.2 million	$147.0 million
2009	$148.5 million	$138.2 million
2010	$140.8 million	$136.7 million
2011	$140.7 million	$129.8 million
2012	$146.3 million	$137.2 million
2013	$140.7 million	$137.9 million
2014	$166.6 million	$142.9 million
2015	$151.7 million	$159.2 million
2016	$149.2 million	$159.6 million
2017	$147.4 million	$153.6 million
2018	$149.0 million	$161.8 million
2019	$127.2 million	$127.0 million
2020	$98.2 million	$112.7 million
2021	$86.6 million	$96.1 million
2022	$98.4 million	$114.1 million
2023	$108.0 million	$118.3 million
2024	$119.1 million	$136.2 million

See also

• What is an influencer?
• Supreme Court of the United States
• Judicial independence and accountability
• United States Constitution
• 501(c)(6)

External links

• American Bar Association official website
• American Bar Association on Facebook
• American Bar Association on X
• American Bar Association on LinkedIn
• American Bar Association on Instagram