Font Resize
Senators will sit in judgment of Sonia Sotomayor this week, cross-examining witnesses and presenting evidence to determine if she has what it takes to be a justice on the Supreme Court.
But the members of the Judiciary Committee are not the only ones debating Sotomayor's nomination. Law professors nationwide are engaged in water cooler talk about the rulings, temperament and outside affiliations of the woman who may reach the pinnacle of their profession.
And quite a few of them are impressed. More than 1,200 legal scholars from 49 states signed a letter backing Sotomayor's nomination to the high court, including 16 from the University of Utah and four from Brigham Young University. The only state not represented is New Hampshire, which has only one small law school.
The letter, sent to the committee Wednesday, describes Sotomayor "as a brilliant, careful, fair-minded jurist whose rulings exhibit unfailing adherence to the rule of law." It also says she would bring "much needed ethnic and gender diversity" to the Supreme Court, becoming the first Latino member and only the third woman to sit on the bench.
Those who oppose Sotomayor dismiss the phalanx of law professors on her side.
"I doubt that very many of those professors have read her opinions. They are simply adding their names to support the political agenda of President Obama," said Paul Cassell, a former federal district judge from Utah. "It is important to understand the
He should know. Cassell is one of them.
Cassell, the most prominent conservative law professor at the U., reviewed Sotomayor's record at the request of PBS' NewsHour.
"My concern is that I don't see her opinions as being particularly distinguished. They are fairly mechanical," he said, agreeing with a recent Washington Post review that found Sotomayor's decisions include an unusual level of detail about the evidence in cases.
He wonders how easily she will make the transition to the Supreme Court, which focuses on legal precedent, not deciding factual disputes.
"There's nothing in there to suggest she would be a horrible Supreme Court justice, but there is also nothing in there to suggest that she would be an exceptional Supreme Court justice," he said.
Cassell expects Sotomayor to be "a fairly conventional liberal."
Fellow U. professor Daniel Medwed takes issue with Cassell's assessment saying that Sotomayor is "extremely well qualified."
He cited her Yale law education, practical experience as an assistant district attorney in New York and years of judicial experience first on the district court level and later as a circuit court of appeals judge.
Medwed said Cassell is right when he says more law professors are liberal than conservative, but he thinks it's unfair to say those signing the letter are doing so for political rather than legal reasons.
He said the large number of signers could be a reaction to some of the criticisms Sotomayor has faced.
"A lot of professors don't like people attacking folks unjustifiably," Medwed said.
Medwed and Cassell are on different ends of the political spectrum, and while both are experts in criminal law, their specialties also often collide. Cassell focuses on victims rights and Medwed on the wrongfully accused.
But when it comes to criminal law, both agree that Sotomayor has strong credentials.
"I am encouraged by a number of her opinions on criminal law issues," Cassell said.
Medwed spent six years working in New York, where Sotomayor served on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. He said Sotomayor is "well regarded in New York circles" even among those who believe she is more favorable to law enforcement than they would like.
Other U. law professors who signed the letter include Scott Matheson Jr., a former Democratic gubernatorial candidate and brother of Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, and law school dean Hiram Chodosh, who said he thought it was important for people outside of the political arena to weigh in.
In all, 15 of the U.'s 42 professors publicly endorsed Sotomayor, as did one administrator.
At more conservative Brigham Young University, the support was not as strong. Four out of 33 full-time professors signed the letter, which was circulated by e-mail from groups such as the Alliance for Justice, a national association of liberal nonprofit organizations.
BYU professor Carolina Nunez is a Democrat, who found Sotomayor's life story appealing. The Supreme Court nominee grew up in a housing project in the Bronx, raised by her mother after her father died when she was 9.
But Nunez said her support isn't political and isn't based on Sotomayor's heritage or history.
"I see Sotomayor as being very good at legal analysis, which is what is important," she said, after having read some of Sotomayor's 3,000 decisions before signing the letter.
As a lifelong Republican, BYU professor James Backman knows that some may question why his name appears on the letter. For him, it boils down to three things. He likes the diversity she will bring to the court. He thinks she has the chops to handle the job. And she's about as mainstream as can be expected from a Democratic presidential nominee.
"I am convinced she is as fine a candidate as we can hope for from the conservative side of the spectrum," he said. "I think she has proven a good jurist who would be fair."
He also dismisses the criticism from Republican senators, including Utah's Orrin Hatch, about speeches where Sotomayor said "a wise Latina" should reach better conclusions than white judges because of her life experiences.
Backman said those comments were before minority law students and were not an attempt to explain how she rules from the bench.
"I don't think it has any effect on her actual judicial temperament or the way she decides cases," he said.
But his colleague Lynn Wardle isn't sold.
Wardle, a BYU professor who is very active in pro-life groups, called Sotomayor "a stealth candidate on some of the hot button issues."
She has not ruled on any major abortion cases, though Wardle said she has sat in judgment on three abortion cases where only procedural matters were discussed.
"She applied the rule of law quite fairly," he said. "She didn't follow an agenda."
But Wardle has doubts about her views because of her previous association with the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund.
Wardle, and a number of leading Senate Republicans, have criticized the group for what they call "very radical positions" on issues ranging from abortion to the death penalty.
"I have some real concerns about her. She seems a mixed bag on some issues." Wardle said. "At this point, I would have to be convinced to vote for her if I was a senator."
While senators are sure to ask Sotomayor about abortion, she will probably get more questions about gun rights, affirmative action and whether she will be able to set aside her views and follow the rule of law.
Medwed called the expected "rule of law" criticism a bogus one.
"It is an attack often lodged by conservatives against liberals. The law itself is not hard and fast, it is soft and slow," he said. "If the rule of law was so crystal clear, why do we need judges?"
Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation hearings begin Monday and, barring some explosive new discovery, the Senate is expected ultimately to confirm her as the nation's first Latinoon the Supreme Court.
But that hasn't stopped conservative groups and a number of Senate Republicans, such as Utah's Orrin Hatch, from questioning her commitment to following the law.
Democratic supporters, meanwhile, tout her long judicial experience and tough-on-crime reputation, not to mention the ethnic and gender diversity she would bring.
