Academic

Jeffrey Rosen (GW): The Case Against Sotomayor--the Responses

By Kevin Maillard

I have been asked to repost Prof. Rosen's article on Sotomayor, along with some responses.

Excerpts from Rosen's Article in the New Republic:

The most consistent concern was that Sotomayor, although an able lawyer, was "not that smart and kind of a bully on the bench," as one former Second Circuit clerk for another judge put it. "She has an inflated opinion of herself, and is domineering during oral arguments, but her questions aren't penetrating and don't get to the heart of the issue."
....
Her opinions, although competent, are viewed by former prosecutors as not especially clean or tight, and sometimes miss the forest for the trees.  It's customary, for example, for Second Circuit judges to circulate their draft opinions to invite a robust exchange of views. Sotomayor, several former clerks complained, rankled her colleagues by sending long memos that didn't distinguish between substantive and trivial points, with petty editing suggestions--fixing typos and the like--rather than focusing on the core analytical issues.
...
I haven't read enough of Sotomayor's opinions to have a confident sense of them, nor have I talked to enough of Sotomayor's detractors and supporters, to get a fully balanced picture of her strengths.

The full article may be found here.

And a interesting responses found on Dissenting Justice (Darren Hutchinson) and  Wonkette.

Full post as published by The Faculty Lounge on June 01, 2009 (boomark / email).