Defending Judge Sotomayor

Jeff Rosen's bashing this week of Judge Sonia Sotomayor of the Second Circuit—who is on all the Supreme Court short lists—is making the rounds. Glenn Greenwald calls Rosen's attack a "smear" and points out his problematic reliance on anonymous sources. I'm just starting to gather string on the judges on the short list, so I called Jamal Greene, a Columbia law professor who clerked for Judge Guido Calabresi, one of Sotomayor's colleagues. Here's his rebuttal of Rosen's unnamed critics:

I was always impressed with her memos. I thought that they always said exactly what was on my mind. One particular opinion that stands out: Hayden v. Pataki. Not sure that's the opinion she'd want to talk about most, because what she wrote was quite short, but I thought it was also quite brilliant. The case was about whether felon disenfranchisement"—taking away the vote from prisoners—"fell under section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, as a form of vote dilution or vote denial. Her short dissent said: This is a really easy case, and only becomes difficult if you try to make it that way. There were all these long opinions flying back and forth—Judge Cabranes in the majority, and Judge Parker in dissent, and Guido too. She had a short one that got it right.

Tags: Glenn Greewald, Jeff Rosen, Sonia Sotomayor, Supreme Court

Emily Bazelon is a founding editor of Double X, and a writer and editor at Slate.

Comments

This is "divide and conquer"

By: rashoodollison | Tue, 07/28/2009 - 03:02

This is "divide and conquer" analysis is sheer and transparent sophistry -- the kind that gives law professors a bad name (lawyers too, though few lawyers would make such an argument because they are constrained by judges and juries). Sotomayor isn't just hoping that her decisions will be better than someone else's; she's hoping, and claiming, that the decisions made by judges of a particular ethnicity and gender will be better than the decisions of other judges. And she's claiming that this is so because of their ethnicity and gender.

online phd degree | education degree

It may very well be true that

By: rashoodollison | Tue, 07/28/2009 - 03:02

It may very well be true that the ethnicity and gender of a judge will affect some of that judge's decisions. But this doesn't make it unobjectionable for a judge to consider this a phenomenom to be celebrated as the source of better decisions. Judges, and certainly Supreme Court Justices, should "hope" that the quality of their decisions stems from the traits we have traditionally looked for in a judge -- intelligence, judiciousness, close attention to the facts and the law, and fair-mindedness, including an ability to minimize the extent to which prejudices and predispositions influence decisionmaking

accredited degree | marketing degree | online associate degree