A Wise Old Woman

Judge Sotomayor was asked whether she agreed with Sandra Day O'Connor's statement that a wise old man and a wise old woman will reach the same conclusion. Sotmayor said she disagreed. She said, and has on more than one occasion, that she would hope that a wise Latina woman might reach a better conclusion.

"Wise" as an adjective, means, "characterized by wisdom : marked by deep understanding, keen discernment, and a capacity for sound judgment," or "exercising or showing sound judgment."

A wise person is just that -- wise. They are not more wise or less wise than another wise person because, by definition, wise is wise. That said, I think the controversy around Sotomayor's remark is a bit overblown.

A wordsmith might say the bigger controversy is that she misapprehended the meaning of wise in the first place. Just as a pregnant woman is not more or less pregnant than any other pregnant woman, a wise Latina woman is as wise as a wise white man or a wise white woman because they are all wise. Comprende'?

For me, the biggest controversy surrounding Sotomayor are the adjectives used to describe her. One lawyer, explaining that Sotomayor will sometimes interrupt an attorney, remarked, "She's brilliant and she's qualified, but I just feel that she can be very, how do you say, temperamental."

Temperamental? Scalia frequently interrupts the lawyers in front of him but I've never seen him described as "temperamental." Justice Thomas never asks a single question. But I've never seen him described as docile.

Another lawyer said Sotomayor was "more strident and much more vocal" than the other judges on the panel when he last appeared before her. She even "used her questioning to make a point, as opposed to really looking for an answer to a question she did not understand."

I wonder what he would have said if he'd thought Sotomayor didn't understand an aspect of the case or the argument. Were I Sotomayor, I'd much prefer this sort of criticism to "she was clueless."

Hillary Clinton was often described as strident during her presidential campaign. But John McCain? Umm, no.

What other things have been said of Sotomayor? Well, let's see. She's been described as "difficult" and "nasty." She's a "terror on the bench," she "behaves in an out-of-control manner," and she goes after lawyers when they make arguments "she doesn't like."

Consider how a male judge with a similar demeanor would be described. "Difficult" and "nasty" would be "contentious" and "acerbic." A "terror on the bench" would come out as "domineering and argumentative." He "runs a tight ship" they'd say. One that asks a lot of questions would be a "bomb-thrower." And a temperamental male judge would be "mercurial" or "unpredictable."

If anyone were to ask me, which they're not. I'm not up for a Supreme Court nomination, either.

Maybe it's because I hated the Nancy Drew books. Nancy was a namby pamby and Ned Nickerson could jump in a lake, as far as I was concerned. But Sotomayor loved reading Nancy Drew and bravely admits it today.

Nor did I ever have her "Perry Mason" moment. Sotomayor said her inspiration to be a judge came from an episode of Perry Mason, when she realized the judge is the most important person in the courtroom. I loved Perry Mason, watched it faithfully. But for the life of me, I can't remember a single thing any Perry Mason judge did that was memorable.

This is perhaps her most revealing statement yet. She doesn't see the jury as the most important in the courtroom. She doesn't see the witnesses as the most important, nor the lawyers who cross-examine them to elicit the truth. And what about the defendant, who is on trial for his life? No, for Sotomayor, the most important person in the courtroom is the judge. And that deserves some pondering.

But the sexist statements of lawyers, most of them made anonymously, deserve nothing more than a summary dismissal.