I agree with Alfred Brophy that this study titled ‘Not that Smart’: Sonia Sotomayor and the Construction of Merit, which aims to assess Justice Sotomay’rs influence by considering “publication rates and number of published pages” is a stretch. That’s like measuring the quality of a law school based on the number of pages in its library–oh wait, USNW does consider volumes in its formulas. And based on number of volumes, Thomas Cooley is one of the best law schools. Now what does that say about Justice Sotomayor? Isn’t brevity the soul of wit!

Here’s the abstract:

The appointment of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court in 2009 was criticized as sacrificing merit on the altar of identity politics. According to critics, Sotomayor was simply “not that smart”. For some conservative critics, her selection illustrated the costs of affirmative action policies, in that this particular choice was going to produce a lower quality Supreme Court. For liberal critics, many were concerned that the President, by selecting Sotomayor, was squandering an opportunity to appoint an intellectual counterweight to conservative justices like Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito and John Roberts. Using a set of basic measures of judicial merit, such as publication and citation rates for the years 2004-06, when Sotomayor was on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, we compare her performance to that of her colleagues on the federal appeals courts. Sotomayor matches up well. She might turn out to be more of a force on the Court than the naysayers predicted.

“Basic measures of judicial merit?” OK.