Blogger Eric Zorn: Can we judge defense attorneys by the clients they choose?

The Democratic Governors Association has been blasting Republican gubernatorial hopeful Richard Irvin, the mayor of Aurora, for his work as a defense attorney.

For example: "(He's been) profiting by defending some of the most violent and heinous criminals. Domestic abusers and sexual assaults. Kidnapper who molested a child. Reckless homicide. Even accused child pornographers. Irvin has been getting rich by putting violent criminals back on our streets."

This has echoes of Republican attacks on U.S. Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson for her stint as a federal public defender from 2005 to 2007.

"The last Judge Jackson left the Supreme Court to go to Nuremberg and prosecute the case against the Nazis," said Arkansas Republican Sen. Tom Cotton on Tuesday, referring to former Justice Robert H. Jackson, who served as chief counsel in the prosecution of Nazi war criminals. "This Judge Jackson might have gone there to defend them."

Cotton's remark was, of course, nasty and idiotic, but both the DGA commercials and the Republican innuendo pose a question: When, if ever, is it fair to judge lawyers by the nature of the clients they represent?"

• For his thoughts on whether attorneys have an obligation to represent unsavory clients or can make their own choices, see Eric's newsletter The Picayune Sentinel at https://ericzorn.substack.com.