Justin D.Smith, one of President Donald Trump's attorneys in the E.Jean Carroll litigation, is nearing confirmation to a lifetime position on the U.S.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.The Senate is expected to vote on his nomination after it advanced through procedural steps in the chamber.

However, several legal scholars interviewed by Raw Story expressed concern about Smith's written responses to questions submitted by members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

A central criticism involves Smith's description of a 'Law & Order: SVU' episode that became relevant during Trump's appeals in the Carroll case.

Experts argued that Smith repeated disputed characterizations of the episode and inaccurately attributed certain statements to Carroll rather than to Trump's former attorney Joe Tacopina.

Legal scholars said the responses raised questions about Smith's accuracy, judgment, and attention to detail, although they acknowledged the issue is unlikely to derail his confirmation.Additional concerns focused on Smith's answers regarding the 2020 presidential election.Rather than directly stating that Trump lost, Smith noted that Joe Biden was certified as the winner, a response critics viewed as evasive.

Scholars also highlighted his reluctance to broadly endorse Supreme Court precedents, explicitly affirming only a small number of landmark decisions such as Brown v.Board of Education and Loving v.Virginia.

The article also references criticism from advocacy groups regarding Smith's past positions on abortion and questions about his involvement in political organizations.

Experts interviewed said these factors raise broader concerns about judicial impartiality and whether Smith would approach cases as an independent judge rather than as an advocate.

Despite those concerns, observers quoted in the article believe there is sufficient political support for Smith's confirmation to the federal appeals court.