Senior Circuit Judge Bruce M. Selya says he enjoys his work.

The Providence Journal / Bill Murphy

Senior Circuit Judge Bruce M. Selya is now the longest-serving Rhode Islander in the history of the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Selya surpassed the previous record-holder, Judge LeBaron P. Colt, who took office when the court was created in 1891. Colt served from June 16, 1891, to Feb. 7, 1913 — a total of 21 years, 7 months and 23 days.

Selya began serving on the Boston-based appeals court on Nov. 24, 1986, so he caught up to Colt on July 16 of this year.

Selya, 74, of Providence, was born in Providence and graduated from Classical High School, Harvard College and Harvard Law School. He served on the U.S. District Court in Providence from 1982 to 1986 before President Ronald Reagan nominated him for a seat on the 1st Circuit. He assumed senior status on Dec. 31, 2006, meaning he stepped down from full-time service but still handles 1st Circuit cases.

Question: What are your thoughts on surpassing Judge LeBaron P. Colt to become the longest-serving Rhode Islander on the 1st Circuit?

Answer: “Really a sense of wonder at how that could happen to someone as young as me. Ever since my law school days, I’ve been a great admirer of the federal courts as an institution in this country, and to be able to play a part in the perpetuation of that institution has been a source of great satisfaction to me. It really is among the things that make me feel I’ve been a very fortunate person.”

Q: Why are 1st Circuit judges hearing cases at the federal courthouse in downtown Providence on Oct. 8?

A: “The District Court — particularly Chief Judge [Mary M.] Lisi — has put together a series of events to mark the centennial of the courthouse, and she asked me if, as part of that, the 1st Circuit could sit in Providence. I spoke with [1st Circuit] Chief Judge [Sandra L.] Lynch, and she agreed.”

“In my memory — which, as you know, is more than 21 years, 7 months and 23 days — this will be the fourth time the court has sat in that courtroom. A couple of times it has sat at the Roger Williams University law school. But normally it’s not more than once every three, four or five years.”

“It’s a good way of making the court more relevant to the bar. Because our normal sittings are held out of state, many lawyers tend to think of the Court of Appeals as being some institution that is very high up in the pecking order but far away, making important rulings but in a detached way from a distance. I think it’s good to have a flesh-and-blood embodiment of the court because it makes it easier for people to relate to the court and what it does.”

Q: You could have retired years ago with full pay. Why didn’t you?

A: “Mostly because I love my work and I love my court. I have deluded myself into thinking I am making a continuing contribution.”

Q: Are you teaching at the Roger Williams University School of Law? What are you telling aspiring lawyers?

A: “I’ve been on the faculty many years at the Boston College law school, and when I agreed to teach at Roger Williams, one of the inducements — and I’m very grateful for it — was I could devise my own course. I had been teaching standard courses at BC such as constitutional law, evidence and civil procedure. [Roger Williams University School of Law] Dean David Logan said if you come here, you can devise your own course. This will be the third year that I’ve been teaching it.”

“I call the course, rather euphemistically, ‘The Lessons of Litigation.’ What I’m trying to do is put into practice a theory I have that law schools don’t really do a very good job of preparing people for what the real world of law practice is all about. They teach people how to think like lawyers and to research legal problems, but not how to be lawyers. I try to do this as a bridge course to encourage the students to actually think like lawyers and put themselves in a lawyer’s position and apply some of these skills.”

“One thing that is interesting — and probably sounds quirky but is emblematic of what I’ve been trying to do — is I told the dean I want to have a dress code requirement: I expect guys to show up in coats and ties, and women in comparable attire. He said, ‘They’ll never do it. Not even professors do it.’ He said, ‘Are you trying to be difficult?’ And I said, ‘No. If you want people to think like lawyers, if they dress like lawyers, it helps to start them down that path.’ And the young people have bought right into it. I’ve had no complaints. I’ve had professors in sweatshirts and jeans peeking their heads around the corner to see if it’s really happening.”

“More than anything, we take decisions and have them read the decision and then talk — not about the legal points but what the lawyers did and didn’t do and what they could have done better. Last week, we were talking about a United States Supreme Court case that was dismissed on rather technical grounds, and most of the discussion was about what the lawyers could have done to avoid that result. Could they have reframed the cause of action or joined different parties or brought it in a different court, rather than pros and cons of the Supreme Court decision.

Q: So it’s Selya 101?

A: “That’s about the size of it.”

Q: President Bush has nominated U.S. District Judge William E. Smith for the 1st Circuit seat that you vacated when you assumed senior status, and he has nominated U.S. Magistrate Judge Lincoln D. Almond for the U.S. District Court seat that Judge Ernest C. Torres vacated when he assumed senior status. Do you expect the Senate, which is controlled by Democrats, to confirm the Republican president’s nominees, and if not, what is your reaction?

A: “Well, it would be my fondest hope that the Senate would confirm Judge Smith and Judge Almond, each of whom I think of as a highly qualified nominee. I have very low expectations that that will happen. It realistically seems to me that we are so close to the election that this is going to become, or probably has become, more of a political decision than a referendum on the qualifications of the nominees.”

“I’m obviously unhappy about it because our court and the District Court need the help, but I understand the way the system works. I have every confidence that no matter who wins the presidential election, Senator [Jack] Reed and Senator [Sheldon] Whitehouse will step up and try in the next session of the Senate to assist in getting qualified people into those positions.”

Q: You chaired the late John H. Chafee’s campaign for U.S. Senate. What advice would you give to his son, former Sen. Lincoln D. Chafee, as he considers whether to run for governor in 2010?

A: “I think that’s beyond my present purview. One of the things that happens when you agree to put on that black robe and take the bench is you have to realize you give up some freedoms. And one is freedom in politics. You correspondingly acquire the freedom to refuse to give contributions to any political candidate because it would be unethical under judicial canons.”

efitzpat@projo.com