The Talk in Orange County : Reaction: Even after the confirmation vote, sentiments ran high around TV sets broadcasting the climax of the Senate drama.

Prof. Jerry Engelskirchen’s evidence class at Western State University College of Law wasn’t over by 3 p.m. Tuesday, but a third of his students were already out the door by then--on their way to the nearest TV set to catch the Clarence Thomas vote.

Engelskirchen didn’t mind the exodus, though. In fact, he was the one who suggested it. “This appointment is something that will affect the course of law in this country profoundly for the next 30 or 40 years,” he explained.

Budding lawyers weren’t the only ones captivated by the Senate vote on Thomas’ confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Around Orange County, in classrooms and lounges, at water coolers and watering holes, in offices and malls, people watched the day’s events unfold and debated their impact. Just as it was around the nation, sentiments ran high on both sides after the 52-48 vote that will send Thomas to the Supreme Court.

At Reuben’s Restaurant, a Santa Ana establishment frequented by lawyers, the high drama that has mesmerized the nation for days drew a mixed response.

“I had some hopes that there’d be enough courageous people in the Senate who would not go along with George Bush,” said Arturo Nieto, 43, a workmen’s compensation attorney in Santa Ana.

“I think that regardless of all this hullabaloo, he (Thomas) really wasn’t qualified and he should have never been confirmed,” said Nieto, a Democrat who voted for Bush.

At the next table, sipping cocktails with four women employees from his office, Ron Courtney disagreed.

“It was a moot point as to whether he was guilty or not,” said Courtney, vice president of a title search company in Orange. “When the Senate went into a TV inquisition and put that man up before the world, they failed to protect the rights of every citizen. And when I saw Mr. (Sen. Dennis) DiConcini and Mr. (Sen. Edward) Kennedy up there who have had their own problems, I thought it was very hypocritical.”

Others said the affair would encourage special interest groups to introduce last-minute allegations in their efforts to scuttle an opponent’s nomination.

“If it wasn’t premeditated in this case, it certainly will be in the future,” said Gerry McCarty, 56, a telecommunications-sales representative from Anaheim. “This has certainly made everyone aware that sexual harassment is a problem. But that doesn’t mean that this was the forum to take care of it--especially to the detriment of an individual.”

Earlier in the day, there was a collective gulp of anticipation among the 50 students crowded into UC Irvine’s student center as the last “ayes” and “nays” were recorded on the television screen. And when Vice President Dan Quayle read the final tally, a burst of applause erupted.

“I thought Clarence Thomas had a stronger case than Anita Hill,” said Robert Chang, a 21-year-old psychology major from Arcadia. “I think he’ll do even better as a justice because of this whole thing about sexual harassment.”

Chrissy Anderson wasn’t so sure. The 20-year-old African-American student from Cerritos was torn between Anita Hill’s account of sexual harassment, Thomas’ unequivocal denial and the character witnesses who spoke for him.

“I’m glad I wasn’t a senator up there having to cast my vote because I don’t know how I would have voted,” the pre-law student and psychology major said. “ . . . It was really sad to see blacks fighting against each other in front of the whole country. It was disgusting and it was ugly.”

Eldridge Suggs, a senior, had been in favor of Thomas’ confirmation before the Hill allegations surfaced. Although he said he believes neither Hill nor Thomas told the whole truth about their relationship, the 28-year-old African-American from Houston sides with various senators who said the benefit of the doubt should be given to the nominee.

“Don’t get me wrong, I’m totally for women’s rights and against sexual harassment,” said Suggs, a former police officer. “But the charges of sexual harassment came a decade too late. . . . And I think this whole process backfired on the Democrats.”

Laura Anglin, 22, a philosophy major from Irvine, didn’t support Thomas in the first place because she said she believes that he opposes abortion and a woman’s right to choose, despite his claims of having no opinion on the question. But she found herself even more incensed by the Thomas team’s tactics in questioning Hill and attacking her credibility.

“They tried to say she was fantasizing about him and suggesting that she was crazy and unbalanced,” Anglin complained. “It was weird--they were very careful not to accuse her of lying. They couldn’t do that because her testimony was so credible. Instead, they implied that she was crazy.”

At Western State University College of Law, President John C. Monks said that while the Thomas nomination garnered the attention of the nation as a whole, it attracted even closer dissection from many of the 2,450 people studying law at the school’s campuses in Fullerton, Irvine and San Diego.

“When you become a law student, you get into it--you live and breathe and think law constantly,” Monks, who does not believe Thomas is well-qualified for the job, said at the Fullerton campus. “That’s what’s happened here.”

Indeed, hopeful prosecutors at the school looked for pointers from members of the Senate Judiciary Committee on their questioning techniques. Professors held class discussions on the hearings, and some sent lookouts from class Tuesday afternoon to report back on the progress of the vote. Other faculty members conducted their own polling on the confirmation.

While academic campuses are generally considered more politically liberal than the general population, some class pollings at Western State indicated a slight majority for Thomas, students said. This might be explained by the school’s placement in conservative Orange County and its older student population, many of whom are switching careers.

Manfred Wallner of Anaheim, a 63-year-old surgeon who is studying to become a lawyer “for fun,” applauded the confirmation vote--to the chagrin of some fellow classmates in the student lounge.

“I think he’s lying (about the harassment issue), but I don’t think it makes any difference,” Wallner said. “You’re not going to find any saints.”

But others saw the vote as a reason for mourning.

“This is a low time,” said Mary Mullin of Whittier, 27, a law student who is now clerking for a federal judge. “It’s really sad because he wasn’t even qualified to begin with, even before the (harassment) allegations came up.”

Daniel P. Goggins, 27, of Michigan, also a law student, agreed, saying that he believes Thomas will set back abortion rights and solidify a conservative majority.

Times staff writer Tammerlin Drummond contributed to this report.