The president's nomination this morning of Harriet Miers
to the Supreme Court means ... who knows? The woman has no record of judicial experience or legal scholarship that might signal her judicial temperment or ideology. One upbeat sign for liberals is initial right-wing reaction that looks more like fury than feelgood, to judge from the comment board at confirmthem
). John Podhoretz at The Corner
plays defense: "Just because she's not a conservative activist doesn't mean she's not a conservative."
For his part, Tom Goldstein of SCOTUSblog
, who has argued many cases before the Court and who teaches Supreme Court litigation at Stanford and Harvard law schools, predicts:
Even if Democrats aren't truly gravely concerned, they will see this as an opportunity to damage the President. The themes of the opposition will be cronyism and inexperience. Democratic questioning at the hearings will be an onslaught of questions about federal constitutional law that Miers in all likelihood won't want to, or won't be able to (because her jobs haven't called on her to study the issues), answer. I have no view on whether she should be confirmed (it's simply too early to say), but will go out on a limb and predict that she will be rejected by the Senate. In my view, Justice O'Connor will still be sitting on the Court on January 1, 2006.
For an over-the-top endorsement, we go to conservative David Frum at National Review Online
, who had this to say last week about a possible Miers nomination:
I believe I was the first to float the name of Harriet Miers, White House counsel, as a possible Supreme Court. Today her name is all over the news. I have to confess that at the time, I was mostly joking....In the White House that hero worshipped the president, Miers was distinguished by the intensity of her zeal: She once told me that the president was the most brilliant man she had ever met.
See also Malkin
What Julie Myers is to the Department of Homeland Security, Harriet Miers is to the Supreme Court. It's not just that Miers has zero judicial experience. It's that she's so transparently a crony/"diversity" pick while so many other vastly more qualified and impressive candidates went to waste. If this is President Bush's bright idea to buck up his sagging popularity--among conservatives as well as the nation at large--one wonders whom he would have picked in rosier times. Shudder.
UPDATE: Pat Robertson's legal arm
thinks Miers is an "excellent choice."
UPDATE: William Kristol at the Weekly Standard
: "I'm disappointed, depressed and demoralized."
Talk about splitting your base!
UPDATE: Be sure to check out Miers's own blog
. It's a window into her soul.