We went from Harvard Law and the D.C. Circuit in John Roberts to a graduate of SMU and former head of the Texas Lottery Commission. Bush’s nomination of Hariett Miers today is rather remarkable. While a distinguished big firm lawyer, that’s all she is. Hundreds more like her abound in every medium and big city in America. I’ve known and worked with such people; their skills and intellect are nowhere near the average law professor or circuit court judge. More important, the demands of big firm litigation tend to close one’s mind to bigger picture legal issues that come up in complex areas of statutory and constitutional interpretation. Other than a fervent desire to have a woman and loyal aide as a nominee, this nomination makes little sense from someone claimed to seek judges in the mold of Scalia and Thomas and who, supposedly, believes in merit. Then again, if loyalty is the highest form of merit, then I’m sure this longtime advisor and current White House Counsel is good to go.
Subscribe To This Feed
I think this appointment was a huge mistake. This woman could be on the Court for 25 years. Why take a shot in the dark? Why not go with a sure thing? Because you’re scared of ticking off the Senate?
I think there’s more than a small chance this nomination could get tanked by opposition on both sides. I hope it does. Then we can get a real nominee in place. One with much stronger credentials. This is the Supreme Court, not the GAO.
“…a graduate of SMU …”
Hey! I resemble that remark!
E$ this nomination, in sharp contrast to Roberts, doesn’t make sense from any standpoint, unless you just don’t care about anything in particular, which I suspect is true of Bush.
I will assume that Bush knows Miers well enough that, from his point of view, she’s as “conservative” as any of the other picks he was considering. (The basis for this assumption is simply that if it is not true, then Bush is a friggin’ idiot.) So what we’re left with here is the strategic decision to nominate someone with pretty much no paper trail. Considering how the Democrats have been lately, no paper trail may very well better than any.
The optimist in me says that this pick will prompt a change in how nominees are picked. We’ve reached the point of absurdity in the nomination game — eerily reminicient of The Onion’s joke article about a second-trimester fetus being nominated. Democrats should step forward with some Republicans and say, in effect, look, we promise to vote based on qualifications and not ideology if you just give us people who look good on paper and don’t make fools of themselves at the hearing.
I just wonder what it’s like to be Judge Posner or Kozinski and find out today that some nobody may very well be the one voting to overturn your decisions. She probably isn’t credentialed enough to clerk for either one.
Another thought: Wasn’t Miers originally part of the team to help Bush decide who he should be nominating to the Court? Doesn’t that make it the second time he chose someone who was originally just supposed to help him find a nominee (Cheney being the first one)?
Another thought: Wasn’t Miers originally part of the team to help Bush decide who he should be nominating to the Court? Doesn’t that make it the second time he chose someone who was originally just supposed to help him find a nominee (Cheney being the first one)?
At what point did personal loyalty trump loyalty to principles? Although I know itââ¬â¢s important to be surrounded by people who support you, I feel prioritizing personal loyalty weakens organization. As a professional military officer one quote I would always use ââ¬Åthis is business not personalââ¬Â. I have had to, on more than one occasion, discipline loyal and stellar personnel; I did not let my loyalty to them cloud my judgment. I am sorry to see the President chooses staff members based on loyalty to him and not on performance. Should I expect Karl Rove to take over the DOD?
You can probably expect one of Bush’s personal buddies whose credential consists of an honorable dischrage as a cook. If the guy is a Hispanic or the guy is a gal, well more points, of course.