News and Document archive source
copyrighted material disclaimer at bottom of page

NewsMinecabal-elitew-administrationjudicial — Viewing Item


Court pick harriet miers most discreet in adminstrative

Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)
   http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20051003/cm_thenation/326302;_ylt=A86.I1KLZEFDsGsBXQT9wxIF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20051003/cm_thenation/326302;_ylt=A86.I1KLZEFDsGsBXQT9wxIF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

Harriet Miers: Supreme Court Choice With Few Footprints

David Corn
Mon Oct 3,12:36 PM ET

The Nation -- Here we go again. Another pick for the Supreme Court without much--or, in this case, any--judicial experience. And that will make it hard for senators--or anyone else--to assess what sort of Justice Harriet Miers, currently George W. Bush's White House counsel, will be if the Senate confirms her as Bush's pick to replace the retiring Sandra Day O'Connor. In announcing his selection of Miers, Bush said, "I believe that senators of both parties will find that Harriet Miers's talent, experience and judicial philosophy make her a superb choice."

But what precisely is her "judicial philosophy"? And how can it be discerned? Miers has never been a judge (which should not be a disqualification). She spent most of her career as a corporate lawyer (Bush was once a client) before joining the Bush Administration as staff secretary. Does she qualify as a crony? According to the Los Angeles Times, Miers introduced Bush and Alberto Gonzales in the 1990s. (Given Miers's close personal connection to Bush, senators might want to ask whether it's good for the nation to have a Supreme Court Justice who has such a tight bond with a person whose decisions and policies come before the Court.) In private practice, she headed one of Texas' largest law firms, Locke Lidell & Sapp, and as a trial litigator she represented Microsoft and Disney. She also racked up a series of firsts: first woman to lead a major law firm in the Lone Star State, first woman to become president of the Dallas Bar Association, first woman to become president of the state bar.

But--again--what is her "judicial philosophy"? It seems that even conservatives are not sure--and worried. Conservative bloggers and commenters quickly expressed anxiety over this nomination, not knowing if Miers is truly a conservative. "Utterly Underwhelmed," proclaimed conservative blogger Michelle Malkin. On one conservative site, a reader posted campaign finance reports showing that Miers donated $1,000 to the Democratic Party in 1988 and $1,000 to Al Gore's presidential campaign that year, as well as $1,000 to a Democratic senatorial candidate the previous year. (Egads! Maybe this is not a disaster of a pick for Democrats.) Soon after Bush unveiled the Miers nomination, David Frum, a former Bush speechwriter, observed:

I worked with Harriet Miers. She's a lovely person: intelligent, honest, capable, loyal, discreet, dedicated....I could pile on the praise all morning. But there is no reason at all to believe either that she is a legal conservative or - and more importantly - that she has the spine and steel necessary to resist the pressures that constantly bend the American legal system toward the left.

I am not saying that she is not a legal conservative. I am not saying that she is not steely. I am saying only that there is no good reason to believe either of these things. Not even her closest associates on the job have no good reason to believe either of these things. In other words, we are being asked by this president to take this appointment purely on trust, without any independent reason to support it. And that is not a request conservatives can safely grant.

So if a former White House co-worker is unclear about Miers's "judicial philosophy," what's a senator to do? It seems it will take much probing to determine whether Miers's views on issues of constitutional law make her a "superb choice." But before any Democratic senator could raise a question, Republican Senator Bill Frist, the majority leader, was telling them not to push for too much information. In a press release, he stated,

As we begin the confirmation process, I hope the Senate continues to move beyond the partisan obstructionism of the recent past. I hope we carry forward the lessons learned from Chief Justice Roberts' nomination....A bipartisan majority of senators also agreed that senators can make an informed decision on the fitness of a judicial nominee by focusing on the individual's qualifications and not her political ideology and by looking at the individual's record, testimony, and writings, without probing into confidential and privileged documents. Finally, a bipartisan majority of senators agreed that we should not ask or expect nominees to compromise their judicial independence by pre-judging cases or issues that may come before the court.

Here was a warning: don't go after documents Miers has written or advice she has given while she has worked in the White House. But that might be necessary to suss out her "judicial philosophy." (By the way, I'd like to see a Democratic senator ask her how the counsel's office has handled the Plame/ CIA leak case. Ms. Miers, can you tell us what advice you gave to the President or anyone else in the White House when evidence recently emerged showing that Karl Rove and Scooter Libby had passed classified national security information to reporters? Can you tell us how the counsel's office reacted to this evidence, which showed that the White House had previously misinformed the public when it declared that Rove and Libby were not involved in this leak?) After decades of defending corporations and a few years working in the White House, there is not much of a record upon which to judge Miers's "judicial philosophy."

Miers has not left many footprints. A quick search of articles in the Lexis-Nexis database disclosed little material of note, certainly no clues. In a profile of her last year, Legal Times described her as "one of the most discreet, most private and most protective members of George W. Bush's inner circle." That profile also noted that her tenure as top domestic policy adviser in the Bush White House was "problematic." Apparently, she was more focused on process than policy. Legal Times reported that "she did raise eyebrows early in Bush's first term by arguing against eliminating the American Bar Association's 50-year-old role of vetting potential federal judiciary nominations, a move led by [then White House Counsel] Gonzales." Miers was defending the institution she once helped lead, but booting the ABA out of the judicial process was a top-priority item for rightwing activists. That's more grist for the conservative bloggers--and more reason for them to wonder where her ideological loyalties lay.

So here's an idea. Perhaps right and left can join forces in a campaign called Harriet, Give It Up! The point would be to demand that she and the White House provide enough details so that senators--and all Americans--have sufficient information to evaluate her "judicial philosophy." If this means answering questions related to Roe v. Wade, so be it. Let's have it all out in the open--and then a real fight. Unlike John Roberts Jr., Miers would replace a swing-vote justice. And many rightists do not want to take a chance. They want a champion upon whom they can count to undo Roe and advance other conservative notions. Prior to the Miers appointment, Senator Sam Brownback, a social conservative Republican from Kansas, said he would want to know much about the next Supreme Court nominee's views before casting a vote. (He is, of course, looking for a Justice who will undermine, if not eliminate, abortion rights.) Brownback should get his wish.

Disappointment among conservative activists and writers is certainly not bad news for Democrats and progressives. But the bottom line remains: Miers is an unknown when it comes to the critical issues facing the Supreme Court and the nation. She sure is no liberal. But will she be a Justice in the mode of Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas--that is, the type of jurist Bush promised his conservative base he would nominate? There is no telling at this point. But isn't it in the interests of both the right and the left to find out before the Senate votes on this all-important nomination?




court-affirmative-action
filibuster
gonzales
roberts
After filibuster fight whitehouse readies for supreme court { May 25 2005 }
Alito memo argues for torture foreigners { November 29 2005 }
Alito rules on case helping his investment funds
Angry americans attempt seizing justice souter property { July 25 2005 }
Ashcroft in contempt of congress senator biden says { June 9 2004 }
Ashcroft retroactively classifies translator sibel edmonds case { July 5 2004 }
Ashcroft says judges threaten national security questioning bush
Attorney general refers to president bush as the client { February 7 2006 }
Bill switches claassaction lawsuits to federal courts
Bush abandons harriet miers nomination
Bush again attempts to push court candidates { December 24 2004 }
Bush attorney general calls owens rulings judicial activism { May 26 2005 }
Bush ex starr aide judgeship { June 19 2003 }
Bush pick miers cited for her religion { October 13 2005 }
Bush puts enduring imprint on nation judiciary { January 15 2006 }
Bush revives candidicies for 20 federal judgeships { February 15 2005 }
Business lobby to get behind judicial bids { January 6 2005 }
Clash over unconstitutional memo { June 9 2004 }
Committee composition dispute
Conservatives rally against gonzales as justice { July 3 2005 }
Conservatives upset over judicial pick miers { October 4 2005 }
Court pick harriet miers most discreet in adminstrative
Court pick harriet miers never has been a judge
Estrada judiciary panel { January 31 2003 }
First alito decision sides with liberals on execution
Frist ethics skeletons
Frist majority leader
Frist seeks chirstain support for judicial nominees { April 25 2005 }
Frist settlement
Frist to end filibusters { May 9 2003 }
Groups sue over erased scalia tapes { May 11 2004 }
Janice rogers brown plays blacks against each other
Journalists ordered to erase scalia speech
Judge admits voiding whistleblower lawsuit draconian { July 7 2004 }
Judge janice brown militant about property rights
Judge no bar { March 17 2001 }
Judicial block
Judicial spare
Lawmakers clash on class action suit bill { July 7 2004 }
Lott not happy with new bush pick
New nominee nicknamed scalito or little scalia { October 31 2005 }
Owens confirmation deals blow to environment { May 25 2005 }
Pickering expected to win { October 1 2003 }
Pickering judicial nomination { December 18 2002 }
Priscilla owens fought by womens rights advocates { May 25 2005 }
Priscilla owens takes enron halliburton money { May 18 2005 }
Roberts avoids specifics during senate hearing { September 15 2005 }
Roberts helped reagan fight sandinistas in nicaragua { August 25 2005 }
Scalia backs police on arrests { December 14 2004 }
Scalia says americans need more orgies { October 1 2004 }
Scalia says detainees have no rights { April 3 2006 }
Scalia says judicial activism renders constitution useless { March 14 2005 }
Scalia says trip with cheney wont effect rulings { March 19 2004 }
Scalia tape erase order raises constitution questions
Scalia thinks americans need more sex orgies { October 1 2004 }
Senate democrats block 3 more bush judicial nominees { July 23 2004 }
Senates new math may aid stalled judicial nominees { February 13 2005 }
Strange judicial vote { November 14 2002 }
Strange judicial vote2 { November 15 2002 }
Supreme court shuffle { May 18 2003 }
Supreme court sides with enron accounting firm { May 31 2005 }
Supreme court vacancy not this year { June 11 2003 }
Syrians lawsuit risks national security says US
Vacancies

Files Listed: 64



Correction/submissions

CIA FOIA Archive

National Security
Archives
Support one-state solution for Israel and Palestine Tea Party bumper stickers JFK for Dummies, The Assassination made simple