Nomination for the Supreme Court

[Tigermike 3,425]

Bush Picks Miers for Supreme Court

Monday, October 03, 2005

By Liza Porteus

WASHINGTON — President Bush on Monday chose White House counsel Harriet Miers (search) to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor (search) on the U.S. Supreme Court.

"She will be an outstanding addition to the Supreme Court of the United States," Bush said during a press conference announcing his pick.

Saying she has a "record of achievement with the law," Bush said Miers also has "built a reputation of character and integrity" and possesses a "deep compassion and abiding sense of duty."

"She will bring that same passion for service to the Supreme Court of the United States," he added.

If confirmed, Miers, 60, would join Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (search) as the second woman presently serving on the nation's highest court.

"I am very grateful for the confidence in me that you've shown by this nomination and certainly I am humbled by it," Miers told Bush during the press conference.

The White House is describing the nominee as "a woman of many firsts," including being one of the first staff members to arrive at the White House each morning and among the last to leave. She is known for thoroughness and her low-profile.

When Bush named her White House counsel in November 2004, the president described Miers as a lawyer with keen judgment and discerning intellect — "a trusted adviser on whom I have long relied for straightforward advice."

He added: "When it comes to a cross-examination, she can filet better than Mrs. Paul."

In making his announcement on Monday, Bush stressed that his nominee will not legislate from the bench. Conservative Republicans in recent years have complained that too many judges have been "activist" in their rulings in not strictly interpreting the Constitution on issues such as gay marriage and end-of-life issues.

"It is the responsibility of every generation to be true to the founders' vision of the proper role of the courts in our society," Miers said. "If confirmed, I recognize that I will have a tremendous responsibility to keep our judicial system strong and to help ensure that the courts meet their obligations to strictly apply the laws and the Constitution."

Supporters call Miers a great lawyer who understands the limited role they think judges should play in society and the importance of strictly adhering to the Constitution.

"In nominating Ms. Miers, the president has reaffirmed his commitment to appointing judges who will respect the rule of law and not legislate from the bench," said Noel Francisco, former assistant White House counsel and deputy assistant attorney general during the Bush administration.

Miers headed for the Capitol to begin courtesy calls on the senators who will vote on her nomination within hours of being nominated.

Senate Republicans said they would press for confirmation by Thanksgiving.

"It is an enormous appointment, replacing Justice O'Connor, and we will be very, very thorough. To the extent we can meet a timetable we will but thoroughness will be our goal," Senate Judiciary Committee Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said after a meeting with Miers.

Later in a press conference, Specter added: "Everything I know about Ms. Miers is good but I do not know a great deal about her professional activities or her academic standing or her work in her legal career, which appears to be a very distinguished career. ... There needs to be, obviously, a very thorough inquiry into her background as a lawyer and her activities."

Appeasing Both Side of the Aisle

A lawyer who has never been a judge, Miers was the first woman to serve as president of the Texas State Bar and Dallas Bar Association. She also was the first woman to become president of a large law firm in Texas — Locke, Purnell, Rain & Harrell — with a staff of 200 attorneys.

White House officials and some political observers said Miers is conservative enough to satisfy the president's supporters and does not have a lengthy legal record that could give Democrats much ammunition against her.

But others say Bush perhaps took the easy way out by picking Miers rather than someone like Priscilla Owen (search), who undoubtedly would be more controversial but more pleasing to conservatives.

"It looks an awful lot like he flinched," said Bill Kristol, a FOX News contributor and publisher of The Weekly Standard. "He put up someone with no judicial record and it's hard to interpret that as anything but flinching from a fight."

Republican strategists said they would have to work hard to assure the support of some of the more conservative Republicans in the Senate. All 55 GOP senators voted to confirm Roberts.

But not all conservatives are shrugging at the nomination.

"I think she is a wonderful choice. She has gone through some of the same experiences Sandra Day O'Connor" did and is considered one of the top lawyers in Texas, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, told FOX News.

"I think it's very important to have someone on the bench who has been a practicing lawyer ... you need that real-world experience that brings another dimension to the Supreme Court."

Senate Democrats for months have been warning Bush to pick what they call a "consensus nominee" whose ideology lies somewhere in America's "mainstream." They also continuously called on the president to include them in nomination discussions to make sure the person who was chosen for the court appealed to both sides of the aisle.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the president consulted with more than 80 senators on the nominee to replace O'Connor. Miers had initiated several of those contacts between White House and the Senate.

"They recognized that she is someone who had the kind of qualifications and experience and judgment that was needed to serve on the nation's highest court," McClellan said, adding that Bush and Miers met several times about the potential nominee before Bush made the decision on Sunday night to nominate his longtime friend and colleague.

McClellan said Bush called White House Chief of Staff Andy Card Sunday night to inform him of his choice, then Card called newly-installed Chief Justice John Roberts (search) early on Monday morning before Miers was notified by the president of his final decision around 7:15 a.m.

"She has earned the respect and admiration of the legal profession and she will earn the respect and admiration of the American people," McClellan added.

Democrats are under pressure from liberal interest groups to fight Bush's second Supreme Court pick, and many observers speculated prior to the nomination that the fight for O'Connor's seat would be even more brutal than that Roberts, who started his new job on Monday morning. Confirmed last week on a 78-22 vote, Democrats were evenly split on confirming Roberts.

Some Republicans have said they believe Democrats may even attempt to filibuster (search) Bush's pick for the court because Roberts got a pass, even if the nominee isn't necessarily that far out of the mainstream.

"My view on that is, the Constitution does not allow for a supermajority to be appointed to the Supreme Court," Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, told FOX News Monday morning. "Never has a filibuster stopped somebody from being on the Supreme Court."

Bush said the "American people expect Harriet's hearing to be handled with the same respect and civility that characterized the last three Supreme Court nominations" of Roberts, Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.

Sen. John Cornyn, the Texas Republican who served as a type of point-person in the Senate for the administration while Roberts was being shepherded through the confirmation process, said Bush's pick is a great choice.

"It is important that we put aside partisanship, and that the Senate fulfill its constitutional responsibility of advice and consent," he said. "This fine nominee must be treated with civility and respect, not as a political pawn. I hope that we in the Senate can move forward in a manner worthy of the American people."

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid issued a statement saying he likes Miers and adding "the Supreme Court would benefit from the addition of a justice who has real experience as a practicing lawyer." Reid had personally recommended that Bush consider Miers for nomination, according to several sources familiar with the president's consultations with senators.

Lack of a Paper Trail

Bush noted Monday that neither the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist (search) nor did 35 other Supreme Court nominees had judicial experience before being named to the country's highest court. He also reminded the country that both Republicans and Democrats have encouraged a nominee that doesn't necessarily have a judicial background.

Reid said he looked forward to the "process which will help the American people learn more about Harriet Miers, and help the Senate determine whether she deserves a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court."

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., was up in arms when Roberts would not give details on his opinions on certain hot-button issues or cases that likely would come before the court during his confirmation hearings.

"There is some hope that Harriet Miers is a mainstream nominee, a very preliminary view indicates very little that she wouldn't be," Schumer said during a press conference Monday. "This is a good first day in the process that begins to fill the seat of Sandra Day O'Connor."

Schumer said Bush has recognized that "the views of the extremist wing of his party are not the views of the American people."

"We are certainly, we Democrats, are going to look at this nominee with a complete and open mind," he added. "Having said that, we know less of this nominee than we did about John Roberts in terms of" judicial philosophy and temperament.

With no record, observers say the White House and Miers should be prepared for a firing squad of questions during her Senate confirmation.

Asked if Democrats will be tougher on Miers than they were on Roberts, FOX News Supreme Court analyst Tim O'Brien said, "I don't know if toughness is the word.

"This is such a critical appointment. She is going to be subjected to the most exacting scrutiny and I think that's appropriate … they are going to challenge her understanding of constitutional law."

Grassley said Miers has "kind of a blank slate" as far as judicial history is concerned.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat from California who voted against Roberts after saying she simply did not know enough about his views to be comfortable voting to confirm him, said Monday that while she's had some "good conversations" with Miers, the lack of judicial record will require careful scrutiny.

"My view is, always wait for the hearings" and do due diligence before forming an opinion, Feinstein said. "I'm delighted by the fact that she is a woman … Sandra Day O'Connor leaves behind big shoes … this is a very pivotal nominee."

O'Connor was considered a swing voter on the court for years who has cast deciding votes on some affirmative action, abortion and death penalty cases.

Formerly Bush's personal lawyer in Texas, Miers came with the president to the White House as his staff secretary, the person in charge of all the paperwork that crosses the Oval Office desk. Miers was promoted to deputy chief of staff in June 2003.

She grew up in Dallas, earning her undergraduate and law degrees from Southern Methodist University. She also served as a member-at-large on the Dallas City Council. In 1992, she became the first women president of the Texas State Bar. She was the first woman of the Dallas Bar Association in 1985.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,171050,00.html

[Wishbone 0]

It's sad to see how far the party has fallen since Reagan. Bush Jr. has been as elitist and liberal as his father. Very disappointing given the tremendous opportunity that he had.

[channonc 466]

Out of curiousity, who would you rather he nominated?

I have no opinion as of yet, about Miers, so I am curious as to why you immediately dislike this nomination.

Also, since when has GW ever been labeled liberal.

[Wishbone 0]

His father was a moderate conservative for New England elitist liberals. Reagan was feared by the republican establishment and they forced him to pick Bush sr. is a backroom deal. I would like to see someone the Republican elites hate, a Reagan type.

The real question is what has he done that is conservative. Everything he has done has been half-ass and luke warm.

[channonc 466]

Ok, so how does that relate to the SC nominee? Right now, we know NOTHING about her. Other than she is a WH counsel.

Once we know more, you are entitled to your own opinion... I am just baffled at how you have arrived at an opinion based on no real facts.

[Piglet 0]

Oh, pre-judging people is a great American pastime. Already, the extreme left is screaming their lungs out because they're sure she's a closet fascist, and the extreme right is screaming just as loud because they're sure she isn't.

Me, I'm getting out the popcorn and beer and intend to sit back and enjoy the carnage.

Oh, and apparently Miers has her own blog: http://harrietmiers.blogspot.com/ Read it while you can--I'm sure it will be taken down well before any hearings...

[WarTim 3,463]

Just curious, Who thinks Thomas Jefferson was a right wing wacko? What about George Washington?

[AUloggerhead 2,356]

Ok, so how does that relate to the SC nominee?  Right now, we know NOTHING about her.  Other than she is a WH counsel. 

Once we know more, you are entitled to your own opinion... I am just baffled at how you have arrived at an opinion based on no real facts.

186073[/snapback]

Well for one thing, we know she's never been a judge before. I know there's no official requirement for a presidential appointee to be a judge but geez louise, this is the Supreme Court -- you know, the NFL Pro Bowl football equivalent in the judicial realm. One would think a seasoned pro might be a no-brainer pick to put on the SC bench. Why should ANY president appoint his WH counsel when there are obviously many more actual practicing judges to choose from? Color me suspicious but this pick smacks of cronyism. I know I wouldn't have liked it if bill clinton had done the same thing.

IMHO, the one question that applies here: is Harriet Miers the best choice Bush could have made?

Not just no, but HE!! NO!

[CCTAU 3,369]

So we should always get a professional? Bullcrap. I, for one, like the fact that she has no "sit on my ass and do nothing from a bench" experience. Half of the people on the SC do not even write their own briefs. So because she has never been a judge, its cronyism. Cronyism would be if she were not qualified. She is more than qualified and would bring a fresh outlook to a stale group. I like the idea of somebody thats been hanging out mostly on my side of the courtroom, speaking for me. Many judges have sat on the SC in disgrace. Being a judge does not automatically qualify a person and is not always the best deciding factor. If she goes through the proceedings with no glaring tendencies, then I find no problem with her nomination.

[AUloggerhead 2,356]

cro·ny·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (krn-zm)

n.

Favoritism shown to old friends without regard for their qualifications, as in political appointments to office.

I'm sure a court reporter or a bailiff could give you a "fresh outlook" on the SC proceedings, too. For that matter, any new face would provide a "fresh outlook" by virture of never having been there before. Bottom line is the position she's being nominated for is a SC justice. She's never been a judge before, not even a run of the mill county judge, and now she's going to get lifetime appointment as one of the top judges in the country? In any profession, rookies make mistakes. We can go round & round about her qualifications to be a SC justice but that absence of any judicial apprenticeship on her resume raises a red flag with me. It's Bush's call to nominate someone and I'll accept that. However, this is one time I won't mind if the Senate blocks his nominee or not.

[DKW 86 7,726]

Oh, pre-judging people is a great American pastime.  Already, the extreme left is screaming their lungs out because they're sure she's a closet fascist, and the extreme right is screaming just as loud because they're sure she isn't.

Me, I'm getting out the popcorn and beer and intend to sit back and enjoy the carnage.

Oh, and apparently Miers has her own blog:  http://harrietmiers.blogspot.com/  Read it while you can--I'm sure it will be taken down well before any hearings...

186082[/snapback]

And right on time, someone from the Left used the F-word again.

fas·cism

Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces

1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality

1) centralized autocratic government: Bush noimnates a Lefty, how is this autocratic?

2) headed by a dictatorial leader: Bush, he can barely make a decision.

3) severe economic regimentation: Just laughable in the America.

4) social regimentation: Most diverse country in the world, Bush was nominating a minority to the SC. Dems stopped him from nominating GANZALEZ!

5) forcible suppression of opposition: Right, just more baloney, where has a Dem been FORCIBLY SUPPRESSED?

[Piglet 0]

fas·cism

Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces

1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality

1) centralized autocratic government: Bush noimnates a Lefty, how is this autocratic?

2) headed by a dictatorial leader: Bush, he can barely make a decision.

3) severe economic regimentation: Just laughable in the America.

4) social regimentation: Most diverse country in the world, Bush was nominating a minority to the SC. Dems stopped him from nominating GANZALEZ!

5) forcible suppression of opposition: Right, just more baloney, where has a Dem been FORCIBLY SUPPRESSED?

186709[/snapback]

Yup. And the extreme left is mad at the administration because they think it fits that definition, and the extreme right is mad because they think it doesn't. You got it in a nutshell.

[DKW 86 7,726]

Zoom, right over his head....

No debate, just banter....

No facts, just

the extreme left is mad at the administration because they think it fits that definition

And I guess that is what they get for THINKING! Whiny Opines do not make facts.

For your info, no one on the Right wants a Fascisti in office. We want freedom of speech, freedom to worship, freedom from Socialism, etc. even the freedom to try and FAIL!

Final Shot: Mama said: "Those who have to resort to calling names have already lost the argument." But that was the first step in all Liberal discourse. Next I will be called a racist or accused of supporting "racist" policies. Typical...

The above was meant as a personal slam. More like a Lib in general slam.