Stingray blogsite: Conservative Christian Commentary
Posted on 10/07/2005 12:56:04 PM PDT by DallasMike
Miers pressed Bush to let court decide lawyer fees WASHINGTON -- President Bush praises Harriet Miers as an opponent of legislating from the judicial bench, but as a corporate lawyer she lobbied then-Gov. Bush to let the Texas high court rather than the Legislature decide if attorney fees should be limited. In the process, Miers unleashed a verbal assault on trial lawyers who typically file lawsuits and whose cases sometimes land in the U.S. Supreme Court, where Bush now has nominated her to serve. She suggested they were "greedy" and had "brought shame" on Texas. As a corporate attorney in 1995, Miers stepped into a battle between trial lawyers and proponents of limiting lawsuits. She pressed the future president to veto legislation that would have blocked the Texas Supreme Court from limiting attorney fees. ... Bush, who made limits on lawsuits a priority as Texas governor, vetoed the legislation as Miers wanted. The bill was sponsored by a Democrat and supported by the Texas Trial Lawyers Association. It would have barred the court, which has disciplinary power over Texas lawyers, from adopting rules that interfered with an attorney's ability "to contract in the free market to provide legal services for a fee" or that discouraged competition "among attorneys to provide legal services at reasonable fees." ... "Harriet is a supporter of President Bush's tort reform agenda, and I don't think she's made any bones about that. But at the same time I believe she's a lawyer's lawyer and believes strongly in how we run our bar in Texas and that lawyers should discipline themselves," Whitehurst said. ... Full text of the letter to Bush is at: http://wid.ap.org/scotus/miers/1995letter.pdf Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
(Excerpt) Read more at kristv.com ...
Stingray blogsite: Conservative Christian Commentary
She gets better and better!
I have the same concerns about like everyone else, but she is growing on me, slowly. I also think that the ICC stuff was debunked too.
This actually makes me like her a little.
I can't say I disagree with her here.
That is not legislating from the bench, no matter how her opponents might try to twist it.
Yes, she keeps looking better and better.
Sounds good to me. That makes me feel a lot better.
Either this article was poorly written, I'm as dumb as a box of rocks, or a little of both. It sounds to me as if Miers was lobbying against a law that would have prohibited the Texas Supreme Court from limiting attorney fees, presumably in those lucrative class-action suits. In other words, if Bush signed the bill, lawyers could charge whatever they wished in class action lawsuits, but if he didn't sign it then the state Supreme Court could have limited those fees to something reasonable.
Since in some class action lawsuits the plaintiffs end up with a coupon worth $10 off their next purchase while the lawfirms make off with millions, it sounds like a good thing to me.
What a bunch of crap. This article tries to paint Miers as legislating from the bench when in fact the veto is anything but that.
If she had petitioned the court to legislate then that would be something BUT she petitioned the Governor, an elected official to use his constitutional power to veto.
Freepers who glom unto this obviously twisted view should refrain from calling themselves freepers.
Before I forget.
Bush vetoed something?
Exactly. Miers wasn't on the bench but was writing in her capacity as former president of the State Bar of Texas. As a useful background, note that much of Texas politics -- especially the Democrat party -- is heavily run by trial attorneys. The trial attorneys didn't want the Republican-heavy courts from limiting their fees.
Yeah, that was back in the good old days. Actually, the veto is about the only power that a Texas governor has.
Hey! she has been saying and acting on what we all knew!!!
The sooner she is on the Supreme Court the better.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.