[Steven W.]

One thing I'd like to see I'm surprised nobody has done yet is a comparison of the two Edith's votes on the Appeals Court as they sit alongside each other and it would be worthy to see how often they agree and under what circumstances they disagree. My impression thus far is that Edith I is a more promising nominee from the constitutional perspective but that Edith II is the better public choice for SCOTUS scrutiny.

[Iwo Jima]

Neither Edith is among my first five choices. But Edith I is of proven constitutional philosophy and is VERY strong-willed. She is however a poor public speaker and simply lousy at Q & A even before friendly audiences like the Federalist Society.

Edith I also has views on the criminal justice system which are too strong for even the conservative 5th Circuit and are just unacceptable in my view. The Burdine opinion in which she joined was simply awful, so much so that the 5th Circuit sitting en banc reversed it, a very rare occurrence. This case will give the Dems very effective tools to oppose her.

Having thought about it, I have concluded that Edith I would do less harm with those views on the Supreme Court where she would have to get 4 other votes and Scalia and Thomas would ask her if she were crazy, than on the 5th Circuit where she only needs to get one other justice, like the crazy Rhesa Barksdale, to go along with her.

So I am OK with Edith I. I just fear that her Burdine opinion will doom her nomination. The first time I read Burdine, my very first thought was "Edith, Edith, Edith, you have blown your chance to be on the Supreme Court now." I would not be displeased to be proven wrong.