Posted on 10/04/2005 3:03:35 PM PDT by new yorker 77
CBN.com – Jay Alan Sekulow is Chief Counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), a law firm and educational organization that specializes in constitutional law. He is also chief counsel of the European Center for Law and Justice (ECLJ). Pat Robertson recently asked Sekulow for an evaluation of his colleague, and latest Supreme Court nominee, Harriet Miers.
PAT ROBERTSON: Well, Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice knows Harriet Miers very well. They pulled a fast one and got Souter in, and the cry now is no more Souters. So is Harriet Miers another gamble by a Republican president?
JAY SEKULOW: No Pat, she's not. There's a significant difference in what happened in the appointment of Justice Souter and now the appointment of Harriet Miers. That was George H.W. Bush...did not have a personal or professional relationship with Judge Souter. He was serving as a court of appeals judge at the time. Here you have a different situation. President Bush has worked with Harriet Miers for over a decade. She has served as his personal counsel, and has served as White House counsel. So he knows her and he knows how she thinks. He knows how her judicial philosophy has developed. So you have a difference of personal knowledge of the legal thinking of the nominee. I think that makes a big difference here.
PAT ROBERTSON: Some of the so-called conservative talking class, chattering class, in Washington, is just screaming bloody murder about this appointment. What's their problem?
SEKULOW: Well, you know, they don’t know her, and that's part of the problem. I think you will see that addressed in the next few days. People will get to know her. And no one should sell this woman short either. I have told some of my friends who are part of the talking class, as you said, Pat, that they're underestimating the prowess of this woman.
She is, number one, been on – twice - a very prestigious list put together by the National Law Journal, one of our biggest publications. That is the 100 most influential lawyers in America -- and that's a significant list. You don't get to be on that list unless you do understand the inner workings of the law and how it develops, and what a judicial philosophy is supposed to be. So she has been on that list. She is a thinker in that regard. She is well respected by those who have worked with her and understand -- look, she's been involved heavily in this process of picking judicial nominees. And there's not one nominee that the President has put forward that any of us has objected to, and I think that's in large part because of what her involvement has been.
There's another historical fact. I thought David Brody's piece was very interesting on the history. Do you know the last time there was an evangelical nominated to the Supreme Court? Back in the 1930s. This is a big opportunity for those of us who share an evangelical faith in Christianity to see someone with our positions put on a court. She was a very active member of an evangelical church in Dallas…I think she's going to be a good pick. The fact that she's not a judge, I say thank the Lord for that. We needed somebody who wasn't a judge to be on the Supreme Court, to move things around a little bit.
ROBERTSON: It's amazing that Harry Reid said he thinks really highly of her. She must have won some significant points with the senators when she was talking about other judges.
SEKULOW: She has a very personal demeanor. She’s not confrontive by nature, but as President Bush said, she [can be] a bulldog. She is kind of a steel fist in a velvet glove. She is a tough litigator. She represented big companies, she understands what was at stake when you adjudicate a case in front of the jury. She consistently advocated a strong litigation policy. So I think when she gets into these individual meetings with these senators, much like John Roberts, she does a very, very effective job of conveying her message. And she is somebody of significance, and I think as we get to know her, as the America people get to know her, they're going to like what they see. Look, the criticism is not illegitimate in the sense that people don't know her. But what I'm telling some of our friends, don't judge this woman until you get to know her better. And when you get to know her, you are going to be very impressed.
ROBERTSON: Senator [Arlen] Specter is apparently pushing this nomination. Everybody is talking about how nice it would be, before Thanksgiving. Some are saying the first week or so of December. Do you have any take on how long it will be?
SEKULOW: I certainly hope it will be before Thanksgiving because there are many cases, many of which the American Center for Law and Justice is involved in. We have the Rico case and the parental notification case on November 30. In fact, our second round of briefs will be filed in October. The court is, has with it right now, a petition for review followed by our friend, the solicitor general of the United States, Paul Clement, on the issue of partial-birth abortion. So I think it's realistic now that the court is going to grant review. And, in fact, the ACLJ - we're representing members of the House and Senate who actually wrote the law on partial-birth abortion. So I think we'll have a partial- birth abortion ban case at the Supreme Court this term. So you look at what's at stake. We need her sooner rather than later.
ROBERTSON: What's the chance of passing the word? I mean, it looks like the Democrats, they're holding their fire, it's amazing. She is kind of a little woman, and you cannot imagine these great big old Democrats beating up on a little woman. That does not play well on television, so these hearings could go by quickly.
SEKULOW: You know, I think it will be like the old days where they do go by quickly. This is one smart woman. You don't get to be the head of the Texas bar without being tough. You don't get to be the managing partner of your almost 300-person law firm without being smart. And remember something that is being overlooked by some. In the middle 1990s -- you’ll remember this -- in the 1990s, there was a huge controversy within the ABA because they took a pro-abortion position for the first time in history. And do you know who led the charge against the ABA? She was an ABA delegate - Harriet Miers. She thought they should not be doing that. Ultimately and unfortunately, the position that she advocated, and we supported, did not prevail on the ABA delegates, but she led the charge to get the ABA to reverse its position on this. I'm quite optimistic that we have the right nominee here. A little bit different because she’s not a judge, but again, I think that's a plus.
ROBERTSON: Well, thank you, Jay, for being with us. Ladies and gentlemen, no more Souters. And I applaud the President. I think on this one, so far, every single pick of the President of judicial nominees has been superb. Every single one. And I think he deserves our trust on this one. He knows this woman. He promised the American electorate, if you elect me, I'm going to put in strict constructionist judges, and he's going to fulfill that vow to the American people. And this pick is in keeping with that vow.
You gotta dance with the one that brung ya.
The question is (assuming she IS everything we could want), will the administration have to go SO far in convincing the right that she's "the one" that the left will catch on and sandbag her?
I think that many of the Democrats that are supporting Miers are doing so simply because they know that expressing their support will cause conservatives anguish. Many of us will think that, since Harry Reid is voicing his excitement, that automatically means that Miers must be anathema to everything that conservatism holds dear. They want conservatives to be in disarray.
That's just conjecture, of course. But considering the visceral hatred the liberals have for President Bush, I have to be skeptical of their suddenly cheering for one of his nominees. No Bush nominee could ever be sufficiently far left to make the liberals genuinely happy.
Miers may very well be one of the greatest of President Bush's mistakes. But she may also be a very faithful conservative. I'll wait to learn a little more before I get my panties in a wad.
Several thousand years ago, Sun Tsu, in his everlasting book named, "The Art of War" which has been studied by every military since, said, " The best general wins the battle without firing a single shot".
Does this sound like GWB? Do not play Texas hold-em with GWB.
Jay is a solid citizen.
How about this: plausible denial?
IOW, Reid knows Miers is probably quite conservative, but he also knows WE the people don't know that.
So he can go along saying what a swell gal she is and when she turns out later to be exactly what the Rat base despises, he can claim: How was I to know?
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.