Posted on 10/05/2005 5:10:11 AM PDT by OESY
Although the ink is still drying on her nomination, the president's selection Monday of Harriet Miers to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor has already been met with praise from senators on both sides of the aisle. As one would expect, her nomination has also been met with questions by those who do not yet know her. But those of us who do know and have worked with Ms. Miers think very highly of her, and we believe she will make a valuable contribution to the Supreme Court.
Nonetheless, some have criticized the president because he did not select an Ivy-League-credentialed federal appeals court judge for the open seat. I think this criticism is misplaced. For one thing, there is no evidence that service on the federal court of appeals is a prerequisite for distinguished service on the Supreme Court: 41 of the 109 justices who have served on the Supreme Court had no judicial experience at all when they were nominated. These include several luminaries from the school of judicial restraint, including the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
Furthermore, Harriet Miers's background as a legal practitioner is an asset, not a detriment. She has spent her career representing real people in courtrooms across America. This is precisely the type of experience that the Supreme Court needs. The court is full of justices who served as academics and court of appeals judges before they were nominated to the bench. What the court is missing is someone who understands the consequences of its decisions on the American people....
The court is dangerously out of touch with America. Ms. Miers will help bring it back down to earth.
Ultimately, I think some people are uneasy about Harriet Miers because they are unfamiliar with her....
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
John Cornyn is a liberal Bushbot.
Actually he's more Conservative than most, in the Senate.
Great opinion piece by John Cronyn, someone who has known Ms. Miers for years, and is convinced of her abilities and suitability for the Supreme Court. He mentions what I had thought when I heard she was not of the 'legal elite'. She's been dealing personally with the law, and the consequences of bad laws and poor judicial decisions for many years as a courtroom lawyer. She'll bring something to the Supremes they haven't had in years; a dose of REALITY!!
Oops! Transposition error. It's Cornyn, not Cronyn.
Very true BUMP!
The luminaries there now thought Kelo was good for the people.
Just about every ruling brings a further insult to the daily lives of Americans.
No to the Ten Commandments, No to parental notification of minors getting abortions, No to Christmas decorations in the public square.
Just what we need, more of the same!
Here's a good piece on Harriet Miers, without the hand-wringing.
I will also add that he will be representing Ms. Miers, as will Kay Bailey Hutchinson, at the confirmation hearings.
I know that. The statement was tinged with dripping sarcasm. I should have tagged it.
Not exactly compliments for the 7 known Justices on the court. I think judges that tack left once appointed are falling victim to their own percived intellect. They come to believe they are smarter than written law and start making decisions based on their own thoughts and not what is written.
I am tired of this bogus reverse-snobbery used to brush away the disappointment conservatives feel over this appt. Maybe Miers will work out just great. Maybe she's the Common Sense judge I'm hoping for.
But I don't see, after all our faith and work...why do we have to "hope for the best"--
Good read and thanks for posting.
I'm reserving judgement until the hearings. I think that is the reasonable thing to do.
I do agree with some other FReepers who have indicated that Dr. Miers will indeed be the legacy of President Bush. If she turns out to be something other than what he stated, his legacy will be really damaged. I respect his remarks that he trusts her, and I think that's an important consideration. I just believe that people will (and rightly so) hold him responsible for how she does on the USSC.
I must admit I'm concerned.......
Harry Reid and Leahy (sp) both say
they asked Bush to nominate her.
"Not exactly compliments for the 7 known Justices on the court."
There hasn't been a lot to compliment them on of late, has there? But the FR representatives of the judicial-academic complex want their pound of flesh.
She often gets to the Whitehouse at 5AM, leaves at 9PM, and has been leaned on heavily by GWB and his staff for years. She has practiced law for years, and served 2 years on the city council in Dallas. She does not have an elite education, nor is she a blue blood.
She's simply a hard working, plain spoken Texan who actually practices her faith in an admirable fashion. Seems like she's a reflection of the base of the Republican party, yet many are bent out of shape over her.
Rehnquist and many others did not have judicial experience before serving on the court. I am thrilled with GWB for nominating her, and methinks many senators will be surprised to learn that she is one tough cookie if they try to corner her. This is gonna' be fun.
What a nonsensical statement. Here's the record:
2004 According to the National Journal - Liberal on Social Policy's calculations, in 2004, Senator Cornyn voted more liberal on social policy issues than 0 percent of the Senators.
2004 According to the National Journal - Liberal on Economic Policy's calculations, in 2004, Senator Cornyn voted more liberal on economic policy issues than 5 percent of the Senators.
2004 According to the National Journal - Conservative on Economic Policy calculations, in 2004 Senator Cornyn voted more conservative on economic policy issues than 91 percent of Senators.
2004 According to the National Journal - Liberal on Foreign Policy's calculations, in 2004, Senator Cornyn voted more liberal on foreign policy issues than 33 percent of the Senators.
2004 According to the National Journal - Conservative on Foreign Policy's calculations, in 2004, Senator Cornyn voted more conservative on foreign policy issues than 61 percent of the Senators.
2004 According to the National Journal - Conservative on Social Policy's calculations, in 2004, Senator Cornyn voted more conservative on social policy issues than 84 percent of the Senators.
2003 According to the National Journal - Conservative on Economic Policy's calculations, in 2003, Senator Cornyn voted more conservative on economic policy issues than 82 percent of the Senators.
With instant search, why do people insist on making false and innacurate staements on FR???
FYI
RUSH is on Bill Bennett's show right now....
http://www.wjgr.com/default.aspx
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.