Posted on 10/21/2005 10:13:21 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
Harriet Miers will not join the Supreme Court.
It may seem a little early to say that; Miers's Judiciary Committee hearings, after all, don't even start for two weeks. But given the news this week, I think it's a pretty sturdy limb I'm out on.
John Fund reported on Monday that Texas Supreme Court Justice Nathan Hecht and Dallas-based federal Judge Ed Kinkeade, both friends of Miers's, apparently assured social conservative leaders on a conference call that Miers would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. Hecht and Kinkeade deny it, but two of Robert Novak's sources, who were on the call, confirm Fund's story. And in a document issued to the Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, it was revealed that Miers pledged, in a questionnaire she filled out for the Texans United for Life Political Action Committee (TUL-PAC) during her 1989 campaign for Dallas City Council, to support various pro-life policies, including a Human Life Amendment. That may do a little to reassure some conservatives on Miers, but it won't be enough to earn her monolithic support from the Right. After all, if Miers is defeated or withdrawn, her replacement will almost certainly be at least as reliably conservative as Miers, who, as I noted last week, appears to believe that public universities can constitutionally employ race-based admission policies.
Democrats might have concluded that it would be better to back Miers than risk facing a stronger conservative. But after the latest revelations about her pro-life views, Miers can expect almost no support from the party of Roe v. Wade.
Consider just the Judiciary Committee. Unless she explicitly declares fealty to upholding Roe, the five Democrats who voted against John Roberts won't vote for her. The three who did vote for Roberts -- Herb Kohl of Wisconsin, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, and Patrick Leahy of Vermont -- did so on the grounds that the overwhelming qualifications of the nominee trumped their ideological concerns. With Miers, the qualifications are significantly less and the ideological concerns are now arguably greater. Miers will probably not get even a single vote from the Committee's eight Democrats.
She can't count on Committee Republicans, either. Another conservative Committee member, Jeff Sessions of Alabama, commented after the TUL-PAC questionnaire came out that Miers still needs to "show she has the capacity to be a Supreme Court justice." The New York Times reported two weeks ago that after meeting with Miers, conservative Committee member Sam Brownback of Kansas "said he would consider voting against the nomination, even if President Bush made a personal plea for his support." And squishy Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, along with ranking Democrat Leahy, it was reported yesterday, was very displeased with Miers's "incomplete" answers to a Judiciary Committee questionnaire.
Under a bipartisan agreement, Supreme Court nominations can't be killed in committee. But if all the Committee Democrats and even one Republican vote against her, the vote will be 9-9 and Miers will go to the Senate floor without a recommendation that she be approved. This will make it much harder to get Miers confirmed on the Senate floor. It will be harder still -- probably impossible -- if ten or more Senators vote against her in committee.
"This is going to be an unusual hearing," says Specter, "where I think all 18 senators are going to have probing questions." There's not much reason to think that Miers can skillfully navigate that buzzsaw.
Her nomination is doomed.
Doomed??? Someone should tell Bush.
Get ready for Alberto Gonzales.
look, bottom line is, she may well be a fine lady. She probably has many of the same values as me and other conservatives. But she has not shown that she has a strong enough intellect to withstand the suasions and appeals to emotion that will be used by her liberal comrades on the bench. There is great temptation for justices to become heady and more liberal once they hold the reins of power (Souter, anyone?). She's too much of a risk.
Do you REALLY think that Bush would be stupid enough to nominate Gonzales if he sees Miers get voted down by his own party?
If I were Bush, here's what I would consider doing: I would not nominate anyone until late next summer just before the Congressional election campaign started.
Then, I would nominate Gonzalez and watch them sweat.
All this is, of course, dependent upon what's on the docket for this term.
Ar-g-g-g-g-g-h!
But seriously, I think that's unlikely.
If W withdraws Miers, it will be in large part because he realized that he cannot afford to alienate his conservative base. Nominating Gonzales on top of Miers would be such a provocation to the right that it would make the rift permanent and in many ways doom the Bush presidency. I'm optimistic that if Miers is withdrawn the next nominee would be much better qualified and more palatable to conservatives.
I don't know who this Tabin fellow is, but I think he is correct.
Ms. Miers is a weak nominee.
If you're right then Bush would be 0 for 2.
Moving on.
Doomed??? Someone should tell Bush.
I am predicting that W will eventually conclude that the Miers nomination is doomed and withdraw it. But even if he decides to see it through to the bitter end, it might still be doomed - it's the Senate, after all, that gets to decide, not W.
Miers will go through. JMO.
Democrats might have concluded that it would be better to back Miers than risk facing a stronger conservative.
----
Of course. That is why they were "happy" with Meirs. They see her as a soft spot. An easy touch. Bush really let us down with her selection, in lieu of a STRONG, ESTABLISHED, WELL-KNOWN stand-up CONSERVATIVE.
i don't think there's a dime difference between Miers or Gonzales..........except Gonzales is alot more versed in the constitution and obviously alot smarter. I'm a woman and this is setting back conservative women who like to make it because they are qualified not because they are a friend of the Presidents.
If I were Bush, here's what I would consider doing: I would not nominate anyone until late next summer just before the Congressional election campaign started.
Then, I would nominate Gonzalez and watch them sweat.
Without wishing to offend my fellow FReepers who support Miers, those who agree that the nomination is going down are invited to participate in my pool to guess the date and time of the nomination's withdrawal.
Grand Prize: a Wal-Mart jumbo-sized eraser.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1506652/posts
My theory is he knows--he's just unbelievable cheesed off at her for something. Maybe she badgered him for the appointment. So now he's letting her endure the full humiliation, as punishment.
Good Lord I hope not.
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.