The Last Line of Defense (Miers' Record Indicates She Is To The Left Of O'Connor)

Red State.Org ^ | 10/26/05 | Leon H

[TitansAFC]

We have known she's probably to the left of O'Connor for a while now. The only question was Roe.

Now we need to start asking if she's to the left of Kennedy; that's the real question.

[ConservativeDude]

Stop the worry. GWB knows her heart, and she's very pious.

That's enough...isn't it? (sound of crickets chirping...)

[Cicero]

Legislating religion or morality we gave up on a long time ago.

Hmm. I find this use of a favorite code phrase of the leftists deeply disturbing. How many times have they told us "We mustn't legislate morality"? By which they mean, we mustn't legislate your morality, only ours.

If the law shouldn't be based on moral judgments, what should it be based on?

No, it isn't the job of the Supreme Court to legislate morality. But neither is it their job to constantly strike down perfectly valid laws on the basis that they "legislate morality." The recent decision finding a constitutional right to buggery was one such instance.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Which makes you ask (oh please forgive me everyone, but it is too obvious to not say), what did he know about Miers and when did he know it.

[peyton randolph]

The recent decision finding a constitutional right to buggery was one such instance.

That was a professional courtesy decision made so that David Souter and his boyfriend wouldn't be arrested for sodomy when vacationing in the South.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

We have known she's probably to the left of O'Connor for a while now. The only question was Roe. Now we need to start asking if she's to the left of Kennedy; that's the real question.

BTW, do you see Kennedy as being to the left of O'Connor? I'm not sure, but I always thought they were about equal, only they got there differently. O'Connor found liberalism through appeasement. Split the baby! Kennedy found it through authoritarian libertarianism. What do you think of that theory?

[Raquel]

BUMP, Now I'm really starting to worry...

[freespirited]

It would help if someone who has access to Lexis-Nexus could retrieve recent speeches she has given. FOX quoted from one the other day. She said something like "none of us can rest until there is no difference in pay between men and women." The occasion was Law Day. I thought FOX said she gave it last year but a post by someone else indicated the year was 1997.

Can anyone retrieve the speech? It is not on the net best I can tell. Any speech she has given recently is likely to help everyone--pro, con, or undecided--understand where she currently stands.

[feralcat]

Some of the Miers defenders have been making the case that conservatives shouldn't worry that Miers was a Democrat for so many years because Texas Democrats were conservatives.

Many Texas Democrats were conservatives, but this speech proves that Harriet wasn't one of them.

With the revelation of this speech, I think that those who try to pretend that Miers is a judicial conservative are going to be in about the same position as those who argued that the Rather memo wasn't written with Microsoft Word.

[counterpunch]

Compare Harriet Miers's answer to question #28 on the Senate Judiciary Committee's questionnaire to the wording of the majority opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the 1992 case which reaffirmed Roe v. Wade and expanded abortion rights:

"Any decision to revisit a precedent should follow only the most careful consideration of the factors that courts have deemed relevant to the question. Thus, whether a prior decision is wrong is only the beginning of the inquiry. The court must also consider other factors, such as whether the prior decision has proven unworkable, whether developments in the law have undermined the precedent, and whether legitimate reliance interests mitigate against overruling."

—Harriet Miers


"So in this case, we may enquire whether Roe's central rule has been found unworkable; whether the rule's limitation on state power could be removed without serious inequity to those who have relied upon it or significant damage to the stability of the society governed by it; whether the law's growth in the intervening years has left Roe's central rule a doctrinal anachronism discounted by society; and whether Roe's premises of fact have so far changed in the ensuing two decades as to render its central holding somehow irrelevant or unjustifiable in dealing with the issue it addressed."

U.S. Supreme Court
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SOUTHEASTERN PA. v. CASEY, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)


The court must also consider other factors, such as whether the prior decision has proven unworkable
So in this case, we may enquire whether Roe's central rule has been found unworkable

whether developments in the law have undermined the precedent
whether the law's growth in the intervening years has left Roe's central rule a doctrinal anachronism discounted by society

and whether legitimate reliance interests mitigate against overruling
whether the rule's limitation on state power could be removed without serious inequity to those who have relied upon it or significant damage to the stability of the society governed by it


This shouldn't be giving anyone comfort.

 

[TheDon]

"She's a witch I tells ya! Burn her! Burn her!"

[Cindy_Cin]

Roe vs Wade is not my ONE and ONLY issue..
& For Miers supporters to fling that around like a bone to Miers critics is quite frankly insulting.

[Cindy_Cin]

www.betterjustice.com
For any who are not on the Harriet Miers Bandwagon!
(like me)

[Cindy_Cin]

www.betterjustice.com
a site for those who at least want to voice opposition to this Miers Fiasco :(

[Cindy_Cin]

Its astounding to me all the Bush Groupies who say
"Trust Bush"
I mean wasn't it GW Bush who rehabilitated Bill Clinton & wasn't it the BUSH White House that allowed Sandy Berger to cop a plea to avoid a public trial?
And isn't it GW BUSH who is smothering Able danger?
"Trust Bush" not this girl!

[ConservativeDude]

no doubt...let's not EVEN get started on why one "might" not trust Bush. We'd be here all day....

[sinkspur]

Is it now mandatory that minorities sit on juries in any trial that impact minority rights? As in, the cases don't even have to involve actual minorities, they just have to "impact the rights of minorities"? Do you have any idea how far out in left field this idea is?

Actually, it is mandatory. Pick an all-white jury for a civil rights case involving minorities, and a verdict against said rights will be thrown out on appeal due to the makeup of the jury.

May as well seek out a couple of minorities in the original jury pool.

[ConservativeDude]

"Roe vs Wade is not my ONE and ONLY issue.. "

That is exactly right!

Moreover, you could even add that in the truest sense RvW is not an issue at all...though the WH thinks that it is an issue and want to treat it like that...which is just a roundabout way of accepting the left's view that the SC is really just a super-legislature.

What we want is to know that a GWB nominee understands the constitutional role of the judiciary and the traiditonal police powers of the states. We want to know she understands enumerated powers. Basically, we want her to believe in and enforce the Constitution.

If someone follows the Constitution, then the political questions are left to we the people, as it should be.

And if one understands and follows the Constitution, then, we don't actually need to know where they are on RvW. Obviously if someone is completely sold out to the constitution, then RvW would be history....and even non-Christians could reason to that conclusion.

To just tell us she is a pro life Christian and expect us to support her on those grounds makes it seem like she is running for Congress. Which is precisely the problem...and which is why we are so angry at this President for this particular nomination (especially in light of his C of A appointments).

[TheForceOfOne]

I hear she burns ants with a magnifying glass and uses slugs to get junk food from the vending machines.

She also tortures kittens in her basement, a monster I tell ya!

Someone get a wood stake, we'll drive it through her heart when she is sleeping in her coffin.