More GOP Senators Doubt Miers

NewsMax ^ | 10/26/05 | NewsMax

[wagglebee]

Of the 10 Republicans on the key 18-member Judiciary Committee, three have publicly raised concerns.

Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and a Judiciary Committee member, noted that senators who had met with Miers were telling colleagues that they left unimpressed.

I hope that the White House and Miers can figure out soon if she has what it takes to win confirmation, because if she can't impress a lot of people in the hearings, it would be better for her to withdraw now.

[Sometimes A River]

They should just give up the ghost re: Miers.

[flashbunny]

quagmiers ping.

[trubluolyguy]

* Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and a Judiciary Committee member, noted that senators who had met with Miers were telling colleagues that they left unimpressed.

"She needs to step it up a notch,” Graham concluded.

---

Thanks a lot you gigantic RINO douche. This is mostly YOUR FAULT.

[counterpunch]

Compare Harriet Miers's answer to question #28 on the Senate Judiciary Committee's questionnaire paraphrasing 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

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


Miers parroted Souter, O'Connor, and Kennedy's exact reasons for not overturning Roe v. Wade while professing her deep abiding respect for stare decisis.

Miers says "Judicial activism can occur when a judge ignores the principles of precedent and stare decisis. Humility and self-restraint require the judiciary to adhere to its limited role and recognize that where applicable precedent exists, courts are not free to ignore it. Mere disagreement with a result is insufficient to justify ignoring applicable precedent"

Souter, O'Connor, and Kennedy refer to the stare decisis of Roe no less than 11 times in their opinion, making sure to cement it as Court precedent. Miers's answer binds her to deference.

None of this should give anyone comfort in the least.
It is all a very strong signal from Miers that she will turn to stare decisis and not vote to overturn Roe.

 

[wagglebee]

They should have never gotten themselves into this in the first place.

[trubluolyguy]

The discomfort level can perhaps best be illustrated by Sen. Sessions’ reaction to the question if the debate had become "one-sided” - with too few defending Miers.

According to the Times, Sessions struggled for words, then pushed a button for a nearby elevator in the Capitol building and told an aide, "Get me out of here.”

---

ROFLMAO!!!!!!

[Clintonfatigued]

Let's at least give her a chance to make her case in confirmation hearings.

If she wins confirmation and proves to be a good judge with Constitutionalist principles, a lot of conservatives will be stuffing their faces with crow and wiping egg yolks off their faces.

[Sometimes A River]

The seeds of this fiasco were sown long ago, when the GOP accepted the legitimacy of the Judicial filibuster.

55 Senators in your own party and you can't even get your own judges up for a vote.

Pathetic.

[wagglebee]

"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."

Over 40 million babies have been butchered, if this isn't "unworkable" then I don't know what is!

[Soul Seeker]

"publically" is the key word. Word is that a Senator did ask the W.H. to withdraw the nominee quietly, though the name remains unknown.

Tonight on Brit's show it was reported the reason Republican Senators have not broken ranks as inclined is because FRIST is doing his best to keep them in line till the hearings.

[Cboldt]

Here are some quotes from Santorum, as well ...

Mr. Santorum would say only: "I don't know that much about her yet, but I'm doing my homework and trying to get more comfortable with the nomination."

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., and Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., both said that the onus would be on Ms. Miers to convince conservatives she is right for the bench during the hearings. Mr. Thune, who defeated former Minority Leader Tom Daschle last year in a campaign that centered on clearing the path for the president's federal judicial nominees, said some conservatives felt "burned in the past on this whole 'trust me' idea," which he said has heightened the uncertainty about Ms. Miers.

"This is a historic opportunity to finally have an opportunity to get some right-thinking people on the Supreme Court and we certainly don't want to miss it," Mr. Thune said.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05279/583560.stm

---

"I don't know yet," Santorum said. "But I am concerned President Bush nominated someone who is a blank slate. I'm disappointed he wanted to nominate someone like that instead of someone with a record."

Public Opinion - www.publicopiniononline.com - Chambersburg, PA

[flashbunny]

"If she wins confirmation and proves to be a good judge with Constitutionalist principles, a lot of conservatives will be stuffing their faces with crow and wiping egg yolks off their faces."

And if she doesn't, the republicans will have failed to take advantage of the best political position ever when they could have taken control of a court that has decimated the constitution for decades.

Sorry, a lifetime position on the Supreme Court is not a "gee, let's give them a chance!" type of choice.

[Soul Seeker]

If you really believe that, then you have not understood the arguments advanced by conservatives at all.

[wagglebee]

If Miers, Bush and their advisors think she is prepared for the confirmation hearings, she should absolutely be given the opportunity. But if the feeling is that she's not up for them, then it's time for Bush to cut his losses.

[pacesferry1967]

what will Miers fails and Bush nominates Gonzales

[wagglebee]

If Bush is counting on Frist to keep the GOP senators "in line," this could get a whole lot worse. Keeping the party united has not exactly been Frist's strong suit.

[George W. Bush]

Where did all the pro-Miers people go in the last 24 hours? I'd like to ask them some questions about those speeches she made on abortion and how it just seemed to Harriet that self-determination was the way to go on that.

Funny how they've suddenly disappeared. I hope they aren't sick.

[Clintonfatigued]

There's nothing anti-conservative about giving someone a chance to have their say before making a decision regarding them. If she performs poorly in confirmation hearings, I'll oppose her. But we're obliged to hear her side of the story before reaching a conclusion about her.

[counterpunch]

Over 40 million babies have been butchered, if this isn't "unworkable" then I don't know what is!

It sounds like its working like a factory to me.