Posted on 10/03/2005 10:43:26 AM PDT by The_Victor
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush on Monday nominated White House insider Harriet Miers for a Supreme Court vacancy, triggering outrage from conservatives who questioned whether she would uphold their political views.
Bush chose Miers, a lawyer but not a judge whose opinions on key issues likely to come before the high court are largely unknown, to replace the retiring Sandra Day O'Connor.
Conservatives who formed the bedrock foundation of Bush's re-election last November immediately protested the nomination as a betrayal of his campaign promise to pick conservative judges, pointing to her past campaign donations to Democrats.
Miers, 60, a longtime ally of Bush's going back to his days as Texas governor and currently White House counsel, would be the third woman ever to serve on the Supreme Court if confirmed by the U.S. Senate. O'Connor was the first and Ruth Bader Ginsburg has been there since 1993.
"I believe that senators of both parties will find that Harriet Miers' talent, experience and judicial philosophy make her a superb choice to safeguard the constitutional liberties and equality of all Americans," Bush said in a hastily arranged Oval Office ceremony with Miers.
O'Connor, a moderate conservative, was the key swing vote on a number of 5-4 decisions on the closely divided Supreme Court. Democrats said much was unknown about Miers and that she would undergo intense scrutiny by the Senate.
The White House noted some Democrats had urged Bush to consider the Dallas-born Miers but would give no names. One of those, however, was Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat.
"I like Harriet Miers," said Reid, who had voted against John Roberts as U.S. chief justice in Roberts' confirmation vote last week. "In my view, the Supreme Court would benefit from the addition of a justice who has real experience as a practicing lawyer."
But some conservatives expressed concern that Bush had missed a historic opportunity to shift the balance of the court in a clear way by picking someone in the same mold as conservative justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
"It is very hard to avoid the conclusion that President Bush flinched from a fight on constitutional philosophy. Miers is undoubtedly a decent and competent person. But her selection will unavoidably be judged as reflecting a combination of cronyism and capitulation on the part of the president," said William Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard magazine.
Manny Miranda, head of a conservative coalition called The Third Branch Conference, said Miers was "the most unqualified choice" for the high court since Lyndon Johnson tried to make Abe Fortas chief justice in 1968.
"I was hoping that the president would keep his campaign promise. He said he would name someone like Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. We thought he meant someone with a clear judicial record on particular issues," Miranda said.
Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn (news, bio, voting record) urged conservatives not to jump to conclusions and not to prejudge her.
Records show Miers has given money over the years to both Republicans and Democrats, including $1,000 to Democrat Al Gore's presidential campaign in 1988.
In 1987 she gave $1,000 to former Texas Sen. Lloyd Bentsen. Bentsen was the Democratic vice presidential nominee who ran against Bush's father in 1988.
In more recent years, Miers has regularly contributed to Republicans such as Bush.
LOL! Careful now.... I'm creeping up to her age...lol.
And she may not......
However I suspect President Bush has seen her work product over some 10+ years and likes the way she arrives at decisions.... My guess is he is confident in her methodoligy to the point he's willing to stick his neck on the line for her. I want someone that applies the Constitution without writing law from the bench and that doesn't always go along with what conservatives want.
Excellent point. Wasn't Bush recently warned by "his" chairman of the judiciary to nominate a mainstream candidate for the court. Of course, Bush doesn't have such a spectacular conservative record himself...
Miers is almost certainly further to the right than Justice O'Connor, so her confirmation will by definition move the Court to the right. Further movement to the right requires retirement of one of the liberal Justices (Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg). A pick that would please all FReepers would never be confirmed. That's not Bush's fault, and it won't change until the Republicans in the Senate ditch all RINOs and get 61 real Republicans in office.
1. Why go with an unknown when there are judges who are proven social conservatives? There is an inherent risk here that she will turn out to be a souter. Why? Why add that risk to the equation?
And here are two resolutions she sponsored in the ABA
"Supports the enactment of laws and public policy which provide that sexual orientation shall not be a bar to adoption when the adoption is determined to be in the best interest of the child. ...
Recommends the development and establishment of an International Criminal Court."
"Well...Rush just nailed it.
If you were Bush, would you go to war against the Libs with the GOP Senate team he's been delt ?"
Rush is out to lunch on this. A leader leads, a wimp doesnt. Try to get the best you can, compromise only if you must. If you fail with JRB, then you can try a lesser candidate. Bush has actively avoided a fight with the RATS that he probably could have won.
Some more food for thought. Miers donated to the Dem Party at a time when Reagan was one of our most popular Presidents ever and who had won one of most decisive Presidential elections in 1984. Why would Miers contribute to Bentsen, Gore, and the DNC in 1987-88? Did she have a problem with Reagan's political philosophy and its continuation under Bush 41?
But you might well be right, Bentsen's abortion position might be better described as pro-abortion.
I wouldn't take Frist to a marble shoot.
It's a matter of trust -- I trust POTUS. That;'s why I voted for him and worked for his election twice.
Can you imagine Kerry or any democrat nominating Harriet Miers? The answer is NO. Not even Harry Reid. MSM are trying to make a big deal out of Reid suggesting her name... as though POTUS wasn't already thinking about her.
She's his close personal friend. Think Karen Hughes. Would she disappoint? Of course not.
ROFL!
Actually, when Al Gore ran for president in 1988 he was still-to the best of my recollection-pro-life.
The fact that you don't know about Miers means you should be outraged.
Bush should have appointed someone as obviously conservative as Ginsburg is liberal. Conservatives who've supported Bush have done so in large part because of his steadfastness on nominating judges. We shouldn't have to guess as to whether Miers is conservative. We deserved a Luttig or a Jones, even a Garza, not a crony.
"I will never understand why the Dems opposed Bork. He was totally apolitical in his view on the law. HE was the strictest of the the strict and would have been a brilliant Supreme Court Justice."
Umm...I think you just answered your own question.
My basis for saying she is NOT, is that......anyone that contributed to the election of Bill Clinton over Bush41 is NOT to the right of Justice O'Connor (who was a solid Arizona republican). Not even close.
"Like she made donuts for her church group?"
I noticed that too. An excellent qualification, she probably sealed her nomination by baking Bush some cookies.
BTW, I got an email from the RNC asking me to support Meirs and Bush. I basically told them to stick it.
I'd rather keep O'Connor, who's as strong as they come on property rights, Bush v. Gore, gun rights, than take my chances with Miers.
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.