Give Her A Break

Wall Street Journal ^ | 10/15/05 | MELANIE KIRKPATRICK

[harpu]

Many of my friends on the right have signed up for the conservative revolt against Harriet Miers. Count me out -- at least for now.

I don't know enough about President Bush's most recent nominee for the Supreme Court to stand up and shout, "Hooray for Harriet." Her judicial philosophy remains a mystery and the White House's attempts to explain who she is have been ineffective, to say the least.

But I do know enough about Mr. Bush's judicial appointments over the past five years to give three cheers for his record on picking judges. Almost to a man and a woman, they are judicial conservatives who are already shifting the ideological balance of the federal judiciary to the right. Conservatives who have rushed to bash Mr. Bush for his selection of Ms. Miers should brew themselves a cup of chamomile tea and go back and review the roster of Bush judges. They'll sleep better, though it's probably too much to hope that they'll wake up with a more open-minded perspective on Ms. Miers.

Mr. Bush was elected in part on his pledge to remake the federal judiciary, and he's demonstrably followed through on that promise. That includes the appointment of John Roberts as chief justice of the United States, 43 appointees to the appeals courts and nearly 200 judges on the federal district courts. There are 871 judges in the federal judiciary, including 50 current vacancies. By the end of his second term, Mr. Bush will have appointed one-third or more. Ms. Miers has served on the committee that advises the president on judicial picks and, as White House counsel, has been chairman of that committee for the past year.

This reshaping of the judiciary hasn't been easy, and Mr. Bush has had to fight to keep his word.

[Lazamataz]

But I do know enough about Mr. Bush's judicial appointments over the past five years to give three cheers for his record on picking judges. Almost to a man and a woman, they are judicial conservatives who are already shifting the ideological balance of the federal judiciary to the right.

It's a good point, and it's a hell of a lot better an argument than "Trust me."

[The Red Zone]

Dobson was making the same point weeks ago. If Miers is a dud she would be very atypical of Bush's picks.

[SwinneySwitch]

"...Mr. Bush has had to fight to keep his word."

Wish he'd fight to secure our borders.

[MEG33]

Bush's record on judicial appointments is part of my trust..
I am withholding final judgement until after I have heard her.

[NavVet]

She gave to Al Gore's election campaign. She said that she wouldn't join the Federalist Society (an organization devoted to the principal of original intent) because it was political, but added that she didn't consider the NAACP to be a partisan political orgainization.

I wouldn't vote for her if she were running for dog catcher.

[The Red Zone]

Look at the time line, that was virtually a generation ago. When she backed Gore, Gore was claiming to be ANTI abortion.

[NavVet]

True enough on Gore, but her comments about the Federalist Society and the NAACP should still be applicable today, since those organizations haven't changed.

[Rudder]

Almost to a man and a woman, they are judicial conservatives who are already shifting the ideological balance of the federal judiciary to the right.

Easy for her to say. How about some concrete examples that prove her point?

[The Red Zone]

Harriet has learned much more about the world than she was aware of when the 1980s became the 1990s. It's the fish phenomenon: the last thing a fish notices about its environment is water. Until it is plucked out...

[randita]

but her comments about the Federalist Society and the NAACP should still be applicable today, since those organizations haven't changed.

Yes, they have. In 1988, the Federalist Society was in its infant stages and consisted of a small group of Texas politicos. Today it has evolved into a conservative/libertarian think tank -- much different. The NAACP used to be focussed on uplifting black people mainly through education, now its just an extension of the Democrat Party and is focussed on the defeat and demonization of Republicans and the expansion of the government plantation.

Miers comments in 1988 and today on those organizations make perfect sense.

[GarySpFc]

True enough on Gore, but her comments about the Federalist Society and the NAACP should still be applicable today, since those organizations haven't changed.

The question of legal philosophy. The stronghold of conservative lawyers is the Federalist Society--of which Miers is not a member, but many conservative lawyers aren't; Hugh Hewitt, for example. Miers has been a speaker before the Federalist Society, and has the strong support of Federalist Society executive director Leonard Leo:

He spoke as one who has known and worked with her for well over a decade, who has played host to her when she has been a Federalist Society speaker, and -- perhaps most significant -- who joined her in a battle to get the American Bar Association to rescind its resolution endorsing Roe v. Wade , the decision establishing a right to abortion.

The first thing Leo said was that Miers's statement accepting the nomination from Bush was significant to him. "It is the responsibility of every generation to be true to the Founders' vision of the proper role of courts in our society . . . and to help ensure that the courts meet their obligations to strictly apply the laws and the Constitution," she said. "When she talked about 'the Founders' vision' and used the word 'strictly,' " Leo said, "I thought, 'Robert Bork,' " Ronald Reagan's Supreme Court pick, who was rejected by the Senate after a bitter fight. "She didn't have to go there. She could simply have said, 'Judges should not legislate from the bench.' But she chose those words."

I asked if he was surprised that she did -- or whether it was consistent with what he knew of her judicial philosophy. He replied: "I'm not surprised that's what she believes. I'm surprised her handlers let her say it."

http://presidentaristotle.blogspot.com/2005/10/case-for-miers-when-things-look-blurry.html

[winston2]

The problem I have with the Miers choice is that it is too close to home for the President.

I would be worlds more content with the choice process if I had seen evidence of Mr. Bush looking all over the country for qualified candidates. The method of choice he used doesn't do a thing for inclusive representation. It smells strongly of the good ol' boy system.

[xcamel]

Based on W's record of appointments so far, I can live with "trust me". Nobody is perfect, but all this vile "you don't listen to us" whining has degenerated into an infantile temper tantrum of the hard right. Barry Goldwater is dead, and they need to get over this before they all look like flaming boobs in the end.

On a darker note, the anti Miers crowd is handing ammo to the dims by the carload, not only for the '06 election cycle, but for when JP Stevens drops dead.

[martin_fierro]

For you.

< |:)~

[maica]

My response to Opinion Journal:



That President Bush keeps his campaign promises should be a strong argument in favor of Harriet Miers - at least for the hand-wringers in the conservative punditry to hold their fire until she has her hearings. That only 43 judges have been placed on the Appeals Courts in the past 5 years - an average of 8 per year - is an argument against moving one of them again to fill a slot on the Supreme Court.

We do not know if any of the prized-by-the-pundits' names want to go through another trial by Senate again so soon. We do know that they will be doing valuable work where they are.

Perhaps issues will not even reach the Supreme Court because they are settled incontrovertably in the Appellate system by these "top-tier" judges.

[RunningJoke]

"Every absurdity has a champion to defend it." -Oliver Goldsmith

[KDD]

Harriet has learned much more about the world than she was aware of when the 1980s became the 1990s. It's the fish phenomenon: the last thing a fish notices about its environment is water. Until it is plucked out...

So you are saying that she has "changed" or "grown" with the passage of time?

So the President's reassurance that Miers will have the same philosophy 20 years from now is bogus...is it not? It would appear she has a great capacity for change and for reversing her course. I oppose this nomination as I opposed Roberts. There is deception being played out on the conservative by this administration. Bush is not a conservative. He is part of "the third way" his daddy talked so much about.

[RobFromGa]

It's a good point, and it's a hell of a lot better an argument than "Trust me."

I'll assume you are being sarcastic. Bush's record on picking judges is the reason why "Trust Me" has any meaning.

Of course, Bush's loyalty is also well-known and proven, yet people who claim to have liked him before are clamoring for him to "Throw Miers From the Train". Even though he won't do that, and if he did it would greatly hurt him with those of us who do trust him.

[The Red Zone]

She's learned in a direction consistent with Christianity.