That was NOT the argument. She was criticized precisely because she wasn't well versed in "precedent".
Are you really going to argue that Meirs had the latter?
The laws belong to the people, not to the "experts" in Constitutional law.
The laws belong to the people...?
Experts in Con Law aren't "people"? Scalia and Thomas aren't "people"?
So it is the "people" who should decide Supreme Court cases? So if the "people" decide that that the Constitution protects the right to abortion, then Roe should be upheld?