President Bush devoted his entire radio address Saturday to his Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers. Most of it was a repeat of her qualifications. FindLaw has a good profile of her. Here's a quick summary of her positions and major awards:
* 1967 BS Math from Southern Methodist University
* 1970 JD from SMU Law School
* 1970-72 Clerked for Chief Judge Joe E. Estes of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
* 1972-2001 First woman lawyer hired by Locke Purnell Boren Laney & Neely
* 1985 President Dallas Bar Association
* 1986 First female president of the Dallas Bar Association
* 1989-1991 elected as an at-large member on the Dallas City Council
* 1992-1993 First woman president of head the State Bar of Texas
* 1993 Counsel Bush's Texas gubernatorial campaign
* 1994 General Counsel for Bush's TX Governor transition team
* 1995-2000 chair of Texas Lottery Comission
* 1995 Bush's personal lawyer
* 1997 National Law Review 100 Most Influential Lawyers
* 1998 National Law Review 50 Most Influential Women Lawyers
* 1999 Co-Manager Locke, Liddell & Sapp
* 2000 Lawyer in Bush's presidential campaign
* 2000 National Law Review 100 Most Influential Lawyers
* 2001-2003 Assistant to the President and Staff Secretary
* 2003: Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy
* 2004: White House Counsel, the chief legal adviser for the Office of the President.
Here are some things that bother me about Bush's address. He said "She was in charge of the process that resulted in the appointment of Chief Justice John Roberts." That may be true, but really, is it any evidence that she's qualified to be a justice herself?
Bush said "Like Justice William Rehnquist and Justice Byron White, who were also nominated to the Supreme Court directly from legal positions in the executive branch, Harriet Miers will be prudent in exercising judicial power and firm in defending judicial independence.". Well Rehnquist had four degrees from Stanford and Harvard and was valedictorian at Stanford Law School, clerked for a Supreme Court Justice, and was Assistant Attorney General. Byron White graduated first in his class from Yale Law School, clerked for Chief Justice Vinson, was Deputy Attorney General under Robert F. Kennedy. Do these qualifications sound comparable?
Bush said "no Supreme Court nominee in the last 35 years has exceeded Harriet Miers' overall range of experience in courtroom litigation, service in federal, state and local government, leadership in local, state and national bar associations, and pro bono and charitable activities." Ok, I don't she tried any cases before the US Supreme Court. I think her state and local government service amounts to a single 2 year terms on the Dallas City Counsil and chairing the Texas Lottery Comission, I don't think these are qualifications for a life-time appointment on the US Supreme Court.
Bush said: "Throughout her life, Ms. Miers has excelled at everything she has done." which is just pure hyperbole. He also said: "Harriet Miers will be the type of judge I said I would nominate: a good conservative judge." which I don't remember him saying, he usually just repeats the won't legislate from the bench line.
Bush said: "she knows that judges should have a restrained and modest role in our constitutional democracy". Huh? Between Article III and the Supremecy Clause the Supreme Court can overturn any federal or state law. But there's nothing saying it should be restrained or modest. just as there's nothing that says the Commander in Chief should be restrained or modest. In Federalist Paper 48 James Madison discusses the importance of the separation of powers. "It is agreed on all sides, that the powers properly belonging to one of the departments ought not to be directly and completely administered by either of the other departments. It is equally evident, that none of them ought to possess, directly or indirectly, an overruling influence over the others, in the administration of their respective powers." In Federalist Paper 78 Alexander Hamilton wrote "the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power; that it can never attack with success either of the other two; and that all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against their attacks." and "The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited Constitution."
Bush said: "Harriet Miers has served our nation in critical roles, including White House Counsel, one of the most important legal positions in the country. As counsel, Ms. Miers addresses complex matters of constitutional law, serves as the chief legal advisor during regular meetings of the National Security Council, and handles sensitive issues of executive-congressional relations, among many other essential duties." The problem is, Bush said he will not provide those documents because it is "important that we maintain executive privilege in the White House," So there's absolutely no basis to evaluate her expertise on constitutional law.
Sorry Mr. President, I'm not taking your word for anything, you haven't earned that privilege, because you've blown it every other time.
1 comment:
For additional discussion and analysis of Miers, (including Hamilton's Federalist papers, etc), visit: K-Block.
Post a Comment