ConfirmThem

By Carol Platt Liebau Posted in Analysis and Predictions — Comments () / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

Hugh Hewitt has articulated so many arguments against reflexive anti-Mierism so well that's it's ridiculous and duplicative for me to try to summarize them here. His entry is a must read. (In the interests of full disclosure, Hugh sometimes permits me to guest-host his radio show. That being said, I agree with him -- and would feel free to disagree -- on the merits of his arguments alone.)

I'd add something only to one of his points onthe whole argument that being a justice requires a lifetime of study of constitutional law (a "con law priesthood" of sorts). As many know, all justices have four law clerks (the Chief used to have three) -- all top students from the top law schools. Although it varies from chambers to chambers, some justices' clerks play an extensive role in drafting their opinions and articulating theory. This has been particularly true in the case of old or infirm justices (though not, I would hasten to add, in Chief Justice Rehnquist's case) -- and in the cases of some others.

To the extent that the Washington legal elites haven't protested this system (and many, indeed, are products of it), I'd ask this: Do they really believe that a young person two years out of law school -- brilliant though he/she may be -- has a fuller, more rounded knowledge of the Constitution, and is more capable of understanding the Constitution than an eminent practicioner of many years' experience with the credentials of Harriet Miers?