ConfirmThem

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

In this post below, it's suggested that the only rationale Newt Gingrich puts forth in his piece for supporting Miers is that we should "just trust the President." With respect, there are many more arguments than that, many of them meritorious:

(1) The President has a history of making excellent appointments to the federal courts -- and being willing to withstand controversy to do so.

(2) In opposing the ABA's support of abortion, including taxpayer-funded abortion, Harriet Miers showed the kind of tenacity that suggests she's "not for turning" -- in contrast to the Supreme Court justices some conservatives fear she'll resemble.

(3) Despite divisions within the Texas bar on the topic of abortion, Harriet Miers was able to win a consensus that the ABA should put the topic to a vote of the membership. (And such consensus building skills are important on the Court; even the most brilliant jurist's impact is diminished if, by his behavior, he drives other potential "concurrers" into dissent by his behavior).

(4) She has a diversity of experience -- and would be the only justice who didn't come straight from the bench. I'd add that even the fact she's a trial lawyer is important. It means that she understands the difficulties in practical application of "squishy", balancing-test jurisprudence.

(5) Harriet Miers was instrumental in selecting conservative judicial nominees. For my part, I'd add that the President may well have become acquainted with her philosophy by hearing whom she thought merited nomination and why.