ConfirmThem

By DanCT Posted in SCOTUS — Comments () / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

Despite the frustration and disappointment, the question now is whether it is better to tear ourselves to shreds with wailing and gnashing of teeth ("We've lost! We surrender! Let the Left have this country because we're incapable of leading it!), or grit our teeth and move forward.

The are a few voices out there calling for moving forward instead of giving up.

Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice:

"Harriet Miers is an excellent choice with an extraordinary record of service in the legal community and is certain to approach her work on the high court with a firm commitment to follow the Constitution and the rule of law. I have been privileged to work with her in her capacity as White House counsel. She is bright, thoughtful, and a consummate professional and I enthusiastically endorse her nomination...We know the intentions of the liberal left – to do anything possible to derail this nominee...we are prepared to meet those challenges head on and ensure that this battle ends with the confirmation of Harriet Miers as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.�

Leonard Leo, President of the Federalist Society:

"In nominating Harriet Miers, the President has once again kept his commitment to select Supreme Court Justices who are very well qualified and share his philosophy of interpreting the law, not legislating from the bench... She has also on a number of occasions demonstrated her commitment to conservative legal principles and the principles of judicial restraint " (Leonard Leo, Memo To Interested Parties Re: Nomination Of Harriet E. Miers, 10/3/05)

Hugh Hewitt:

"The Miers nomination is turning into a Rorschach test dividing conservatives into the camp that understands governing for the long term and those that are so emotionally fragile or contingent in their allegiance that anything they (1)don't understand or (2) disappoints in any way becomes an occasion for panic and declarations of irreparable injury."

Beldar:

"To you, me, the Senate, and the public, Harriet Miers may seem as much of a blank slate as David Souter was when Bush-41 nominated him. "Another 'stealth' candidate," many will say, "another blank slate about whom we know too little to make confident predictions!" That's already the official party line of the Dems, and it's something being muttered less loudly among puzzled Republicans as well.

But that is emphatically not the case from the perspective of George W. Bush. And the Constitution does, after all, give him the nomination power — not "the White House," not "the Republican Party," nor "conservatives generally," nor even "us'n who put him back into office." And he knows, and he's always known, that the blame for an appointee who turned out to become "another Souter" would likewise be placed on him. It's a responsibility and an opportunity whose benefits and risks he sought, but that he obviously takes very seriously indeed, because from Dubya's perspective, Harriet Miers was the one prospective female nominee about whom he personally felt that he could be most certain in predicting what sort of Justice she will become."

Richard Garnett:

"I yield to no one in my respect for the "farm team" — McConnell, Alito, Luttig, etc. — but I am also surprised that some are so quick to assume that this President, who fought hard to get home-run judges Pryor, Owen, Colloton, Brown, McConnell, Sutton, Roberts, etc., confirmed to the courts, would suddenly drop the constitutionalism-ball just to be nice to an old friend or to satisfy those demanding another female justice."

Dick Cheney:

Right. Well, I'm confident that she has a conservative judicial philosophy that you'd be comfortable with, Rush. I've worked closely with Harriet for five years. I've seen her and worked closely with her, hand-in-glove with her, really, through this process of reviewing candidates for the Supreme Court, and that's how we got to the Roberts nomination. She believes very deeply in the importance of interpreting the Constitution and the laws as written. She won't legislate from the federal bench, and the president has great confidence in her judicial philosophy, has known her for many years, and I share that confidence based on my own personal experience.

In the end, these cool, rational voices will win out.