New Supreme Court Nominee is.....

[Phlegm]

From CNN:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush nominated White House counsel Harriet Miers on Monday to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Miers, 60, was the first woman to head the State Bar of Texas. She has never been a judge.

An outspoken supporter of the Bush administration, she was a leader of its search for potential candidates to fill Supreme Court posts. A White House official said that at the same time, Bush considered her as a nominee without her knowledge.

In a televised announcement from the White House, Bush called Miers "exceptionally well-suited" for the high court. Miers has "devoted her life to the rule of law and the cause of justice," he said.

He called on the Senate to "review her qualifications thoroughly and fairly and to vote on her nomination promptly."

Miers said she was grateful and humbled by the nomination.

"It is the responsibility of every generation to be true to the founders' vision of the proper role of the courts in our society," she said.

"If confirmed, I recognize that I will have a tremendous responsibility to keep our judicial system strong and to help ensure that the courts meet their obligations to strictly apply the laws and the Constitution."

If the Senate confirms Miers, she would join Ruth Bader Ginsburg as the second sitting female justice on the bench. O'Connor became the court's first female justice in 1981.


Bush offered her the job Sunday night over dinner in the White House residence, White House sources said.

During the summer, a vetting process for Miers took place once the president began considering her.

Bush took seriously suggestions by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, and ranking Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, that the president consider candidates from outside the appellate courts, the sources said.

Miers, 60, was the first woman to serve as president of the State Bar of Texas and Dallas Bar Association. She also was a member of the Dallas City Council.

Initial reaction to Miers' nomination was cautious.

"Harriet Miers is an intelligent lawyer who shares the president's judicial philosophy," said Leonard Leo of the conservative Federalist Society.

"She has demonstrated that in her capacity as White House counsel and a senior administration official as well as an active member of the organized bar."

Quietly, some conservatives involved in the White House's nominee selection consultation process said they are concerned with Bush's pick.

"The reaction of many conservatives today will be that the president has made possibly the most unqualified choice since Abe Fortas who had been the president's lawyer," said conservative activist Manuel Miranda of the Third Branch Conference, referring to President Lyndon B. Johnson's pick to the high court in 1965.

"The nomination of a nominee with no judicial record is a significant failure for the advisers that the White House gathered around it. However, the president deserves the benefit of a doubt, the nominee deserves the benefit of hearings, and every nominee deserves an up-or-down vote."

The Concerned Women for America, another conservative group, also took a wait-and-see approach on Miers.

"We give Harriet Miers the benefit of the doubt because thus far, President Bush has selected nominees to the federal courts who are committed to the written Constitution," said Jan LaRue, chief counsel of the group. "Whether we can support her will depend on what we learn from her record and the hearing process."

One Republican official said that many had expectations that Bush's pick would be a "known conservative," adding that he was surprised by the president's choice.

"Republicans were hoping for a clear conservative," the official said. "It's going to be heavy lifting for us and the White House."

Another conservative source who was involved in the selection consultation process said Miers was "not a big surprise" and that she had always been someone under serious consideration.

"She's a good conservative," the source said. "She does share the president's views about law and public policy. But she is not well-known, which is going to be part of the challenge."


Democrats on the the Senate Judiciary Committee reacted cautiously to Miers' nomination, but they did not immediately oppose it.

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) issued a statement saying, "There are a lot of obvious concerns; her lack of experience, cronyism, and of course her views on our basic freedoms." But the group also called the nomination a sign that Bush was "unable to pick a nominee that would appeal to his extreme right-wing base."

In a written statement Leahy said, "It is too early to reach any firm judgment about such an important nomination," noting Miers long ties to President Bush. "It is important to know whether she would enter this key post with the judicial independence necessary when the Supreme Court considers isues of interest to this Administration."

"My first reaction is a simple one: It could have been a lot worst," Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, one of the Demcrats on the committee, said. "... The president has not sent us a nominee that we've rejected already."

Schumer continued, "There's hope that Harriet Miers is a mainstream nominee. ... Given the fact that the extreme wing of the president's party was demanding someone of fealty to their views, this is a good first day in the process that begins to fill the seat of Sandra Day O'Connor."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, another Democratic committee member and its only woman, said she was happy that a woman was nominated to replace the outgoing O'Connor but wanted to know more about Miers' views on privacy and other issues.

"This new justice will be critical in the balance with respect to rulings on congressional authority, as well as a woman's right to privacy, environmental protections, and many other aspects of constitutional law in the United States," Feinstein said.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, was complimentary of Miers.

"I like Harriet Miers," Reid said in a statement. "As White House counsel, she has worked with me in a courteous and professional manner. I am also impressed with the fact that she was a trailblazer for women as managing partner of a major Dallas law firm and as the first woman president of the Texas Bar Association."


The choice to replace O'Connor, a key swing vote, could be pivotal.

The announcement came shortly before justices were to begin a new term with new Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, who is the youngest member of the high court.

The court's new term includes a docket with cases involving abortion, assisted suicide, the death penalty, and other controversial topics.

"This is a situation where, from the very moment the justices start back up in October, they're going to be very divided," said Supreme Court analyst Edward Lazarus, who wrote "Closed Chambers," a book on the justices. "It's going to be a lot of friction inside the building."

In 2004, when she was deputy White House chief of staff for policy, Miers hosted several "Ask the White House" session on the White House's Web site. In that role she expressed her own opinions on certain issues, praising the president's policies on the economy, education, Afghanistan, and Iraq.

CNN senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin said Miers "has a very blank slate as far as a record," and "by the standards that we usually apply to Supreme Court justice nominees she does not appear very distinguished."

There have been Supreme Court appointees with no judicial experience, but "they tend to be senators, governors, people who have had jobs that required confirmation by the Senate," he said. Miers "has had none of those."

It is unclear how soon the Senate may hold hearings on Miers.

O'Connor announced her retirement in July. Bush initially chose Roberts for her seat, but the September 3 death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist changed the White House's strategy.

O'Connor has said she will stay on until she is replaced, making her role in the upcoming term unclear. Under court rules, a justice's vote does not count until a ruling is issued, a process that can take weeks or months.

Many legal scholars question whether O'Connor would want to continue hearing cases if her replacement takes over before rulings are issued, thereby negating her vote.

[Donnel]

Interesting idea, chosing someone with no case history to look at.

[Minrott]

If I were on the commitee a nomination like this would make me even more apprehensive than Roberts.

This however, I like:

"It is the responsibility of every generation to be true to the founders' vision of the proper role of the courts in our society," she said.

[Lyion]

Cronyism is alive and kicking. What a terrible choice.

[Ouchyfish]

Not a very good choice. you can't tell me there wasn't someone more qualified.

This ranks up there with putting a guy who's management experience is raising horses as the director of FEMA.

[Metranon]

I've researched Harriet extensively and after examining all the options my conclusion is:

i would definitely not hit it.

[dammuzis]

this is a bad idea

its like hiring a president for your company whos previous job was a grocery clerk

[xaoshaen]

I dunno. It sounds as if she has a strong legal background. I expect the confirmation hearings to explore her judicial leanings, which are relatively unknown, so I'll wait until we know a bit more about her before I condemn the choice.

[Jay]

Abortions, get em while they're hot! =P

[Phlegm]

Bush defended his choice. From Reuters:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush on Tuesday rejected charges of cronyism for choosing his top White House lawyer, Harriet Miers, for the Supreme Court and ruled out handing over internal documents sought by Democrats that might shed light on her legal views.

Bush was peppered with questions about his nomination of Miers during a nearly hour-long Rose Garden news conference, and he was defensive throughout the session.

He dismissed criticism from conservatives that he passed over many more competent candidates to pick a non-judge from his inner circle who may or may not shift the court to the right.

"I picked the best person I could find," Bush said at his first formal news conference in four months.

"She is plenty bright... She hasn't been, you know, one of these publicity hounds. She's been somebody (who) just quietly does her job."

Bush also denied he picked the 60-year-old Miers in order to avoid a bloody Senate confirmation battle with Democrats at a time when he has been politically weakened by Iraq, the slow federal response to Hurricane Katrina and high gasoline prices.

Bush was fighting a backlash from the right wing of his own party, who were cool to his announcement of Miers on Monday, rather than giving it the warm welcome the White House had hoped for after a grim period in which the president's approval rating at one point languished at 40 percent, his lowest.

The criticism from the right was notable because conservatives have typically rallied to his side. They were particularly alarmed at reports she was a Democrat in the 1980s, when conservative icon Ronald Reagan was president, and at comments by Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, who said on Monday that "I like Harriet Miers."

The absence of a paper trail that might lift the veil on Miers' views about hot-button issues like abortion has led to concerns on both sides about the Dallas-born lawyer.

With some Democrats saying Miers may well be a mainstream nominee, Senate confirmation looked achievable, but a key question will be how hard Democrats fight for internal White House documents they believe could shed light on her views.

Bush, who has consistently refused to turn over documents on internal White House deliberations throughout his tenure, said he would refuse again in this case.

"I'm sure they're going to try to bring this up," Bush said of Democrats. "I happen to view it as a distraction from whether or not Harriet Miers is capable of answering the questions she's asked."

Asked if he knew her position on abortion, Bush insisted he had no litmus test, but when pressed, said "not to my recollection" did he ever talk to her about it.

Bush, who repeated he was "pro-life," insisted that Miers holds his conservative philosophy, saying she is a "strict constructionist" who would not legislate from the bench.

SOME CRITICISM BITING

"There should be no doubt in anybody's mind what I believe the philosophy of a judge" should be, Bush said. "And Harriet Miers shares that philosophy."

Plus, he said, "I know her well enough to be able to say that she's not going to change; that 20 years from now she'll be the same person, with the same philosophy."

Some of the criticism has been biting, like that of Republican firebrand Patrick Buchanan, a former Reagan aide.

"Handed a once-in-a-generation opportunity to return the Supreme Court to constitutionalism, George W. Bush passed over a dozen of the finest jurists of his day -- to name his personal lawyer," Buchanan wrote.

Among those making lukewarm comments was Sen. Sam Brownback, a conservative Kansas Republican and a member of the Judiciary Committee that will hold Miers' confirmation hearing.

He said he wanted to know more about her and hoped she would be in the mold of conservative justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

"I have said in the past that I would like a nominee with a proven track record on important issues to all Americans and whose judicial philosophy is well-formed. I am not yet confident that Ms. Miers has a proven track record and I look forward to having these questions answered," he said.

[mofish]

George Will destroying this pick :

http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns ... 59414.html

[Ouchyfish]

All of these chicken little freaks screaming about abortion...it's so fucking comical.

Ironic how most of the same paranoid folks say nothing when the 2nd Amendment gets threatened.

[Lyion]

Brutal, but truthful

the Miers nomination vindicates the principle of tokenism under the rubric of diversity

Senators beginning what ought to be a protracted and exacting scrutiny of Harriet Miers should be guided by three rules. First, it is not important that she be confirmed. Second, it might be very important that she not be.

Third, the presumption -- perhaps rebuttable but certainly in need of rebutting -- should be that her nomination is not a defensible exercise of presidential discretion to which senatorial deference is due.

It is not important that she be confirmed because there is no evidence that she is among the leading lights of American jurisprudence, or that she possesses talents commensurate with the Supreme Court's tasks. The president's "argument" for her amounts to: Trust me. There is no reason to