George Bush nominated Harriet Miers to fill Sandra Day O’Connor’s spot on the Supreme Court. Whereas I was cautiously optimistic about the Roberts’ nomination, I am less optimistic based on what little I know about Miers. It’s not that I think Miers necessarily has some kind of rabid judicial philosophy with which I disagree. It’s that the only thing that apparently distinguishes her legal career was that she latched on tightly to George Bush. Take away accomplishments related to her association with Bush, and I think you have a fairly run-of-the-mill to above average legal career. Certainly nothing that makes her stand out as a natural choice for the Supreme Court.
Now, if Bush had done this for someone not associated with him, I’d be a little excited. Getting a practicing civil litigator on the bench might add a dose of reality-based thinking to the Court. But, as it stands, it looks like another example of Bush favoring cronyism over competence. “Brownie, you’re doing a heckuva job.”
I’d look for a fervent pro-executive branch streak for the next 3 years; a pretty knee-jerk pro-corporate streak for 10 years, and then she’ll drift to the left once she hits 70.
All of this is based on about 20 minutes of reading and reflection. On top of that, I’ve been running a fever for the past couple of days making my brain more addled than usual. So this bit of rumination is worth exactly what you paid for it.
Leave a Reply