Thursday, October 06, 2005
On Harriet Miers: I've been doing a lot of reading and thinking about the president's nomination of Harriet Miers to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. I'm certainly not excited by her nomination, probably because Democrats aren't going ape.
Miers, if confirmed, may turn out to be a good justice. (Yes, by "good" I mean "votes the way I want.") However, I would've prefered a nominee who had a public record. I'm not talking about a series of judicial opinions, but thougthful writings on the law, whether they appeared on newspaper op-ed pages or on a blog.
That's it, I wish President Bush had nominated a blogger!
Seriously, I wanted a nominee who "wowed" me -- not necessarily with their law school background -- but with their public intellect.
Miers may turn out to be OK, but I'd rather have had a Michael McConnell or a Janice Rogers Brown.
Speaking of Brown, that would've certainly created a fight from the Democrats, despite the fact she was one of the judges approved by the "Gang of 14's" corrupt bargain to preserve the filibuster. What would that have looked like to the public? When in power, Republicans are the ones appointing prominent blacks to be Secretary of State and national security advisor. When nominations come open on the Supreme Court, Republicans are the ones nominating intelligent accomplished blacks like Clarence Thomas and Brown. Would African-Americans begin to see that they were being kept down by Democrats? Bill Clinton, "America's first black president" nominated two honkies to the Supreme Court.
Whichever way you slice it, this was a missed opportunity.