October 10, 2005
ADDITIONAL INSIGHT ON HARRIET MIERS
Ami over at Catholic Democrats just left the following comment on last Monday's post:
I'm eager to hear what your other contacts said. I can't really have an educated opinion about this candidate without more information, so I appreciate your efforts to get us some, Mikal. Thanks.
To recap... Last week, upon hearing of the President Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers to fill Sandra Day O'Connor's seat on the U.S. Supreme Court, I contacted a few well-connected Texas-based friends (all of whom who work in the legal profession--and because of their jobs/posts, probably know Miers' or know of her in ways that the normal everyday American wouldn't) to see what each thought of the Miers' nomination.
As I wrote last Monday, one friend--a former president of the Houston Bar Association and once a partner in a firm where Miers worked--shared that he had indeed personally worked with her, liked her, and felt that despite the fact that her connections to Bush (she has previously served as his personal lawyer) potentially calls into question her ability to remain unbiased on certain matters, he felt she was probably a good choice. Not necessarily a ringing endorsement, but it's something.
Another friend--this one a Senior Counsel for a large Dallas-based law firm who spent five years as the City of Dallas' Chief Prosecutor--has also weighed in. He writes:
She's an interesting individual. As has come out in the papers and blogs by now, she made a lot of political concessions in order to be on the Dallas City Council. These concessions will anger the right wing. But she's a pretty good lawyer, as far as anyone that I've met who knows her says. Did you see Ann Coulter's Blog on Miers, by the way). My goodness. Enjoy.
If it helps to know, both of the lawyers who have thus far offered an opinion on Miers are pretty liberal. The Dallas-based attorney struggled with his decision to leave the City of Dallas and go to work for a big law firm. In his own words... A lot more money, and I still feel a need to apologize to my secretary for giving her work. The other lawyer, the first one to weigh in on Miers, does a great deal of pro-bono work for not-for-profit adventure-based organizations like Outward Bound, and has been dubbed by Outside Magazine the Dean of the outdoor legal community.
Posted by Mikal at October 10, 2005 10:37 AM
| TrackBack
The question isn't whether Miers' is qualified for the bench. Of course, she's qualified. There have been over 40 justices without experience on the bench. Ms. Miers' bio speaks for itself. The concerns many of us have is how will she vote on key issues?
On this question, conservatives must trust President Bush and Liberals need to fear his decision. Having seen her career advance in Texas over the years I'll give her the benefit of the doubt.
I'm willing to give the the benefit of the doubt for now, as I feel that Dubya is a closet moderate and won't rock the boat given his precarious poll ratings.
It'll be interesting to see her confirmation hearings, at the very least.
Rude Pundit hit the nail on the head. To paraphrase, if Miers had promised to ban abortion, allow torture of terror suspects, and quarantine all the gays, there would be no speculation from the right on her credentials.
The hypocrisy of this nation each and every day is sickening. People over at "ConfirmThem.com" are advocating the sabotage and filibuster of Miers' nomination. The same people who bitched and moaned about Democratic filibusters are now advocating because they don't agree with a candidate's viewpoint.
IOKIYAR indeed.
