2
   

Miers to be SC nominee?

 
 
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 06:24 am
It appears that Harriet Miers is to be nominated by Bush for the Supreme Court. Interesting choice in that she has never been a judge. What y'all think?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 2 • Views: 8,670 • Replies: 185
No top replies

 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 06:25 am
She's someone I never heard of before.
0 Replies
 
rodeman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 07:49 am
Exactly edgar...............She has no paper trail and she's certainly not going to divulge her positions during confirmation hearings...............?

Dubya's crazy like a fox. Is this more cronyism..?
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 07:52 am
Sew your legs together girls...goodbye roevwade, and whoever bushs' bosses pick to be his successor is in now and approval ratings be damned. All that's necessary is to make a stink in 2008 of some kind that'll bring the election in front of SCOTUS.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 08:44 am
I doubt they can get confirmation without judical experience. No legal training or experience seems to be required by the Constitution, but I don't see this one making it.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 08:55 am
Roger
Quote:
I doubt they can get confirmation without judicial experience. No legal training or experience seems to be required by the Constitution, but I don't see this one making it.


That was my first response upon hearing of the nomination. However, I since learned that it has happened on more than several occasions in the past. Obviously there are no restrictions. I would suppose the only restriction is a nominee without a law degree. And even that may not be true. I guess we will be hearing from the legal eagles on the forum to give us the scoop.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 09:01 am
In announcing his nomination of Miers, President Bush noted her lack of experience on the bench:


"Harriet's life has been characterized by service to others, and she will bring that same passion for service to the Supreme Court of the United States. I've given a lot of thought to the kind of people who should serve on the federal judiciary. I've come to agree with the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who wrote about the importance of having judges who are drawn from a wide diversity of professional backgrounds. Justice Rehnquist himself came to the Supreme Court without prior experience on the bench, as did more than 35 other men, including Byron White. And I'm proud to nominate an outstanding woman who brings a similar record of achievement in private practice and public service."

Accepting the nomination, Miers said:

"From my early days as a clerk in the federal district court, and throughout almost three decades of legal practice, bar service and community service, I have always had a great respect and admiration for the genius that inspired our Constitution and our system of government. My respect and admiration have only grown over these past five years that you have allowed me to serve the American people as a representative of the executive branch.

The wisdom of those who drafted our constitution and conceived our nation as functioning with three strong and independent branches have proven truly remarkable. It is the responsibility of every generation to be true to the founders' vision of the proper role of the courts in our society. 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."
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 09:04 am
Just as there's no requirement that the pope must be a priest, there's no requirement that a supreme court nominee must be a judge, or even a lawyer. There have been quite a few justices who never had previous experience on the bench (e.g. Earl Warren, William Rehnquist). Nevertheless, it is unusual for a nominee to lack any previous judicial experience.

That being said, nominating Miers is something like choosing a parish priest to be pope. She's White House counsel -- not even an administrative post (unlike Rehnquist, who at least was assistant attorney general when he was picked by Nixon). She is, in effect, Bush's lawyer: that's her only qualification.

I thought John Roberts's resume was rather skimpy, but Miers beats him by a mile. She's a nobody, with no background, no paper trail, and most likely no opinions that she will be willing to share with the senate judiciary committee. She's a cipher, which, I suppose, makes her the perfect Bush nominee.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 09:09 am
Walter
What else could she say?
In truth she is an unknown quantity. The only thing I would imagine to be true is that Bush believes she is a right wing conservative. Hopefully he will be proven wrong.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 09:14 am
I don't like this one bit.

Joe, what do you think her chances of confirmation are?
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 09:18 am
A Woman Of Low Profile In a Job High-Powered
A Woman Of Low Profile In a Job High-Powered
On Nov. 20, 2004, Elisabth Bumiller of The Times profiled Ms. Miers:
New York Times
October 3, 2005

The woman President Bush appointed this week as White House counsel, Harriet Miers, is hardly known in Washington but has a history in Texas of handling years of scandal at the state's lottery commission. The president, who once retained her as his personal lawyer, described her in 1996 as ''a pit bull in Size 6 shoes.''

Those attributes should help her in a new job that requires her to advise Mr. Bush not only on national security and military law -- a large part of the counsel's responsibilities since Sept. 11, 2001 -- but also on continuing legal investigations, including an inquiry into who in the administration leaked the name of a C.I.A. undercover officer.

''She's the kind of person you want in your corner when all the chips are being played,'' said one friend, Joseph M. Allbaugh, former director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. ''She will give the president advice unvarnished, and that's exactly what he wants.''

Ms. Miers, 59, currently serves as deputy chief of staff for policy and assistant to the president. She has rarely, if ever, talked to reporters since arriving in Washington in 2001, and she declined a request for an interview on Friday.

But her history, and comments from friends, suggest that she is the kind of woman, like Karen P. Hughes and Condoleezza Rice, whom Mr. Bush likes on his staff: tough, direct and intensely loyal. Her appointment reflects the president's determination to promote longtime members of his inner circle to critical positions for his second term.

''Harriet Miers is a trusted adviser on whom I have relied for straightforward advice,'' Mr. Bush said in a statement released this week. ''Harriet has the keen judgment and discerning intellect necessary to be an outstanding counsel.'' In 1995, Mr. Bush, then in his first months as governor of Texas, appointed Ms. Miers to a six-year term as chairwoman of the Texas Lottery Commission.

Ms. Miers unexpectedly resigned after five years that were marked by controversy and the dismissal of two executive directors of the commission. The first executive director, Nora Linares, was fired in 1997 when it became public that her boyfriend had worked for the company that held the contract to operate the lottery. Ms. Linares's successor was dismissed after only five months when he began reviewing campaign contributions of state legislators without the commission's knowledge.

Despite the problems, as well as the lottery's declining sales, The Dallas Morning News praised Ms. Miers when she resigned in 2000 for ''preserving the operations' integrity.''

Ms. Miers, who is unmarried, was born and raised in Dallas, one of five children whose father was in the real estate business. She graduated from Southern Methodist University and its law school, then went to work in Dallas for Locke Purnell Rain Harrell. In 1985 she became the first woman to be president of the Dallas Bar Association, and in 1992 the first woman to be president of the Texas State Bar. She became the president of Locke Purnell in 1996, the first woman to lead a major Texas law firm.

In 1998, she presided over the merger of Locke Purnell with another big Texas firm, Liddell, Sapp, Zivley, Hill & LaBoon, and became co-managing partner of the resulting megafirm, Locke Liddell & Sapp.

In 2001, Mr. Bush brought Ms. Miers to Washington with him as his staff secretary, a little known but powerful job in which she handled much of the paper flow to the president. Ms. Miers is a regular guest at Camp David and is often the only woman who accompanies Mr. Bush and male staff members in long brush-cutting and cedar-clearing sessions at the president's ranch.

Ms. Miers has an extremely low profile in Washington. She was better known in Texas, where Governor Bush introduced her when she received the Anti-Defamation League's Jurisprudence Award in 1996.

''When it comes to cross-examination,'' Mr. Bush said then, ''she can fillet better than Mrs. Paul.''
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 09:19 am
sozobe wrote:
Joe, what do you think her chances of confirmation are?

There are 55 Republican senators. You do the math.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 09:19 am
There an audio out by now:

Loyalty and Stealth
NEWSWEEK's Debra Rosenberg on why Bush picked Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court link to audio
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 09:22 am
I persist, perhaps naively, in thinking that there are hard-line Republican senators who will merely say "how high?" when Bush says jump, and a separate group of Republican senators who actually think. McCain would be an example of the second group.

Could there be enough of those to put the kibosh on this?
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 09:27 am
BBB
I wonder how the American Bar Association will rate her qualifications as a judge since she has never been one.

BBB
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 09:30 am
Now would be a good time to write to your Senators, whichever side of the aisle they might represent.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 09:31 am
Unless something found in her paper trail that makes her unsuitable to the republican senators. She will be confirmed. The Democrats in the senate are at this time irrelevant.They can scratch but not bite.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 09:35 am
There might be a valid case made for the cronyism charge. Perhaps a few repubs can be swayed to vote against someone so closely connected to Bush's inner circle.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 09:42 am
J_B wrote:
There might be a valid case made for the cronyism charge. Perhaps a few repubs can be swayed to vote against someone so closely connected to Bush's inner circle.


you certainly live a rich fantasy life. I commend you. Laughing
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Oct, 2005 09:48 am
Maybe the religious people are correct. We are aproaching armageddon. God sent his messanger to faciliate the process. Sad Sad
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Miers to be SC nominee?
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/24/2021 at 04:16:51