October 10, 2005
With the Stakes so High, Is Miers Good Enough?Why are many conservatives outraged over the Miers nomination? Because the stakes are so high:
every Republican president over the past half century has stumbled when it comes to naming nominees to the high court. Consider the record:2 (Souter, Stevens) of the Supreme Court's 4 liberals were appointed by Republicans, as well as both of its meandering justices (Kennedy, O'Connor). With conservatives a minority of 3 (Roberts, Scalia, Thomas), we cannot afford Miers ending up like Kennedy or O'Connor. We need certainty about Miers based on her own record, not simply someone else's word (even the President's).After leaving office, Dwight Eisenhower was asked by a reporter if he had made any mistakes as president. "Two," Ike replied. "They are both on the Supreme Court." He referred to Earl Warren and William Brennan, both of whom became liberal icons.
Richard Nixon personally assured conservatives that Harry Blackmun would vote the same way as his childhood friend, Warren Burger. Within four years, Justice Blackmun had spun Roe v. Wade out of whole constitutional cloth. Chief Justice Burger concurred in Roe, and made clear he didn't even understand what the court was deciding: "Plainly," he wrote, "the Court today rejects any claim that the Constitution requires abortions on demand."
Gerald Ford personally told members of his staff that John Paul Stevens was "a good Republican, and would vote like one." Justice Stevens has since become the leader of the court's liberal wing...
Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation recalls the hard sell the Reagan White House made on behalf of Anthony Kennedy in 1987, after the Senate rejected Robert Bork. "They even put his priest on the phone with us to assure us he was solid on everything," Mr. Weyrich recalls. From term limits to abortion to the juvenile death penalty to the overturning of a state referendum on gay rights, Justice Kennedy has often disappointed conservatives.
Most famously, White House chief of staff John Sununu told Pat McGuigan, an aide to Mr. Weyrich, that the appointment of David Souter in 1990 would please conservatives. "This is a home run, and the ball is still ascending. In fact, it's just about to leave earth orbit," he told Mr. McGuigan. At the press conference announcing the appointment, the elder President Bush asserted five times that Justice Souter was "committed to interpreting, not making the law." The rest is history.
Posted by Jonathan R. on October 10, 2005 12:39 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/majority.cgi/2255
Comments
This your latest "kick?" Attacking the President and the Republicans over fiscal issues getting boring for you? Is there ANYTHING you like about Republicans? Maybe their logo or something?
[Yes. I like when Republicans are fiscally conservative and appoint reliably conservative people to the Supreme Court. It is your right to prefer profligate spending and unknowns for the Supreme Court. In the Big Tent of the GOP, there's room for conservatives and moderates as well. -Jonathan R.]
Posted by: Reverend Scaramonga ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.gopbloggers.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at October 10, 2005 03:00 PM
It should be a warning sign when virtually every contributor and a clear majority of commenters at www.confirmthem.com - a site which sprung into existence for the sole purpose of advoicating for President Bush's court nominations - is aghast at the Miers pick, and many of them are militating against it.
What's strange is, those defending the Miers pick don't really seem to be able to articulate a good reason to support her. Hugh Hewitt, for example, has lead the charge, and yet for all the endless stream of verbiage issuing from his blog in support of Miers, the only actual reason he has offered for supporting her is "trust the President." That's not actually an argument, though, Hugh.
Posted by: Simon at October 10, 2005 06:05 PM
To be fair, even Justice Blackmun didn't know what he was setting off with Roe. He thought he was giving doctors a chance to make occasional exceptions and recommend an abortion in a regular hospital for very serious cases. He was as shocked as Chief Justice Burger when doctors started to go along with virtually any request for an abortion and even set up clinics especially for abortions.
Posted by: Jeremy Pierce at October 10, 2005 09:29 PM
Jeremy-
If he didn't know what he was doing, that doesn't speak very highly of his foresight, but in any instance, having become aware of his mistake, how did Justice Blackmun vote in Webster and Casey? Did he try to help fix his mistake, or did he try to turn it into a sacred cow?
Posted by: Simon at October 11, 2005 09:43 AM
Post a comment
