Monday, October 03, 2005

Miers Round-Up

Joe Gandelman at TMV has the one place to go for all the reaction today from around the press and the blogosphere to the Miers nomination. He's done a great job with this post, and I highly recommend it.

My thoughts, I must say, haven't really changed from earlier. It could have been worse, I'm slightly put off by the cronyism aspect, but so far I see no reason to fight this nomination. Quite the contrary, I think fighting this nomination would probably only get us a much, much worse alternative. So, while I reserve final judgment until after the Judiciary Committee hearings, as of now, I'm underwhelmed but not opposed.

3 Comments:

At 12:23 AM, Anonymous Paul Wartenberg said...

I can't support this nomination at all, for exactly the reason that is bothering you: the cronyism aspect of it all. She's not bringing judicial experience to the bench. The only reason, the only real reason she got this nod is that Bush knew her, she's a loyalist from the inner circle. And to be frank, all of his loyalists are incompetent as hell or worse corrupt as hell. After Katrina, after Heckofajob Brownie, cronyism is a four-letter word around here. Bush could have done a lot better with a Roberts-esque pick, in some respects I'd be settling for a Scalia-esque pick compared to her.

 
At 7:16 AM, Blogger JBD said...

Yeah Paul I think that's a legit position, for sure ... and it's one I may well come around to as things move forward. I quite agree that he could he done a "heck of a" lot better this time, and wish he had.

 
At 1:06 PM, Blogger Alan Stewart Carl said...

You need to read what Randy Barnett wrote in the WSJ (link here). He quotes Hamilton from Federalist No. 76 where AH argues that one of the points of Senate confirmations is to prevent the President from appointing unqualified political allies to important posts.

It's really, really hard for me to believe that Miers is one of the best legal minds in the nation AND she just happens to have been a Bush insider for the last decade.

This is all very strange. It's not that Miers should be opposed based on having an out-of-the-mainstream judicial philosophy. It's that she should be opposed based on her lack of qualifications and overly close ties to the President.

I will wait and learn more before actively opposing Miers. But this doesn't look like a strong pick at all.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home