Imagine if Boston University had announced last summer that, rather than Robert Brown, the new president of BU was your high-school physics teacher. Think about what would go through your head. Done? Good. Now you know how the American legal profession feels after the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. Not since the Emperor Caligula named his horse as a Roman consul has someone so unqualified and so underwhelming been nominated for such a high office.
Why am I so harsh? The Supreme Court is a special place. The people who sit on the Court have to resolve deep and complex legal questions on the rights of citizens, the validity of laws and the limits of government. It should be a place reserved for people with a powerful intellect, capable of seeing a clear and consistent outcome through even the most daunting of legal minutia. The first and last time you will hear the words “powerful intellect” and “Harriet Miers” in the same sentence will be in the one you just read.
My objection is not about politics. I am fan of John Roberts. You may disagree with his philosophy, but one thing you cannot dispute is that the man belongs on the Supreme Court. He has a great mind, and has detailed views on the Constitution supported by a lifetime of work in law. Even Antonin Scalia, the justice I find most repugnant, is unquestionably brilliant and a good representative of conservative judicial philosophy on the court.
Contrast these two conservatives with Harriet Miers, a woman about whom a supportive Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) said would need “a crash course in Constitutional Law.” Are you kidding me?! This would be like the Red Sox trotting out someone as their new manager and saying that they need a quick reminder of the rules of baseball. But, then again, the Red Sox only matter emotionally to a group of fans, and managers can be fired. Crony McStooge will be there for life if the Senate confirms her, and she will decide cases which will affect the rights of millions.
Of course, the counterargument from the Bush administration is that the Court needs a perspective of someone from outside the mainstream of the law, with more practical experience. This, by itself, is a valid point. But has anyone noticed that Harriet Miers is a lawyer? She is simply not an exceptionally smart, talented or accomplished one. So, what Bush is saying is that because there are way too many great legal minds on the Supreme Court, what is needed is a mediocre one. Bush is pretty mediocre himself, but this still doesn’t excuse such a terrible pick.
If Bush really wanted someone with more practical experience on the Supreme Court there are a multitude of better and more accomplished choices. They include: Bill Clinton, Al Gore and John Kerry. Oh, wait, he wants conservatives? Okay then how about Orrin Hatch, John McCain, Colin Powell or George Will? Oh, he wants a conservative woman? Did he miss Elizabeth Dole, Kaye Bailey Hutchinson and Olympia Snowe on his jogs through Washington? Sure, some of these people would be terrible choices for the court, but they would all be much better than a crony and handmaiden of George W. Bush, who probably should recuse herself whenever a case involving the administration comes in front of the court.
The most stunning thing about this whole episode, though, is that some people are actually going along with it. All Americans should recoil at such a poor choice for the Supreme Court. Moreover, Democrats should be furious at such a choice. How can they expect Harriet to defend people’s Constitutional rights when she doesn’t know what those Constitutional rights are?
“Calm down,” some Democrats might say, “Harriet is a moderate. Look! We don’t know where she stands on the issues, she might be pretty reasonable!” I suppose she could be a moderate jurist. Then again, she could also believe that Jews, homosexuals and Free Masons secretly burned the real Christian Constitution in the 1780s and then received our current Constitution from Satan himself. Since she’s never actually expressed an opinion on Constitutional issues, we have no idea if either is true or even likely.
Democrats ought to fight this pick, not only because she might be a servant of the right, but also because she is plain incompetent and unfit to serve. Cronies don’t make good Supreme Court justices, and the United States deserves a nominee who is qualified, brilliant and independent. If the Democrats allow this joke – this insult to the American government – to be confirmed, then they don’t even deserve to be in opposition, let alone climb back into power. Harriet Miers’ confirmation would be yet another black eye for a government that has failed us so much recently.
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
