Bush on Monday hinted he might choose a woman or minority member. But some outside advisers were intrigued by another part of Bush's reply. The president said he had interviewed and considered people from "all walks of life."The old Cheney maneuver!
That raised speculation that Bush was actively considering people who were not on the bench -- such as Miers....
"It could be someone outside of the legal judicial field like a Larry Thompson, or it could be a senator," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, a public interest legal group founded by religious broadcaster Pat Robertson.
Sekulow said he's heard Miers' name mentioned "fairly significantly" during the past two days. She doesn't have judicial experience, but she's a "well-respected lawyer-- someone the president trusts."
"I think Harriet could certainly be in the mix," he said....
Miers is leading the White House effort to help Bush choose nominees to the Supreme Court so naming her would follow a move Bush made in 2000 when he tapped the man leading his search committee for a running mate -- Dick Cheney.
Here's the White House press release from when she was elevated to the position vacated by Alberto Gonzales:
"Harriet Miers is a trusted adviser, on whom I have long relied for straightforward advice. Harriet has the keen judgment and discerning intellect necessary to be an outstanding Counsel. She is a talented lawyer whose great integrity, legal scholarship, and grace have long marked her as one of America's finest lawyers. I have deep respect for Harriet and look forward to her continued counsel in this new role," stated President Bush.Interesting!
Ms. Miers currently serves as Assistant to the President and Deputy Chief of Staff. Most recently, she served as Assistant to the President and Staff Secretary. Prior to joining the White House staff, Ms. Miers was Co-Managing Partner at Locke Liddell & Sapp, LLP, where she helped manage an over 400-lawyer firm. Previously, she was President of Locke, Purnell, Rain & Harrell, where she worked for 26 years. In 1992, Ms. Miers became the first woman elected Texas State Bar President following her selection in 1985 as the first woman to become President of the Dallas Bar Association. She also served as a Member-At-Large on the Dallas City Council. Ms. Miers received her bachelor's degree and J.D. from Southern Methodist University.
UPDATE: For many more posts about Harriet Miers, go to the October 3 posts on blog.
Posts
10 comments:
How can you call her a non-lawyer?? You must mean non-judge.
Rehnquist was a non-judge.
There has never been a non-lawyer on the Supreme Court. There have been lots of people who had not previously served as judges. Powell and Rehnquist are the most recent ones without prior judicial service, but the expectation of judicial service is mostly a modern phenomenon (and not necessarily a good thing). Some of the great justices of all time had no prior judicial service -- e.g., John Marshall, Robert Jackson.
Speaking of the Cheney precedent, Rehnquist, too, was involved in the selection process and had to be excluded when his name was put in play.
That said, I doubt the Meiers rumor will amount to anything.
Actually could be an interesting choice as Harriet Miers seems to have been respected from early on. TalkLeft endorsed(well congratulated) her in a post from 11/18/04. Sorry don't know how to provide a link.
How old is she?
She could be palatable enough - she's not that right....
Nice variation on 'jobs for the boys' though
Don't forget that O'Connor herself did not rise through the ranks of the appellate courts to become a Supreme Court Justice. She was elevated to the court from the Arizona State Legislature.
The President was right when he said this week that diversity should be a factor in choosing the new justice. Let's not just look at diversity of gender and skin color, though. Let us consider having justices who have had a diversity of life experience. Harriet Miers certainly has that quality in spades.
Actually, there was one justice -- Samuel Miller -- who was barely a lawyer. He was a physician by training and studied law on his own. He was nominated by Lincoln in 1862 and served, with considerable distinction, until his death in 1890. I think, but am not certain, that he wrote the court's opinion in the Slaughterhouse Cases.
The beauty of this nomination is that although she reeks of cronyism - a fellow Texan w/o judge experience who ran the local lottery (Arabian Horse Association, anyone?) -- is still just qualified enough for Bush to serve her up as a nominee.
One may conjecture that he's actually offering up a sacrificial lamb -- and either he'll get his way (and she'll be confirmed) or the Dems will be forced to skewer a woman (and risk looking like sexist obstructionists).
I've wondered about women as justices after Roe v. Wade. After all, they are the only ones who might have had an abortion. In my experience most professional women I have known (at least well enough to tell me) have had abortions.
Maybe it wont be so bad. Famous last words.
I do think she is benefiting from the cronyism, but will there be a more acceptable choice? I agree that this was a political chess move by Bush to kind of trap the Dems so that if they block her, they look like the bad guys. Knight to bishop 5, check!
Post a Comment