In testimony to the Special Court of Review in August, Justice Hecht traced the start of his involvement in Ms. Miers’s nomination to a call from President Bush’s senior adviser, Karl Rove, on Oct. 1, 2005, two days before Mr. Bush announced his choice to fill the Supreme Court seat being vacated by Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.
Justice Hecht told the court that Mr. Rove had asked him to talk to callers about Ms. Miers’s “faith, about her religious background,” and that the group included James C. Dobson, a conservative leader and founder of Focus on the Family.
Justice Hecht said he also answered news media queries, which he said were so numerous that he was asked to report back to a White House aide on the nature of the questions.
He conceded to the court that he told one reporter, “I’m a P.R. office for the White House,” but he later called that a joke.
Justice Hecht said he had considered the Code of Judicial Conduct during his campaign in support of Ms. Miers’s nomination but did not think he was in violation of it. That opinion, he said, was reinforced by two senior appellate judges with whom he conferred.
The evidence [Mark L. Greenwald, a special counsel for the commission] presented to the special review court included a television interview in which Justice Hecht vouched for Ms. Miers as an opponent of abortion, citing her attendance at “a church that is — takes an open pro-life stance.” He also said of Ms. Miers: “She is very charming, of course. Everybody says gracious, but also very determined.”
UPDATE: Hecht wins. Good.
5 comments:
The Texas ACLU has taken the justice's side.
Damn those lefty jerks in the ACLU! Can't they leave us conservatives alone?
...
What, you mean they're on our side? Nevermind.
I'm not sure I see what the problem is. A seat on the Supreme Court isn't an elected position. Harriet Miers wasn't a candidate; she was an appointee. There's a difference. But if there isn't a difference between election and appointment, then what's the difference between Justice Hecht vouching for Harriet Miers and President Bush vouching for her?
As someone once said on another topic, but it applies here: "In Texas, we call that 'walking'."
How can it be illegal if everyone does it?
I would have thought that promoting Harriet Miers as Supreme Court material was per se "conduct discrediting the judiciary," but I second Jim's request for clarification as to how and why this should be seen as a good thing? I don't really have an opinion either way, just curious.
Isn't that the guy who was her boyfriend?
Post a Comment