Archive: October 16, 2005 - October 22, 2005
Knight Ridder Report on Miers Land Transaction
AP reports: Texas officials paid Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers' family more than $100,000 for a small piece of land in 2000 - 10 times the land's worth - despite the state's objections to the way the price was determined, Knight Ridder Newspapers reported Saturday. The three-member committee that determined the price included Peggy Lundy, a friend of Miers, and property-rights activist Cathie Adams, Knight Ridder reported. They were appointed to the panel by state District Judge David Evans, who had received at least $5,000 in campaign contributions from Miers' law firm....
By Fred Barbash | October 22, 2005; 9:53 PM ET | Comments (2)
George Will
George Will's column asks, among other things, "Can Miers's confirmation be blocked? It is easy to get a senatorial majority to take a stand in defense of this or that concrete interest, but it is surpassingly difficult to get a majority anywhere to rise in defense of mere excellence." Such is the perfect perversity of the nomination of Harriet Miers that it discredits, and even degrades, all who toil at justifying it. Many of their justifications cannot be dignified as arguments. Of those that can be, some reveal a deficit of constitutional understanding commensurate with that which it is, unfortunately, reasonable to impute to Miers. Other arguments betray a gross misunderstanding of conservatism on the part of persons masquerading as its defenders....
By Fred Barbash | October 22, 2005; 8:16 AM ET | Comments (11)
Miers and Diversity
Jo Becker and Sylvia Moreno in TWP:As president of the State Bar of Texas, Harriet Miers wrote that "our legal community must reflect our population as a whole," and under her leadership the organization embraced racial and gender set-asides and set numerical targets to achieve that goal. The Supreme Court nominee's words and actions from the early 1990s, when she held key leadership positions as president-elect and president of the state bar, provide the first window into her personal views on affirmative action, an area in which the Supreme Court is closely divided and where Miers could tip the court's balance....
By Fred Barbash | October 22, 2005; 8:12 AM ET | Comments (3)
Cornyn vs. Specter
David D. Kirkpatrick writes in the NYT: Senator John Cornyn, a Texas Republican on the Judiciary Committee and a former judge, took exception on Friday to comments by Senator Arlen Specter, the committee chairman, that Harriet E. Miers, the Supreme Court nominee, needed a "crash course on constitutional law."...
By Fred Barbash | October 21, 2005; 9:57 PM ET | Comments (2)
Judiciary Committee Message
This week in the life of the Harriet Miers nomination is worth some comment. It is apparent now that members of the Senate Judiciary Committee are trying to tell the White House that Miers, as one member put it, is going to have a "tough" time in the hearings. While such language is not explicitly a recommendation for withdrawal of a nominee, it comes close, considering the fact that committee members are traditionally circumspect in their pre-hearing comments, generally adopting some variation of "wait and see." The two ranking members, Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) were clearly appalled by Miers's questionnaire submission, to the point that they demanded a do-over. Others report at best awkward private meetings with Miers, which left them confused about what she was telling them. More important, some came right out and said so, a striking contrast to the conventional "we had a...
By Fred Barbash | October 21, 2005; 5:43 AM ET | Comments (35)
Hard to Believe
Charles Babington writes in The Washington Post:Two months after engineering a nearly flawless confirmation process for Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., the Bush administration's bid to add Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court has been so riddled with errors, stumbles and embarrassing revelations that some lawmakers and other observers find it hard to believe it emanates from the same White House....
By Fred Barbash | October 21, 2005; 3:54 AM ET | Comments (13)
Krauthammer: Exit Strategy for HEM
Charles Krauthammer in this morning's Washington Post: Excerpt:We need an exit strategy from this debacle. I have it. Sen. Lindsey Graham has been a staunch and public supporter of this nominee. Yet on Wednesday he joined Brownback in demanding privileged documents from Miers's White House tenure. Finally, a way out: irreconcilable differences over documents....
By Fred Barbash | October 21, 2005; 3:47 AM ET | Comments (35)
Salazar Sees Trouble
The Denver Post reports this morning: Despite meeting with Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers for nearly an hour Thursday, Colorado Sen. Ken Salazar [D] said he lacked a sense of who she is and predicted the Senate will have difficulty deciding on her confirmation....
By Fred Barbash | October 21, 2005; 3:37 AM ET | Comments (3)
WSJ: 'Blunder of the First Order'
Excerpts from Wall Street Journal editorial: Although skeptical from the start, we've restrained our criticism of the Harriet Miers nomination because we've long believed that Presidents of either party deserve substantial deference on their Supreme Court picks. Yet it now seems clear -- even well before her Senate hearings -- that this selection has become a political blunder of the first order.... Regarding Ms. Miers's qualifications, we aren't among those who think an Ivy League pedigree or judgeship is a prerequisite for a Supreme Court seat. But the process of getting to know Ms. Miers has been the opposite of reassuring. Her courtesy calls on Senators have gone so poorly that the White House may stop them altogether. Perhaps Ms. Miers will prove to be such a sterling Senate witness that she can still win confirmation. But so far the lesson we draw from this nomination is this: Bad things...
By Fred Barbash | October 21, 2005; 3:30 AM ET | Comments (11)
Senate Meetings Leave 'Poor Impression'
From Elisabeth Bumiller's NYT article this morning on HEM's prepping:Ms. Miers, whose confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee are scheduled to begin Nov. 7, has so far practiced in three mock hearings of three to five hours each, most recently on Tuesday. A White House official said Ms. Miers and her team planned at least a dozen more, about the same number that Chief Justice Roberts had. Some conservative lawyers and Republican aides said Thursday that Ms. Miers needed further preparation and that her meetings with senators were leaving such a poor impression that they should be ended for more murder board time, said three people who listened to a conference call organized by Leonard A. Leo, a lawyer working with the White House to organize support for judicial nominees. Mr. Leo said the call was an ordinary discussion about "process," and the White House said it was sticking...
By Fred Barbash | October 21, 2005; 3:22 AM ET | Comments (1)
Brownback: Hearings Will Be 'Tough for Her'
Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), in an interview with Fox News' Britt Hume, says he asked Miers about Griswold and the right to privacy it established. His comments are confusing, but he seems to be saying that he got the impression, at least, that she considers the privacy doctrine in Griswold "not settled." There's some suggestion that she may have given this answer as a reason not to answer a question about Griswold, but in the course of doing so, she did indeed answer -- perhaps inadvertently. "I did talk with her about Griswold," Brownback says. "... She looked at it as the factual setting of Griswold is unlikely to come back up. But the legal issue, I interpreted from what she was saying, is not a settled doctrine." Later, on the same subject, Brownback says " I don't know what particularly she is saying.... " Recall now that Sen. Arlen...
By Fred Barbash | October 20, 2005; 8:23 PM ET | Comments (2)
Nomination Stalled
Jesse J. Holland of AP reports:The Senate may find it tough to meet President Bush's timetable to confirm Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, with lawmakers complaining anew Thursday about incomplete answers to their questions and demanding more information about her work for the president. The White House wants her confirmed by Thanksgiving, and senators plan to begin her Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings on Nov. 7. But problems like Miers' failing to mention on her Senate questionnaire that her Texas law license had been temporarily suspended -- and her being criticized by the committee's two top senators for incomplete answers on a questionnaire -- keep popping up, making it unlikely the Senate will rush her nomination through. "I would say that to this point Ms. Miers' efforts to win support have not been successful," said Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., a member of the Judiciary Committee. "I think that those of us...
By Fred Barbash | October 20, 2005; 6:04 PM ET | Comments (1)
Friends of WH: Nomination No Longer Viable
John Dickerson reports in Slate:Friends and allies of the White House are now saying the Harriet Miers nomination has come to the same pass that the president's plan for overhauling Social Security reached last spring. The nomination is no longer viable; all that remains is for Bush to accept this....
By Fred Barbash | October 20, 2005; 5:37 PM ET | Comments (4)
Miers Handlers Demoralized, Pessimistic
Byron York reports in the National Review Online:Strategists working with the White House in support of the Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers are becoming increasingly demoralized and pessimistic about the nomination's prospects on Capitol Hill in the wake of Miers's meetings with several Republican and Democratic senators. On a conference call held this morning, they even discussed whether Miers should simply stop visiting with lawmakers, lest any further damage be done -- and so that time spent in such get-acquainted sessions will not cut into Miers's intensive preparation for her confirmation hearing. "... Obviously the smart thing to do [said one unnamed strategist helping the White House] would be to withdraw the nomination and have a do-over as soon as possible. But the White House is so irrational that who knows? As of this morning, there is a sort of pig-headed resolve to press forward, cancel the meetings with...
By Fred Barbash | October 20, 2005; 5:34 PM ET | Comments (6)
Miers's Money
Henry Blodget, in Slate, analyzes HEM's financial situation. What does Harriet Miers' money tell us about her? The Supreme Court nominee has filed financial disclosure forms for the last five years as a requirement for her White House job. The most remarkable fact that emerges from her filings is this: She managed to work for nearly 30 years as an attorney in private practice without getting rich. Chief Justice John Roberts--whose psycho-financial biography you can read here--amassed a fortune worth at least $3 million and probably much more; Miers finds herself at age 60 with a net worth of about $675,000, which unfortunately does not make her wealthy....
By Fred Barbash | October 20, 2005; 3:51 PM ET | Comments (7)
Ga. Senators Support HEM
From the Marietta (Ga.) Daily Journal Unlike some of their Republican counterparts, Georgia's two U.S. Senators say they support President Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, even though they haven't decided for sure whether or not they will vote for her confirmation....
By Fred Barbash | October 20, 2005; 3:40 PM ET | Comments (8)
Bush Looking for a 'Fresh Outlook' on the Court
At a brief White House news conference today, President Bush was asked about the criticism of the Miers nomination process voiced yesterday by Sens. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). Bush acknowledged that it was an "unusual nomination because she's never been a judge." But he said that was one of the reasons he chose Miers. "I thought it made a lot of sense to bring a fresh outlook of somebody who has actually been a very successful attorney." He also said Miers would address issues about the Senate's questionnaire that were raised by Specter and Leahy....
By Lexie Verdon | October 20, 2005; 1:30 PM ET | Comments (41)
More on Specter-Leahy
The morning coverage is dominated by the the story of Sens. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) seeking a do-over from HEM on her take-home exam. Bloggers and others continue searching out inadequacies in her questionnaire, including her discussion of venue and equal protection (see below) as well as in her prose, reputation for meticulousness and her tardiness in submitting the document. In her favor, meanwhile, is a WSJ Op-ed (subscription) co-written by Ken Starr and Ronald A. Cass, picking up the theme that Miers's experience in corporate law is something the SCOTUS could use. "... We value her significant experience in business law," they write. Charles Babington and Michael A. Fletcher report in The Washington Post: The top two members of the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday complained about the written responses they received from Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers this week, and warned her to expect tough questions...
By Fred Barbash | October 20, 2005; 3:09 AM ET | Comments (18)
Miers Also Failed to Pay Bar Dues in Texas
Harriet Miers has reported a second incident in which she failed to pay Bar dues, resulting in a short suspension. Miers, in a letter to Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), said her Texas Bar license was "administratively suspended" for several weeks in 1989 due to late payment of her bar dues. The suspension, she said, was lifted as soon as her dues were received, she told Leahy. "I understand I was restored to former status" then, she wrote. This is the second reported incident of failure to pay bar dues. On her questionnaire submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Miers noted that she had a similar problem with theD.C. Bar. In her letter to Leahy, she also said she neglected to list her affiliation with two entities, specifically, she was a director and shareholder of Priority Enterprises from 1983 to 2000, which she descried as a "for-profit consulting and personnel placement...
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 7:14 PM ET | Comments (25)
Specter-Leahy letter to Miers
Click here to see the letter sent by Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) to Harriet Miers requesting more information than she provided in her initial responses to the Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire. Among the requests: Please explain in greater detail exactly when, and under what circumstances, you were suspended from the D.C. Bar for non-payment of dues. Include any documentation, notices from the Bar, cancelled checks, or correspondence, which would help us understand the facts and circumstances of your suspension. Also inform the Committee whether, during the time of your suspension, you appeared in any courts in the District of Columbia. In answer to question 17, you explained that as Counsel to the President you are regularly faced with issues involving constitutional questions, but gave us no specifics about the issues themselves, or the work that you personally did. Please provide the Committee with details concerning the...
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 6:59 PM ET | Comments (3)
Specter, Leahy Excerpts
Sens. Patrick Leahy (Vt.) and Arlen Specter (Pa.), the ranking Democrat and the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, respectively, held a news conference this afternoon. Here are some excerpts on the subject of HEM's responsiveness. Q Senator Leahy, are you insulted personally by her lack of responsiveness? SEN. LEAHY: I have seen an incomplete questionnaire. We've sent out -- I thought -- a very good questionnaire. I was satisfied with the questionnaire that went out. Democrats and Republicans on the committee -- and you know this is a committee that goes across the political spectrum -- were satisfied with it. I don't know of anybody who would tell you in that committee, that they were satisfied with the responses. So I would describe myself as unsatisfied, and I have to be satisfied before I'll vote for anybody, Republican or Democrat....
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 4:10 PM ET | Comments (3)
Specter, Leahy: HEM Responses Incomplete
Reuters reports: U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers was asked by the top Republican and Democrat on the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday to clarify some of the answers she provided this week in a questionnaire their panel sent to her. At a news conference, Chairman Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, and Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, ranking Democrat, described many of her written responses as "incomplete" and "insufficient." "Please prepare a supplement to your responses" in a number of areas "with as much detail, particularity and precision as possible," they wrote in a letter to Miers. Specter also announced that despite complaints by some Democrats that more time was needed to evaluate Miers her confirmation hearing will begin Nov. 7....
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 4:04 PM ET | Email a Comment
Questions on the Questionnaire
HEM's questionnaire and other materials can be viewed here. For a discussion of the HEM questionnaire, see Amy Goldstein and Charles Babington in this morning's Washington Post:White House colleagues have portrayed Miers as uncommonly meticulous in her work. Yet her 57-page response to the committee's questionnaire appears, in several aspects, less precise than the one submitted in August by the last nominee to the court, John G. Roberts Jr., now the chief justice. She listed as "date unknown" a commencement address that she gave at the Texas Tech University School of Law. And asked to list all interviews she had granted newspapers and other news organizations, she omitted an interview with The Washington Post in June.In acknowledging her problem with the D.C. bar, Miers wrote that she was notified about her delinquent dues "earlier this year," although it actually was during 2004. Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.), an outspoken...
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 12:04 PM ET | Comments (4)
Report: Hearings to Start Nov. 7
Reuters reports: Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers' confirmation hearings will begin on Nov. 7, congressional aides said Wednesday. Though at least some Democrats had sought more time before the proceedings begin, Sen. Arlen Specter, the Judiciary Committee Chairman and a Pennsylvania Republican, decided to start the hearings on Nov. 7 and plans to announce it later on Wednesday, aides said. The Republicans' goal is to have a confirmation vote by the full Republican-led Senate before the Nov. 24 Thanksgiving Day holiday. But Democrats may try to push that back if they believe more time is needed to evaluate President Bush's nominee to the nation's highest court, aides said....
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 10:16 AM ET | Email a Comment
Seattle PI Urges Miers Withdrawal
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer says in an editorial today that "President Bush should withdraw the nomination of Harriet Miers to the U.S. Supreme Court."...
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 10:12 AM ET | Comments (3)
Leahy on Miers 'Lack of Responsiveness'
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has issued the following statement regarding Harriet Miers's answers to the committee's questions:"These answers do not help the Senate much in reaching an informed decision about this nomination. In order to conduct a fair and thorough review, the Senate needs information about Ms. Miers, including her experience, her judgment, her views on the Constitution, and her independence. So far, these answers heighten, rather than lessen, concerns about whether, as a Supreme Court justice, she would be able to maintain independence from this administration and future administrations. Lack of responsiveness only adds to the burden she will have in the hearings."...
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 10:03 AM ET | Email a Comment
Bork on Miers
Robert Bork writes in the WSJ op-ed section (subscription):With a single stroke -- the nomination of Harriet Miers -- the president has damaged the prospects for reform of a left-leaning and imperialistic Supreme Court, taken the heart out of a rising generation of constitutional scholars, and widened the fissures within the conservative movement. That's not a bad day's work -- for liberals. There is, to say the least, a heavy presumption that Ms. Miers, though undoubtedly possessed of many sterling qualities, is not qualified to be on the Supreme Court. It is not just that she has no known experience with constitutional law and no known opinions on judicial philosophy. It is worse than that. As president of the Texas Bar Association, she wrote columns for the association's journal. David Brooks of the New York Times examined those columns. He reports, with supporting examples, that the quality of her thought...
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 9:56 AM ET | Comments (26)
PFAW's Neas Seeks Hearing Delay
People for the American Way has issued the following press release:Following news reports that the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court candidate Harriet Miers will begin November 7th, only five weeks after her nomination, People For the American Way President Ralph G. Neas issued the following statement: "It's wrong to rush a hearing on this nominee for a lifetime appointment. The Senate and the American people need more time to assess a candidate who is so little known, who has never served as a judge, and whose answers to the Senate's written questionnaire were as illuminating as a 25-watt bulb. Her role as President Bush's personal lawyer, and as an influential voice in critical White House decisions over the past four years must be examined closely to see whether she can make the fair and independent judgments required of the Supreme Court. "Justice O'Connor has graciously agreed to serve until...
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 9:52 AM ET | Comments (1)
Feinstein on Miers
The following statement was issued late yesterday by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.):"Today, I received a copy of the April 11, 1989, questionnaire submitted by Texans United For Life to Harriet Miers during her campaign for the Dallas City Council and her responses to these questions. The answers clearly reflect that Harriet Miers is opposed to Roe v. Wade. This raises very serious concerns about her ability to fairly apply the law without bias in this regard. It will be my intention to question her very carefully about these issues."...
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 3:08 AM ET | Comments (135)
The Day After
Miers Once Vowed to Support Ban on Abortion, But Conservatives Still Question Nominee's Views, by Amy Goldstein and Charles Babington in The Washington Post. Nominee Backed Ban on Abortion in 1989 Campaign, by David D. Kirkpatrick in the NYT. Miers could be key anti-abortion vote, in Dallas Morning News. Republicans Warming Up to Miers, More Democrats find cause for concern. The turning point for both parties seems to be her answers about abortion in a 1989 survey, by Maura Reynolds in the L.A. Times. Miers was vetted by few in administration, by Joan Biskupic and Toni Locy in USA Today. Miers Disclosures Could Boost Conservative Support, In 1989, Supreme Court Pick Backed Ban on Abortions; Generous Tithing to Church, by Deborah Solomon, Jeanne Cummings and Jess Bravin in the WSJ. (subscription.)...
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 2:32 AM ET | Comments (3)
Lott, Browback, Graham on Miers
Alexander Bolton in the Hill: Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) are calling for the White House to turn over internal documents related to Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers's service as White House counsel, breaking with Republican colleagues who say the boundaries of executive privilege must not be pushed.Jonathan Allen reports in the Hill: Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) suggested yesterday that he may end up supporting Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, even as a prominent Democrat echoed Republican concerns about a lack of information on President Bush's pick to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Lott's possible support could trigger momentum for the Miers nomination among conservative members of the Senate. "More than likely, at some point, I'll be satisfied," said Lott, who brandished a four-page memo of Miers talking points he had been handed. But, Lott added, he is not convinced yet....
By Fred Barbash | October 18, 2005; 8:16 PM ET | Comments (6)
Miers 'Underqualified'
Stuart Taylor Jr., writing in the National Journal:A review of the most important ingredients possessed by a good justice-nominee illustrates both why it is so hard to find consensus choices and why we should be able to agree that Miers seems underqualified -- even assuming the need for some compromise in quality for the sake of political viability and diversity....
By Fred Barbash | October 18, 2005; 6:54 PM ET | Comments (6)
The Fate of HEM
Gail Russell Chaddock has this story in the Christian Science Monitor:Rising stakes for Miers hearing Just a half-dozen GOP senators could derail her confirmation to high court.After the initial shock and awe over her nomination, the outcome of Harriet Miers's bid to join the Supreme Court now depends on how many Senate Republicans join conservative critics determined to bring her down. The White House had expected a small army of conservative groups to provide covering fire for nominees as they charged through the Senate. But many are now missing in action or outright hostile, because they doubt the nominee's legal and conservative credentials. The result is that Ms. Miers is now going it alone, making her testimony at next month's Judiciary Committee hearings even more important....
By Fred Barbash | October 18, 2005; 6:48 PM ET | Email a Comment
Miers 1989 Abortion Questionnaire
Click here to view the form filled out by Miers in 1989 endorsing a constitutional amendment banning abortion....
By Fred Barbash | October 18, 2005; 12:27 PM ET | Comments (17)
D.C. Bar Dues
Reuters reports: U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers told the U.S. Senate Tuesday her ability to practice law in the District of Columbia was briefly suspended this year because of nonpayment of bar association dues. "Earlier this year, I received notice that my dues for the District of Columbia Bar were delinquent and as a result my ability to practice law in D.C. had been suspended," Miers said in submitting written responses to a broad-ranging questionnaire from the Senate Judiciary Committee. "I immediately sent the dues in to remedy the delinquency," wrote Miers, President Bush's White House counsel. "The nonpayment was not intentioned, and I corrected the situation upon receiving the letter."...
By Fred Barbash | October 18, 2005; 12:24 PM ET | Comments (7)
Miers Questionnaire
Click here for the questionnaire submitted by Harriet Miers to the Senate Judiciary Committee....
By Fred Barbash | October 18, 2005; 11:20 AM ET | Comments (5)
Miers Backed Abortion Ban
Jesse J. Holland of AP reports:Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers pledged support in 1989 for a constitutional amendment banning abortions except when necessary to save the life of the mother, according to material given to the Senate on Tuesday. "If Congress passes a Human Life Amendment to the Constitution that would prohibit abortion except when it was necessary to prevent the death of the mother, would you actively support its ratification by the Texas Legislature," asked an April 1989 questionnaire sent out by the Texans United for Life group. Miers checked "yes" to that question, and all of the group's questions, including whether she would oppose the use of public moneys for abortions and whether she would use her influence to keep "pro-abortion" people off city health boards and commissions. The survey was part of the material sent to the Senate with Miers' Supreme Court questionnaire, according to two sources,...
By Fred Barbash | October 18, 2005; 11:03 AM ET | Comments (14)
Harriet Miers Financial Disclosure Available
Click here and here for the completed financial disclosure forms submitted by HEM to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Questionnaire will be available shortly....
By Fred Barbash | October 18, 2005; 10:28 AM ET | Email a Comment
Litmus Test
Michael Stokes Paulsen and John Yoo in an LA Times Op-Ed:The administration's stealth strategy assumes that it is improper for senators to ask, or for a nominee to answer, a question about Roe vs. Wade or any other substantive constitutional question. This has things exactly backward. The Constitution not only permits such questioning, it arguably requires it. Although the Constitution makes judges independent after appointment, it sets up an explicitly political appointment process before a judge is approved. Why on Earth would determining a nominee's approach to interpreting the Constitution be thought to be out of bounds, before giving her a lifetime appointment to do exactly that?...
By Fred Barbash | October 18, 2005; 7:51 AM ET | Comments (9)
Miers Speech Excerpts
The Boston Globe carries excerpts from a number of Miers speeches....
By Fred Barbash | October 18, 2005; 6:04 AM ET | Email a Comment
Miers Glowing Remarks
David Savage reports in the Los Angeles Times:Critics have poked fun at the effusive greeting card messages that Harriet E. Miers used to send to then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush and that have become public following her nomination to the Supreme Court. The glowing remarks were not limited to greeting cards, according to the texts of recent speeches and other public remarks released Monday by lawmakers. "President Bush's vision, his discipline and relentless dedication, his hard work and his likability have made it possible for all of us in this room to participate in the great enterprise we know as the United States," she told a group of White House interns in June. "Most importantly, these qualities in President Bush make a brighter future for our nation and people all around the world possible." "Serving President Bush and Mrs. Bush is an impossible-to-describe privilege," she told Pepperdine Law School graduates...
By Fred Barbash | October 18, 2005; 6:01 AM ET | Comments (3)
Specter Rescinds Account of Miers Comments
Arlen Specter's spokesperson apparently had a busy evening last night calling up reporters to rescind his earlier statement describing Miers's views on the right to privacy. Charles Babington and Amy Goldstein report in The Post:... Last night, a spokesman for Specter issued a statement saying that Miers had called him after his public comments "to say that he misunderstood her and that she had not taken a position on Griswold or the privacy issue." "Sen. Specter accepts Ms. Miers's statement that he misunderstood what she said," the statement said. Former senator Dan Coats (R-Ind.), who is helping guide Miers through the confirmation process, sat in on her meeting with Specter. He later said Miers agreed that the Constitution's "liberty clause" implies a right to privacy. But she stopped short of embracing specific rulings such as Griswold, according to White House spokesman Jim Dyke, who spoke with Coats. The Pittsburgh...
By Fred Barbash | October 18, 2005; 3:33 AM ET | Comments (19)
Miers Believes There's a Right to Privacy
Steven Thoma and James Kuhnenn of Knight Ridder report: Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers told the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday that she believes there's a right to privacy in the Constitution, a basic underpinning of the Supreme Court's landmark abortion ruling Roe v. Wade. Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the panel chairman, said that during a nearly two-hour private meeting Monday, Miers also told him that she believed the court had properly decided a precedent-setting 1965 privacy case, Griswold v. Connecticut, which established the legal foundation that led to Roe v. Wade. Miers also assured a Senate Democrat on Monday that she's never told anyone how she would rule on abortion rights. "Nobody knows how I would rule on Roe v. Wade," Miers said, according to Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee....
By Fred Barbash | October 17, 2005; 8:04 PM ET | Comments (6)
GOP Wants Hearings to Start Nov. 7
David Espo of the AP reports:Senate Republicans hope to begin confirmation hearings on Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers the week of November 7, officials said Monday as President Bush sought to bolster support for her troubled appointment. Officials in both parties said Republicans have proposed a schedule for Miers' confirmation process that calls for a vote in the full Senate before Thanksgiving. It was not clear whether Democrats would agree or seek changes. Miers arranged personal meetings during the day with Democratic Sens. Chuck Schumer of New York and Dianne Feinstein of California. Both are members of the Judiciary Committee, which will hold hearings and take the first vote on the nomination....
By Fred Barbash | October 17, 2005; 12:19 PM ET | Comments (4)
Video: Bush Meets Miers Supporters
Watch video of President Bush's Oct. 17 appearance with Texas supporters of Harriet Miers's nomination to the Supreme Court.
By washingtonpost.com Editors | October 17, 2005; 12:17 PM ET | Comments (39)
Bush Meets With Miers Supporters
Excerpt from president's comments after meeting with various retired Texas judges in support of the nomination of Harriet Miers: BUSH: They're here to send a message here in Washington that the person I picked to take Sandra Day O'Connor's place is not only a person of high character and of integrity, but a person that can get the job done. Harriet Miers is a uniquely qualified person to serve on the bench. She is smart. She is capable. She is a pioneer. She's been consistently ranked as one of the top 50 women lawyers in the United States. She has been a leader in the legal profession. She's impressed these folks. They know her well. They know that she'll bring excellence to the bench....
By Fred Barbash | October 17, 2005; 12:16 PM ET | Comments (19)
Business 'Applauding From the Wings'
Lorraine Woellert, writing in Sunday's Post Outlook section:Forget Roe and the Framers. Let's Talk BusinessConservative howling over Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers echoes unabated since President Bush introduced his friend and confidant to the public on Oct. 3. If anything, the clamor has intensified, with some in the conservative chattering class now hounding Miers to withdraw. But while Bush dodges the brickbats, another critical element of the Republican political base is applauding from the wings. That would be big business. For the first time in more than three decades, corporate America could find itself with not one, but two, Supreme Court allies with in-the-trenches industry experience -- Miers and newly minted Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. Don't be fooled by the low-key personas they have projected thus far; both are legal wonks who have packed a powerful punch in the corporate world. Together, they could be a CEO's dream team....
By Fred Barbash | October 17, 2005; 11:09 AM ET | Comments (3)
Promises?
John Fund, in Opinion Journal, says that during a conference call with evangelicals before Miers was appointed -- the same conference call James Dobson described last week -- two sitting Texas judges gave assurances that Miers would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. Here is the article....
By Fred Barbash | October 17, 2005; 7:33 AM ET | Comments (1)
Miers Pro Bono Work Described
Calvin Woodward of the Associated Press provides an account of Harriet Miers pro bono work in Texas: Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers looked close to home, or the office, in choosing the free legal cases to take on as a private lawyer. No sweeping constitutional matters for her, or even terribly contentious ones. She helped a garage attendant for her building complete an adoption. She won a case for a Nigerian woman who was fighting a deportation order. She lost when representing an indigent single mother denied disability benefits. "She handled small matters," said lawyer Jerry Clements, who has worked with Miers. "Somebody needed a divorce, somebody needed an adoption."...
By Fred Barbash | October 17, 2005; 4:13 AM ET | Comments (1)
Questionnaire Due
David D. Kirkpatrick in today's New York Times:After two weeks of hectoring from conservatives about her Supreme Court nomination, Harriet E. Miers is expected to offer her first rebuttal on Monday, in her answers to a Senate questionnaire. Strategists close to the White House, who requested anonymity for fear of reprisal, say they hope that Ms. Miers can use open-ended questions about subjects like "judicial activism" to lay out her approach to constitutional issues and to placate her conservative critics without providing ammunition to potential liberal opponents....
By Fred Barbash | October 17, 2005; 3:23 AM ET | Email a Comment
Rice on Miers
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was asked about Miers by Chris Wallace on "Fox News Sunday": WALLACE: Another new subject. I know that you're a close friend of Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, who's come under fire from conservatives in the last couple of weeks as an unqualified crony. Laura Bush said this week that she believed it's possible that sexism was behind some of these attacks. What do you think? RICE: I know Harriet Miers very well, worked with her now for five years. She is a woman with extraordinary integrity and talent. She is the kind of person who if there have been four arguments given, Harriet's going to look for the fifth. She's got a very probing mind and a probing intellect. And I think the problem is that people haven't gotten to know her. I think that when they get to know her in the...
By Fred Barbash | October 16, 2005; 10:48 AM ET | Comments (13)
Durbin: Bush and Miers's Religion
Chris Wallace questioning Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) on "Fox News Sunday." Durbin is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee: WALLACE: After everything you've heard, what do you think of her as a nominee for the Supreme Court? DURBIN: Well, I don't know much about her. I met with her personally, and I was happy that she came by the office, and I'm looking forward to the hearings with the Senate Judiciary Committee. But she's been subject to vicious attack by the Republican right. I also have to say that I don't think the president did her a favor this last week by bringing up her religion as part of the reason why she should be considered positively as a nominee. I believe that's the first time in history that any president has pointed directly at a nominee's religion in suggesting that's what qualifies them to serve on the court....
By Fred Barbash | October 16, 2005; 10:43 AM ET | Email a Comment
