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 specific matters you handled, the constitutional issues presented in those matters, and the positions you took related to those issues. This question was designed to help the Committee learn more about your experience with constitutional law, and if most of it was gained during your years in the White House, it is important that we know more about the specifics of that experience.
Please be more specific in your answer to this question by telling the Committee any categories of cases from which you plan to recuse yourself, and by addressing in particular the problem of recusal as it relates to the litigation of cases arising out of matters on which you worked at the White House, or as a lawyer for President Bush in his personal capacity, or in service to his various campaigns. We are aware of the statutes and codes that generally govern these matters, but recusal decisions of Supreme Court Justices are more complicated because they are not subject to further review. The Committee would like you to address the issues specific to your situation.
If you did not make any representations to any individuals or interest groups as to how you might rule if confirmed, please respond, to the best of your knowledge, to the second part of question 27(c), which asks you to describe and provide copies of, "all communications by the Bush Administration or individuals acting on behalf of the Administration to any individuals or interest groups with respect to how you would rule." This would include any and all communications, including those about which there have been recent press reports, in which friends and supporters of yours, among others, were said to have been asked by the White House to assure certain individuals about your views. If you do not have first-hand knowledge of these communications, please endeavor to determine what sorts of communications, if any, took place.
By Fred Barbash |
October 19, 2005; 6:59 PM ET
| Category:
Breaking News
Previous: Specter, Leahy Excerpts |
Next: Miers Also Failed to Pay Bar Dues in Texas
Posted by: Fenice Boyd | October 20, 2005 09:26 AM
I think the comment that Meirs made regarding President Bush "He is the most brillant man I ever meant" says it all.
She must not get out a lot.
Posted by: muddoc | October 20, 2005 11:59 AM
I think the comment that Meirs made regarding President Bush "He is the most brillant man I ever meant" says it all.
She must not get out a lot.
Posted by: muddoc | October 20, 2005 11:59 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.
If Harriet Miers has difficulty writing detailed and adequate responses to the Senate Judiciary Committee's Questionnaire, might this be an example of her lack of qualifications? Or is she deliberately trying to avoid answering important questions? Certaily, she is qualified to respond to questions about "herself." One certainly must wonder what problems she will have writing legal briefs on her rulings.