What is He Thinking?

October 5, 2005 Posted by Roger OvertoncloseAuthor: Roger Overton Name: Roger Overton
Email: rogeroverton@hotmail.com
Site: http://ateamblog.com
About: Roger Overton is currently pursuing a Masters degree at Talbot School of Theology. He has addressed various churches, schools and youth camps throughout the United States. Roger was co-editor of The New Media Frontier (Crossway, 2008) and God and Governing (Wipf & Stock, 2009). Roger can be emailed at rogeroverton@hotmail.com.See Authors Posts (569)

President Bush’s nomination of Harriet Miers has left many conservatives confused, but certainly not speechless. My initial reaction was best summarized by Bill Kristol’s, “I'M DISAPPOINTED, depressed and demoralized.”

We must first understand what qualifications should be in place for a nominee to the Supreme Court. (Remember that I’m not an expert and I’ve probably missed something.) The most obvious one is that  (1) the nominee should be immensely qualified for the position with a strong record indicating competence, wisdom and experience. (2) The nominee must be of good character. Filibustering judicial nominees used to be done solely on the basis of poor character. The next criterion, perhaps more beloved by conservatives, is that (3) the nominee be an originalist, meaning they interpret the Constitution leaving it’s authority with the authors- not with their political agenda. It is additionally helpful if (4) the nominee is not too old, and if (5) the nominee is not too closely tied to politics (as this may compromise the third criteria).

My concerns over Harriet Mier’s nomination have to do with (1), (4), and (5). It appears that we have plenty of evidence she is of good character (2). And it appears that we have reason to trust that she is an originalist (3).

However-

(1) Initially I thought this nomination was like throwing a fresh rookie into the starting line-up. I’ve learned that though she has not been a judge before, she does have a ton of legal experience and qualifications. I would still prefer someone with experience as a judge, at an appeals court would be nice, but it’s possible that she has enough of a record in this area.

(4) Roberts was 50. Miers is 60. She may live another 20-30 years, but wouldn’t it be safer to choose someone younger? Is there really no one else qualified who’s younger than 60?

(5) We can trust that she is an originalist because Bush knows her well. Why? She works for him. This frightens me. As much as I agree with much of what Bush does, to put someone on the Supreme Court who has intimate ties with the Executive Branch seems to jeopardize the accountability that is suppose to exist between them. Bush may legitimately do something that is out of line. Will Justice Miers be objective enough to side with the law?

I generally trust Bush. But I also agree with Joe Carter that this smells like Cronyism. For these reasons, the final one especially, thorough hearings need to be conducted. The Roberts hearings went overboard, since there’s really nothing to object to about him. But with Miers there appears to be justified shadows of doubt as to whether or not she’s the person for the job. This isn’t just any job, but the highest appointed position in the nation short of the Chief Justice.

Hugh Hewitt, of course, likes her. I think he’d be satisfied if Bush nominated just about anyone who sounds conservative. Hewitt does, however, point to people who are making interesting points- like Beldar and Marvin Olasky. However, most of Olasky’s research points to Miers’ good character, but little else.

Most of us conservatives are in a hesitant wait-and-see mode. Here’s what I’ve been reading:

Justin Taylor- “But my question for Hugh is: Didn't conservatives trust Ronald Reagan, too? And he gave us Sandra Day O'Connor.”

TenNapel- “This is absolute proof that Bush is a moderate and not a flaming right wing conservative.”

Joe Carter- “Like the Gipper, Bush prefers to appoint women who have no apparent qualifications and are a complete cipher as to how they will serve once they become a justice.”

David Frum- “It is simply reckless for any conservative president, especially one backed by a 55-seat Senate majority, to take a hazard on anything other than a known quantity.”

Lores Rizkalla- “All I know is that, for many of us, this is the reason we voted for the president: to choose men and women committed to upholding and not re-writing the constitution.”

Related posts:

1. No Need to Fear a Conservative Justice
2. Fighting the Evil Conservatives
3. I’m Sorry, Who’s Dividing the Country?
4. Daniel Craig Nominated For Open "Bond" Position
5. The Enemy of My Enemy…
6. Air America Update

Posted in Main Page, Politics, Roger's Posts