A Sheep in Scalia’s Clothing?
By Randall Nunn (10/13/05)
Bill Press wrote a column the other day in which he likened Harriet Miers to an “Antonin Scalia in sheep’s clothing.” As usual, Press had it exactly backwards. When one looks at Harriet Miers’ training, background and commitment to conservative philosophy, she looks more like a sheep being dressed in Antonin Scalia clothing by those in the administration trying to make her fit President Bush’s model for someone “in the mold of a Scalia or Thomas.”
No conservatives are saying that Harriet Miers isn’t a good attorney and a loyal aide to President Bush. They are simply concerned that she has few, if any, real credentials for the job of Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. It would take more years than she has remaining to bring her experience and knowledge level up to that of a Scalia or Thomas. And this is not the time to appoint someone to the Supreme Court so they can embark upon “on the job” training.
One of the real concerns of many conservatives is that Harriet Miers appears to lack strong commitment to conservative ideals such as limited government and strict construction of the U.S. Constitution. She may be committed to some key conservative principles but breadth and depth seem to be lacking. There are other vital issues besides Roe v. Wade and freedom to express religious belief.
One of the warning signs to many conservatives is the fact that Harriet Miers contributed to Al Gore’s campaign in 1988, as well as to Senator Lloyd (“I knew Jack Kennedy”) Bentsen and the Democratic National Committee. While contributing to Democratic candidates and committees is not a capital offense, when a person in their 40’s makes rather sizeable contributions to people and organizations that are diametrically opposed to most conservative principles, it suggests that either their core beliefs have not yet “gelled” or they have strong liberal tendencies. Either one of these possibilities should raise caution flags in a potential Supreme Court nominee being touted as a conservative.
When President Bush noted, in connection with her nomination, that Harriet Miers had served as a leader in “Meals on Wheels” in Texas, I knew something was not quite right. That organization serves a good and noble purpose. But if serving in such an organization has any relevance to, or somehow constitutes a qualification for, the job of an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, it has yet to be explained. A record of good deeds in charitable causes and a passion for service does not equal a passion for constitutional law. Having to resort to such past activities as a qualifier for the Supreme Court makes the lack of genuine qualifications even more apparent.
Harriet Miers is a good person and a capable attorney who is qualified for many significant and important roles. Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court is not one of them—especially where the President has defined in advance adherence to conservative principles as a key requirement.
(Printer friendly version) Email: Randall Nunn
