Harriet Miers, Conservative
Posted by Patrick Ruffini
At the risk of drawing the undying enmity of The Herd, I'm going to state categorically that conservatism is sitting pretty at this hour. That's because Harry Reid has just been hosed – and he doesn't even know it.
The navel gazers are nabobing about another Souter. That's silly. The Court will almost certainly move to the right as a result of the nomination and confirmation of Harriet Miers. And here's why.
It's true. Little is known about the views of Harriet Miers. But what is known, through official and unofficial channels, paints a picture of a conservative Texas lawyer with rock-solid beliefs on life, strong religious convictions, and a modesty that should allay fears of a renegade Justice determined to remake society through the courts. John Roberts was the silver-tongued, inside-the-Beltway pick for the Court; Miers is the plain spoken red stater.
In 1993, when the American Bar Association moved to enshrine its support for abortion-on-demand, Miers fought to have the issue put to a vote before the entire ABA:
"If we were going to take a position on this divisive
issue, the members should have been able to vote."
As the Note Notes, she kept at it, seeking to overturn the Bar's pro-abortion stance into the late-'90s. Tim Carney observes, "In favor of democracy on the issue of abortion? Let's hope she carries that through."
NARAL can read the writing on the wall, and it's not very pleased, stating that Miers "does not appear to have a public record to assure America's pro-choice majority that she is a moderate in the tradition of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor."
Marvin Olasky gives us by far the most illuminating glimpse into Miers' personal thinking, interviewing longtime friend and Texas Supreme Court Justice Nathan Hecht, as well as Miers' pastor. Here's Hecht on Miers and life: "[H]er personal views are consistent with that of evangelical Christians... You can tell a lot about her from her decade of service in a conservative church." And here's her pastor, Ron Key:
<<<
I don't know how strong her faith was at that time. She came to a place where she totally committed her life to Jesus. She had gone to church before, but when she came to our church it became more serious to her.... Our church is strong for life, but Harriet and I have not had any conversations on that…. We believe in the biblical approach to marriage.
>>>
Miers was raised Catholic, and became Born Again around '79 or '80. We have no idea how her religious beliefs would impact her decisions on the Court, but in terms of the environment in which she has come up, she couldn't be further from the RINO-dominated New Hampshire of David Souter and even the libertarianish Arizona of Sandra Day O'Connor. Can anyone read these passages and not have hope that Miers would be light years ahead of O'Connor and Souter on Roe v. Wade?
Leonard Leo, president of the Federalist Society – you know, the evil, neanderthal Federalist Society – is a supporter. And so is Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice.
But, as usual, quite possibly the most important perspective comes from Hugh Hewitt, who posits that Miers would be particularly strong in the area of national security jurisprudence. Having been "present at the creation" in the war on terror, not cooped up in isolated Circuit Court chambers or rarefied law school classrooms, a Justice Miers would be unlikely to let Jose Padilla roam the streets, or open up the gates of Gitmo. Folks – that's at least as important as the social issues.
As our picture of Miers comes into clearer focus, the Souter II narrative begins to strain credulity. It requires us to believe that the President who gave us Janice Rogers Brown, Michael McConnell, Bill Pryor, Priscilla Owen – and no RINO that I could name at the Circuit or District Court level, who fought the fight on Miguel Estrada, and who had originally orchestrated the masterful trade of Roberts-for-O'Connor, would suddenly punt at this critical moment. It also requires us to believe that Miers, who has worked with Bush for a decade, who is the White House staffer most intimitately involved with vetting nominees' judicial philosophies, and is one of the people Bush knows best, has been able to hide her true beliefs from her boss until – Ah, ha! – she donned the judge's robe. I'm sorry, but I don't think this is the same thing as an unknown from New Hampshire handpicked by Warren Rudman.
It's true this fight does not come under the most opportune circumstances. Had Chief Justice Rehnquist lived just two more months, making possible the elevation of Associate Justice Roberts, conservatives would now be in a position to replace a Justice undeniably their own. Instead, the Roberts nomination became an even trade for the fallen Chief, and Bush needed a certain conservative that Senate Democrats didn't know and couldn't tag as such. Given these tricky circumstances, President Bush has threaded the needle wisely, giving us a confirmable and reliable conservative for the Court's most sensitive seat.
Some would prefer a nominee in a more esoteric, elitist, or eccentric mold, with the penmanship of a Scalia. Harriet Miers will not be the flashiest Justice – but nor will she make leaps of logic that sometimes lead her in unconservative and unpredictable directions (see McConnell on polygamy, or Scalia on pornography). This is not the time to act like preening Ivory Tower elitists, but to call Harry Reid's bluff. Miers will cast the votes that O'Connor wouldn't. And that's all that matters.
patrickruffini.com
timothypcarney.com
abcnews.go.com
naral.org
worldmagblog.com
bench.nationalreview.com
aclj.org
hughhewitt.com |
