The Verdict On Miers

OK. After considering the facts and the expert testimony and the non- expert, yet informed opinions, I have, as promised, made a decision as to whether I will back Harriet Miers for Associate Supreme Court Justice.

The facts are:

From the U.S. government official web site: Miers has served as Counsel to the President since February, 2005. Prior to that, she served as Assistant to the President and Staff Secretary. Miers was also Co-Managing Partner at Locke Liddell & Sapp, LLP. Previously, she was President of Locke, Purnell, Rain & Harrell, where she worked from 1972 until 1999. From 1995 until 2000, she was chair of the Texas Lottery Commission. In 1992, Miers became the first woman president of the Texas State Bar, and in 1985 she became the first woman president of the Dallas Bar Association. She also served as a Member-At-Large on the Dallas City Council. Miers received both her undergraduate and law degrees from Southern Methodist University. My addition: She is an evangelical Christian, and has demonstrated a pro choice and pro family stance in the past. She is a Conservative. She is 60 years old, never married, with no children.

Non expert opinions:

I count political bloggers (including myself) and callers to talk radio shows among this group. This is not to say that many of them don't have remarkable insight into matters like these, as so many of them obviously do. They are pretty much divided on this nomination. Some speak of cronyism, and wonder if Miss Miers has much, if any qualifications for the job. Some say this is a shrewd move by the President, in that he has found someone the Democrats cannot find fault with. The big knock against her, say these non experts, is that no one really knows how she would rule as a justice on the bench. In other words, they aren't so much against her as they are against the nomination of someone who doesn't have much of a "paper trail". Essentially she represents an unknown quantity.

Expert opinions:

These are Senators, Congressmen, and White House staffers, along with political pundits such as Professional talk radio hosts, and political authors. This is interesting. It seems the ones who don't know her personally, or have only met her a time or two are mostly of the opinion that it would be a mistake to put Miss Miers on the court because they suspect she will turn out to be another Souter.

The ones who do know her personally, and have worked closely with her over the years are all overwhelmingly of the opinion that she is a perfect choice for a conservative Justice who will most certainly not legislate from the bench.

My conclusion:

Barring the possiblilty that her "friends" may be biased in her favor simply because of their friendship, I am going to go along with them. They know her. President Bush knows her. If anyone can possibly know, for a fact, how she will rule as a Supreme Court Justice, and whether she will be a strict constructionist, it is them. I don't really have much of a vote, and my opinions don't matter any more than the average person on the street, most of whom probably don't even know there is an opening on the SCOTUS, but I am going to endorse her at this time, with the reservation of the right to change my mind if information emerges that disturbs me about her.


Harriet Miers. God bless her.