October 19, 2005, ( – U.S. President Bush’s nomination of Harriet Miers for the Surpeme Court has become one of the most controversial and confusing actions by the president since he first won the presidency.

Is Miers the right choice for the position? Well, that depends on which of the many conservative voices one listens to. Arguments are compelling on both sides, although at the moment the movement to have Bush start over with another choice seems to have gained the upper hand.

One thing is certain. The selection of not just this Supreme Court replacement but also the next one or two is crucial for the survival of democracy in the United States.

The activist abuse of power by the currentÂjudicial oligarchs dominatiingÂthe Supreme Court has had a devastating and corrupting effect on the U.S. legal and legislativeÂlandscape and if allowed to continue further could threaten the very survival of the Republic. This would in turn negatively affect other democracies in the world which are dependent upon the US for the continuation of their freedoms.

So, the massive media attention on the Miers nomination, although perhaps sometimes excessive, is nonetheless mostly warranted. This is a most serious issue.

With this in mind, will attempt to provide its readers with a summary of links to significant stories on the nomination and excerpts from some of the items. We hope this will help you determine what indeed is the best solution to this currently confusing situation requiring perhaps the wisdom of Solomon.

Sexism and Other Silliness – Concerned Women for America
  There’s new trouble in River City, my friends, and it starts with “M” and that stands for “Miers.” Maybe it’s time to listen to all the women who’ve said for years that it’s sexist and patronizing to pick a Supreme Court nominee from only those who wear or burn bras. Wasn’t it the feminists’ favorite Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg who said “not just any woman will do” as a Supreme Court justice? Refresh my recollection on who called it sexism.ÂÂÂÂ

Too many yes-men – Linda Chavez
  The president is a smart man, but he’s in deep trouble. And no one in the White House seems willing to tell him why, which is where an official fool—or White House jester, if you prefer—would come in handy. Apparently no one stepped forward to warn the president what a monumentally bad idea he’d come up with when he selected Miers over dozens of other, better-qualified candidates. Instead of listening to what conservatives are actually saying about the Miers nomination, the White House strategy is to attack the critics. We are suddenly the enemy: elitists, sexists, disloyal, and don’t really represent anyone anyway.

Give Miers a Chance – National Catholic Register Editorial
We wonder: Would professorial constitutional experts really be more likely to overturn Roe v. Wade than an evangelical Christian woman who, as president of the Texas State Bar, took on the American Bar Association over its stance on abortion? No specialized knowledge is necessary to understand and apply the principles our country was founded on. If Bush wants to seat a pro-life justice who can win confirmation onto the court instead of undergoing a gargantuan struggle over one who possibly can’t, then why not let him?

Is it still the GOP? The Miers nomination poses an awkward test.

Harriet Miers’s thoughts on Roe v. Wade may be clearer than people suspected.

No Judicial Experience May Be Refreshing
  Her lack of judicial experience need not necessarily be a disqualifier. The United States Constitution is an uncomplicated document, written in rather elementary English and quite straightforward, that citizens of the States and after ratification of the United States could understand it. “Legalese” terminology and lawyers’ words of art are omitted. Some 41 of 107 Justices and nine of 17 Chief Justices never previously sat on a court. Sometimes a Justice without prior judicial experience turns out to be exceptionally competent. Byron R. White and Rehnquist come to mind. The evidence may establish that she’s a pit bull who if confirmed would appreciate, understand and defend the Constitution as written

Miers Hearings to Begin Nov. 7

Media gives incomplete information about another Harriet Miers questionnaire!
  Her 1989 questionnaire to Texans United for Life. I have found a copy of the actual questionnaire and list every full question and answer.

Christian and Pro-Life Leader Takes Issue with White House’s Assertion that Being Pro-Life and Opposed to Abortion Will Not Impact How One Rules on the Supreme Court
  Rev. Patrick Mahoney, director of the Christian Defense Coalition – Those White House comments sound more like the views of Senator Clinton, Kerry or Kennedy on abortion rather than a President who supports the culture of life. Those senators believe one can hold a personal pro-life position on abortion but it should have no impact on how they enact laws or make public policy. Sadly, it appears the Bush Administration feels the same way Mahoney asserts that particular position taken by the White House on abortion will have a devastating long term impact on the entire pro-life movement as it will allow public officials to say they are personally pro-life but support policies and laws that do not affirm the dignity of life.

The Last Straw – Gerard V. Bradley – National Review
  The reason why I oppose her confirmation — even if she still believes what she said in 1989 — is this: now we are going to have the fight within the Senate and in the media which conservatives such as myself have all along called for. Unless Miers repudiates her 1989 answers — and, in that case, see above — Schumer & Co. are going to treat her as if she will overrule Roe. Very well. But if we are going to have a climactic battle in the Senate over Roe, we need to have it on considerably better ground. Miers is scarcely the person anyone would choose to make the long awaited case against Roe, with the whole pro-choice phalanx put up against her. I mean no insult whatsoever in saying that Harriet Miers she simply is not up to the job of cogently describing, defending, and justifying before the world what will go into the history books as the most important constitutional law decision since 1954.

Slouching Towards Miers – Robert Bork
  With a single stroke—the nomination of Harriet Miers—the president has damaged the prospects for reform of a left-leaning and imperialistic Supreme Court, taken the heart out of a rising generation of constitutional scholars, and widened the fissures within the conservative movement. That’s not a bad day’s work—for liberals. … the quality of her thought and writing demonstrates absolutely no “ability to write clearly and argue incisively.” By passing over the many clearly qualified persons, male and female, to pick a stealth candidate, George W. Bush has sent a message to aspiring young originalists that it is better not to say anything remotely controversial, a sort of “Don’t ask, don’t tell” admonition to would-be judges. It is a blow in particular to the Federalist Society, most of whose members endorse originalism.

It seems that the pro-Miers forces really are bent on burning down the village in order to save it.

Questions Harriet Miers Must Ask Herself


Refusing to be Miered

Miers nomination sparks whirlwind of media attention for Land

Miers Hearings Rushed on Capitol Hill

The Many Faces of Harriet: Miers supports, opposes, and is neutral on Roe, all within 24 hours!

Time for a Senate GOP Confirmation Philosophy