Reactions Before And After To Miers' Withdrawal From Nomination To High Court
White House Counsel Harriet Miers removed her name from consideration as President Bush’s choice to succeed retiring U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, less than two weeks before her Senate confirmation hearings were to have begun. In doing so, Miers cited requests by members of the Senate for confidential documents in relation to her work at the White House for withdrawing her nomination.
In her letter to the President, which he said he “reluctantly accepted,” Miers said she was “concerned that the confirmation process presents a burden for the White House and our staff that is not in the best interest of the country.”
The Miers nomination was applauded by some conservatives, while others withheld initial judgment, given the lack of a paper trail due to the fact that she had not served as a judge. Still others questioned Miers qualifications and expressed dismay that the President didn’t initially select someone deemed more prominent with a solid conservative background.
A number of Congressional Democrats said that Miers’ nomination was scuttled by conservatives. Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid called Miers a “fine, fine woman,” and lashed out at her conservative critics, calling them “extremists.” “The radical right wing of the Republican Party drove this woman’s nomination right out of town,” Reid said.
Also, Pennsylvania Republican Arlen Specter, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which would have presided over Miers’ confirmation hearings, expressed regret that the “constitutional process” for Miers was “not completed.” Specter said, Miers was denied “basic due process,” and was treated in a “disgraceful” manner.
The 60-year-old Miers was the first female president of the Dallas Bar Association and the first woman to be elected president of the Texas State Bar. She also has been rated as one of the top 100 lawyers in America and one of the top 50 female lawyers in the country. Miers also is an Evangelical Christian. Since 1980, Miers has been an active member and Sunday school teacher at Valley View Christian Church, a non-denominational Evangelical congregation in Dallas.
The President, in naming Miers, whom he has known for the past decade, said, she has the same judicial philosophy as his. “She shares my belief that judges should strictly interpret the Constitution and laws, not legislate from the bench. She understands that the role of a judge is to interpret the text of the Constitution and statutes as written, not as he or she might wish they were written. And she knows that judges should have a restrained and modest role in our constitutional democracy,” the President said.
After the nomination was announced, American Center for Law and Justice Chief Counsel, Jay Sekulow, said that he believed the President made a “great choice” in naming Miers, with whom he has worked over the last several years. “Harriet Miers represents the conservative mainstream of judicial philosophy of interpreting the Constitution, not re-writing it. At a time when the high court is facing some of the most critical issues of the day–including a number of cases dealing directly with abortion, and life issues–the person who replaces Justice O’Connor is critical. Miss Miers is an excellent choice with an extraordinary record of service in the legal community and is certain to approach her work on the high court with a firm commitment to follow the Constitution and the rule of law. I have been privileged to work with her in her capacity as White House counsel. She is bright, thoughtful, and a consummate professional,” Sekulow stated.
Focus on the Family Action Chairman, Dr. James Dobson, initially “welcomed” the President’s choice of Miers. “He pledged emphatically during his campaign to appoint judges who will interpret the law rather than create it. He also promised to select competent judges who will ‘not use the bench to write social policy.’ To this point, President Bush’s appointments to the federal bench appear to have been remarkably consistent with that stated philosophy,” Dobson said.
National Right to Life Committee had endorsed the Miers nomination. “President Bush has an excellent record of appointing judges who recognize the proper role of the courts, which is to interpret the law according to its actual text, and not to legislate from the bench. We believe that Harriet Miers is another nominee who will abide by the text and history of the Constitution.”
Chuck Colson, founder of Prison Fellowship, an Evangelical Christian Ministry, called Miers a “surprising, but inspiring choice,” and a “woman of great integrity.”
However, some groups, like Family Research Council, were initially non-committal on the Miers nomination. FRC President Tony Perkins had urged a “wait and see” attitude with regard to Miers. “President Bush has long made it clear that his choices for the U.S. Supreme Court would be in the mold of current Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. We have no reason to believe he has abandoned that standard. However, our lack of knowledge about Harriet Miers, and the absence of a record on the bench, give us insufficient information from which to assess whether or not she is indeed in that mold,” Perkins said.
Likewise, Concerned Women for America Chief Counsel, Jan LaRue, said more needed to be known about Miers. “We believe the American people deserve convincing evidence that Miss Miers can be trusted with a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. Nothing we have seen or heard establishes Miss Miers’ knowledge of and experience in constitutional law,” LaRue said.
Also, American Values President, Gary Bauer, questioned the president’s selection of Miers. “President Bush is a good man. He was elected twice by millions of good people who simply want him to stand and defend their values. The administration should not fear the battle that nominating an open conservative will inevitably cause. The White House would have had millions of activists and average Americans on the battlefield with them. Have we grown so timid and are we so lacking in confidence that we believe we will lose such a debate? Great majorities of the country are with us on marriage and on religious liberty. On abortion, the divide is more narrow, but still very winnable for our side. If Senate liberals were to block the President’s nominee on these issues, I believe the result would be a Senate with fewer liberals in 2006,” Bauer said.
In background papers released by Miers, she expressed support for a constitutional amendment to ban most abortions in a 1989 questionnaire she filled out for the Texans United for Life Political Action Committee. At the time, Miers was running for Dallas City Council. That disclosure prompted a more favorable response to Miers among some conservatives, but others remained skeptical.
In a move perceived by some to quell criticism of his nominee, the President subsequently brought up Miers’ faith. “People ask me why I picked Harriet Miers. They want to know Harriet Miers’ background; they want to know as much as they possibly can before they form opinions. And part of Harriet Miers’ life is her religion.” That statement drew a sharply negative response from some circles.
Christian Defense Coalition Director, Rev. Patrick Mahoney, called the use of religion over the Miers nomination, “both hypocritical and patronizing to people of faith, and especially Evangelical Christians.” “You cannot have it both ways. One cannot say religion is off limits during the Roberts confirmation and then promote it to gain support for Harriet Miers. The Constitution makes it clear that there shall be no religious litmus test for any person seeking public office. The faith community worked diligently during the confirmation of Chief Justice John Roberts to ensure his Catholic faith did not become an issue during the process. It is both troubling and hypocritical for the supporters of Harriet Miers to promote her strong Evangelical faith to garner support among religious conservatives,” Mahoney said.
Mahoney’s sentiments were shared by Interfaith Alliance President, Rev. C. Welton Gaddy. “It appears that the White House is soliciting support for Harriet Miers by focusing on her Evangelical faith. Just as opposition to a candidate for the Supreme Court because of their faith is wrong, so is using faith to garner support.”
CWA’s Jan LaRue, said, “While we share Miss Miers’ Evangelical faith, we find the continual emphasis on it by her supporters to be inappropriate and patronizing. It offends the Constitution.”
Americans United for Separation of Church and State Executive Director, Rev. Barry Lynn, summed it up this way: “We’re picking a Supreme Court justice here, not a Sunday school teacher. Did Bush pick Miers because of her religious viewpoint instead of her legal qualifications? If he did, that is a disservice to the Constitution and the diversity of the American people,” Lynn said. Following Miers’ withdrawal, Lynn added, “We know that Religious Right leaders are bitterly opposed to ensuring Americans’ right to self-determination on questions of religion and lifestyle. They want to make all the important decisions and impose those choices on the rest of us. It’s no wonder they reacted to Meirs’ remarks with such hostility.”
Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Liberty Commission, said, he was “saddened” by Miers withdrawal, and called her “one more victim of a process that has gone seriously awry in the past two decades.” “Until and when this nomination atmosphere is corrected, the country will be deprived of the services of many gifted and able people who refuse to put themselves and their families through this kind of ordeal,” Land added.
[Home] [Introducing UNI] [News Coverage] [Features Page][Publications]