A Few More remarks on Miers

Well, the Miers nomination is (slowly) moving along. I must say, I still think it was a bad choice. I really don't have a ton to add until the hearings, but I'd like to argue against a few of the arguments I've seen recently.

First, there's the argument that her opponents are elitists. I have seen a few remarks lamenting that she did not attend a "prestigious" law school; other than that, which has only been from a few of her opponents, I really haven't seen much to justify such an attack. Many of the other potential nominees that had been bandied about did not go to a prestigious law school, either, and there weren't people complaining about that.

Second, the argument that her opponents are sexist. This is pure bunk. Offhand, there would not have been these complaints if any of five other women were named -- Edith Clement, Edith Jones, Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla Owen, or Karen Williams. The sex doesn't matter one whit to the opponents of her nomination. Moreover, the case for her support has been highly sexist -- half of it is that she was the first woman ________. A man with her resume would not get nominated.

Third (and I'll go after the other side this time), the arguments that she doesn't meet the basic qualifications for being a Supreme Court Justice are also bunk. Most obviously, as I've already stated in a previous post, previous judicial experience is not necessary. I believe ten of the last thirty-four nominees did not have previous judicial experience. Having a law degree isn't even a requirement, though I'd consider very few people without one to be qualified for the Supreme Court (Ponnuru for SCOTUS!). She does meet the basic qualifications. Is she the best nominee possible? No, but there is no obligation to nominate the "best possible" candidate.

The Republican base is split on this nomination and that's bad news for Republicans. No matter how they vote on the nomination, they're going to be ticking off a portion of their base. The best possible solution would be for the nomination to be withdrawn (by either Miers or Bush) and for Bush to nominate someone else. The Miers supporters would not really be irritated by someone else getting the position instead (especially if the Miers nomination is withdrawn and not defeated, in which case some people would be ticked), but the Miers opponents will be ticked off if she does get the spot. However, a withdrawal looks unlikely, barring an embarassing hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.