Still can’t come to terms with the Harriet Miers nomination
I’ve stayed away from blogging for a few days to give the pro-Miers arguments a chance to seep into my brain. For those Miers supporters who are hoping for a mellowing among ant-Miers forces, I have to say I’m sorry I can’t oblige. She remains a Bush crony of undetermined ideology, with no experience as judge, with no experience arguing constitutional law, and basically with no sign of being a Justice who can move the Supreme Court away from dictating and towards interpreting. If anything, the last few days’ back and forth have mostly served to strengthen my belief that she’s a go along, get along person who will not rock the Court’s boat.
On a different note, her professional accomplishments as The First Woman This and The First Woman That have been unduly dismissed by youngons who frankly don’t and perhaps can’t appreciate how difficult it often was, I dare say routinely was, for women who entered all-male or near all-male professional circles back in the 1970’s. While that experience doesn’t make her Supreme Court material, it is not something that should be scoffed or sneered at the way it is among some pundits.
