Talking Turkey at the TurkeyBlog

Free Website Counter

Saturday, October 08, 2005

Found at the Volokh Conspiracy (by Orrin Kerr), here's Arlen Specter on asking Harriet Miers about constitutional issues:

"I did not ask her about it because I don't think she's ready to face it at the moment," he said. "Look, the lady was White House counsel dealing with totally other subjects until Sunday night when the president offered her the job. And Monday she's sitting with me. I'm not going to ask her questions which she hasn't had a chance to study or reflect on."

I am not a constitutional scholar. In fact, I'm a thousand miles from being one. But I do have opinions on:

the expansion of the Commerce Clause to the point where you could drive a Mac truck through it (the one issue they touched on, though only for practice)
whether the phrase "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" is nebulous or clear as day
whether one can credibly claim the Second Amendment is unclear but that the privacy rights "emanating from penumbra" of the Fourteenth Amendment are obvious
whether further expansion of the takings clause would require scrapping the Fifth amendment
etc.

It's likely, of course, that mine aren't the sharpest or most well formed opinions. They surely aren't the most researched. That said, as these issues have come up over the years, I've had occasion to dig out a copy of the Constitution, read the text and form an opinion. And I'm just a loudmouth with a blog.

Harriet Miers seems to be a bright enough person. Doubtless, she's hardworking. But that can be said of a lot of people. The bar's a little higher than this, though, if you want to be on the Supreme Court.

Maybe Miers meets that higher bar. I'm a little nervous, though, that the Chairman of the Judiciary committee didn't seem a little more eager to find out. One thing's for sure: If Harriet Miers doesn't at least know more about Constitutional law than Arlen Specter, she has no place putting on a robe for that bloviating body.

We shall see what the hearings bring. But my usual inclination to wait for Bush to outsmart his critics and pleasantly surprise his more nervous supporters is being sorely tested.

Kerr also worries that law professors may be too clever or outlandish to make a good justices, but at least they have something to say about constitutional issues. Shouldn't the next US Supreme Court Justice?

We shall see what tomorrow brings, but if it brought a Miers withdrawal, I would not be among those worrying that a nasty political culture had kept us from having the best and most qualified justices possible.

If Bush wants to really change the debate, energize his base and prove he's serious about staying relevant in his second term, he should withdraw Miers and nominate Robert Bork. Those hearings would be worth watching!

posted by gbarto at 6:31 PM

Saturday, October 08, 2005

Archives