Miers' Religious views
gillman at usc.edu
Wed Oct 5 13:17:59 PDT 2005
Rick is thrilled, now that he knows more about Miers' religion affiliations and practices. Ilya is not sure. Of course, everyone is guessing, and I suppose the best evidence would be if there was a clear record of judicial decision making one way or the other. But of course, as Bush understands, a clear judicial record is what would trigger the nuclear option. The only way to get a conservative Evangelical sensibility on the Court is this way.
Ilya notes that Cuomo was personally pro-life but politically pro-choice. Then again, Cuomo had a clear public record as a liberal, and it is a person's political ideology that drives judicial decision making. It's true that some conservatives vouched for Souter, but at the time all the evidence suggested that he was a moderate New England Republican (cf. Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe), which is what he still is. (See http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195159330/002-3230159-7390402?v=glance&n=283155&n=507846&s=books&v=glance.) By contrast, Miers is a pro-life Evangelical conservative.
It's true she was endorsed by Reid. Maybe he knows something Bush doesn't know. Extremely unlikely, of course, but anything is possible. Still, I don't think it is an accurate assessment of the politics of SC nominations to assume that Bush checked his swing and picked a moderate. He's swinging for the fences.
----- Original Message -----
From: isomin at gmu.edu
Date: Wednesday, October 5, 2005 11:52 am
Subject: Miers' Religious views
> Prof. Gillman raises some good points, but I don't think they are
> as probative of Miers' philosophy as he concludes they are.
> Yes, Miers is a "long-practicing pro-life evangelical." But there
> are lots of jurists with pro-life personal views who voted for
> Roe. Consider the fact Mario Cuomo also has pro-life personal
> religious views, as for that matter does Harry Reid. But even if
> Miers' religious views would lead her to vote to overturn Roe,
> that does not show how she would vote on other crucial issues.
> As to her having conservative friends that are willing to vouch
> for her, the same could also be said of David Souter (vouched for
> by Sununu and Sen. Humphrey) and Blackmun, among others.
> Finally, the fact that she was preemptively endorsed by Harry Reid
> also tells against the likelihood of her being highly
> conservative. Reid would not have given such an endorsement if he
> (and his advisers) thought that she would vote like another
> Scalia or Thomas, perhaps not even if they thought she would be
> another Rehnquist.
> Therefore, we have to conclude that either Reid or the pro-Miers
> conservatives are wrong in their forecasts of what she is likely
> to do on the Court. Prof. Gillman implicitly argues that Reid must
> be wrong. In my view, we simply don't have enough information to
> be able to tell.
> None of this is to say that Miers has been proven to be another
> Souter. And, unlike in the case of Souter, the president probably
> DOES know where this nominee stands, thanks to his close
> association with her. The rest of us, however, do not have the
> same luxury.
More information about the Conlawprof