My dad called me the morning of Bush's announcement about the nomination of Harriet E. Miers to see what I thought about the Texas attorney turned nominee to the highest court in the land. The only judgment I could give him at the time was that she wears too much eye-liner. I have the feeling I was not the only one scratching my head wondering where in the world this nomination came from.
So, I did what every girl challenged by her (coughslightlymoreconservativecough) father would do... I did my research. Here is what I discovered:
1. She was the first woman to be hired by a big Texas law firm (of which she became the first female president).
2. She was the first woman to head both the Dallas and Texas State Bar Associations.
3. She is a pretty good corporate litigator with a darn good record in court.
4. She was a top white house official, specifically white house council.
5. She was head of the Texas Lottery commission (I find this achievement a little random).
6. She takes care of her ailing mother (still not sure why this is important, but the media seems to think that it is...Show off her feminine side I guess).
To my dismay, I also found out that she has no judicial experience, no real constitutional law background, and, most upsetting to me, no paper trail. Basically, putting Miers on the Supreme Court would be like making a person an elementary school teacher without first sending them to college and doing a background check. Who knows what their opinion on corporal punishment is, let alone whether they know how to write out a lesson plan?
American women wanted another woman to replace Sandra Day O'Connor because we thought that a woman could better uphold our rights. And powerful women will continue to be great role models to our little sisters. But with some of the most contentious debates our nation has ever seen on the Supreme Court Docket this season (as if I even have to mention abortion and the right to privacy) there is no guarantee that the rights I want her to uphold will even exist next year.
I just want to sum up by sharing something I found in last week's National Journal.
So, I did what every girl challenged by her (coughslightlymoreconservativecough) father would do... I did my research. Here is what I discovered:
1. She was the first woman to be hired by a big Texas law firm (of which she became the first female president).
2. She was the first woman to head both the Dallas and Texas State Bar Associations.
3. She is a pretty good corporate litigator with a darn good record in court.
4. She was a top white house official, specifically white house council.
5. She was head of the Texas Lottery commission (I find this achievement a little random).
6. She takes care of her ailing mother (still not sure why this is important, but the media seems to think that it is...Show off her feminine side I guess).
To my dismay, I also found out that she has no judicial experience, no real constitutional law background, and, most upsetting to me, no paper trail. Basically, putting Miers on the Supreme Court would be like making a person an elementary school teacher without first sending them to college and doing a background check. Who knows what their opinion on corporal punishment is, let alone whether they know how to write out a lesson plan?
American women wanted another woman to replace Sandra Day O'Connor because we thought that a woman could better uphold our rights. And powerful women will continue to be great role models to our little sisters. But with some of the most contentious debates our nation has ever seen on the Supreme Court Docket this season (as if I even have to mention abortion and the right to privacy) there is no guarantee that the rights I want her to uphold will even exist next year.
I just want to sum up by sharing something I found in last week's National Journal.
"She once told me that the president was the most brilliant man she had ever met." So reports conservative writer and former Bush speechwriter David Frum, in National Review Online. Unless White House Counsel Harriet Miers explains that she was joking or Frum was hallucinating, this alone may cast enough doubt on her judgment to warrant a "no" vote on her Supreme Court nomination.
No comments:
Post a Comment