Quote:
Originally posted by Gattigap
Who the hell is Harriet Miers?
I know she's WH counsel, and that she's a Texas buddy and all. But still. Unless this woman assasinates abortion doctors in her spare time or something, I'm completely baffled by Bush's apparent punt on this one.
ETA: A friend who happens to know a bit about this woman has passed along the following trivia:
"*she's unmarried, a career professional women who's been very successful.
* she was the President of the Dallas law firm Locke Purnell Rain Harrell (a firm that I interviewed with out of law school, but decided not to pursue) when it merged with the Houston law firm Liddell Sapp, becoming the co-Managing Partner of Locke Liddell & Sapp after the merger.
* she was a well-known litigation attorney before she started working for Governor Bush
* she's worked in the Bush White House for the last several years.
* she's said to be very loyal to Bush
* she has no judicial experience. All her career has been either in private practice or in politics.
Should be interesting."
Indeed.
|
In the first place, Rehnquist himself had no judicial experience when he was appointed. In fact, numerous Justices have been appointed without prior judicial experience. The only real harm in that is that there is no track record on which to politicize the appointee.
The woman was the first partner of a large Texas firm, the first woman to be elected the President of the Dallas bar, the first woman to be voted president of the Texas state bar. She's obviously a highly-accomplished lawyer.
I can guarantee that Bush knows her politics and her judicial leanings. It's just the rest of the country that doesn't and won't unless she's affirmed. Does anybody here really think that Bush would appoint someone who was not in his mold to be his personal counsel, let alone to the SC?
