pageok
pageok
pageok
Earl Warren Burger:
From a Washington Post story about Harriett Miers making the rounds on Capitol Hill:
  [Mier's] relatively thin paper trail adds greater importance to her personal meetings with senators and to the committee hearing that is expected to begin in about three weeks. While generally well received, Miers has had a few awkward moments, including one during her Wednesday session with Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (Vt.), ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee.
  In an initial chat with Miers, according to several people with knowledge of the exchange, Leahy asked her to name her favorite Supreme Court justices. Miers responded with "Warren" — which led Leahy to ask her whether she meant former Chief Justice Earl Warren, a liberal icon, or former Chief Justice Warren Burger, a conservative who voted for Roe v. Wade. Miers said she meant Warren Burger, the sources said.
  Hat tip: Jason Sorens.

  UPDATE: This scoop by Stephen Henderson is also interesting, via another commenter:
  In what appear to be some of her only public statements about a constitutional issue, Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers testified in a 1990 voting rights lawsuit that the Dallas City Council had too few black and Hispanic members, and that increasing minority representation should be a goal of any change in the city's political structure.
  In the same testimony, Miers, then a member of the council, said she believed that the city should divest its South African financial holdings and work to boost economic development in poor and minority areas. She also said she "wouldn't belong to the Federalist Society" or other "politically charged" groups because they "seem to color your view one way or another."
Challenge:
Warren Burger???? In the mold of Scalia and Thomas indeed. Am I right that Burger is one of the few justices who lived to regret his vote in Roe? Still, Burger?

It would be telling, I think, to know who was omitted from her favorites list (Scalia and Thomas maybe?). It's inappropriate for her to comment on any justice she might serve with, so I wouldn't blame her for that, but did she mention the late Chief, our beloved lone ranger?
10.7.2005 1:57am
BigBob:
Uh, why did she Warren? Would it have been appropriate to say Nino or Sandy or Ruth or Bill? My point: might she have really meant Justice Warren but then backtracked?
10.7.2005 2:01am
Major Harris:
You've got to be kidding me.

It's giving her the benefit of the doubt, even, to say she originally meant Burger. (Who would respond "John" or "Oliver" or "William"?)

Even with that benefit, she either didn't know what her answer implicates or cited Burger purposely to appease Leahy. The first possibility is just depressing. As for the latter, at least Sandra, Anthony, and David waited until they got on the bench to capitulate to liberals.
10.7.2005 2:03am
Justin (mail):
More likely she meant Burger all along, but got her names confused, and thought for a second that Warren Burger's last name was Warren
10.7.2005 2:25am
arbitraryaardvark (mail) (www):
She started to say "Orin" or maybe Sorens, but then remembered that list of future Bush picks isn't out yet.
10.7.2005 2:29am
bbc (mail):
I remember when I was in London in 1985 in the posh Grovsner House hotel and I was standing in the elevator lobby and the elevator door opened and standing there was the Chief Justice of the United States in black tie going out for an event of some kind.

What was remarkable to me was the fact that "Warren" was also wearing a cape. A cape! A CAPE!!

Red lining and all.
10.7.2005 9:36am
jgshapiro (mail):
This isn't all that interesting of a story -- except as it shows how the media works. You can see a theme developing in the media: that Miers is not very smart, or that she is a bumbler. Expect to see any instance in which this theme can be advanced made prominent. You saw it with Quayle -- anything he said that sounded remotely dumb was given immediate prominence, even if it would have been shrugged off if said by anyone else as a simple gaffe.

It doesn't much matter if people think the VP is a moron; no one votes for VP. But the theme that is developing in the media about Miers does not bode well for her.
10.7.2005 10:34am
Jason Sorens (www):
Yes, there seem to be a couple of media themes developing: the "dim bulb" thesis and the "cronyism" charge, which are of course related to each other, as well as an "accusation" of being, deep down, a progressive type unacceptable to conservatives. Political cartoonists are having a field day (link). My favorite is this one:





(I'm assuming posting that isn't a violation of copyright since it's already located on a public website.)


I'm finding the politics of this whole affair mesmerizing, whatever the ultimate implications for the Court and the law may be.

10.7.2005 10:57am
Jason Sorens (www):
As an addendum, I should note that I don't believe there is a media conspiracy to discredit Miers but are actually reporting rather faithfully what seems to be going on. If anything, the media have understated the depth of the opposition to Miers, with headlines such as, "Grumbling on the Right" and "Conservatives Not Convinced." The Will and Krauthammer editorials display all-out opposition, not mere "grumbling."
10.7.2005 11:55am
LiquidLatex (mail):
That is the most horrific looking anthromorphic horse I've ever seen.

If she has a history of calling people by their first name I could maybe believe she meant Burger, but that seems doubtful. She's no Roberts, bleh.
10.7.2005 12:02pm
JayJ:
If I had to take a guess, it seems that the "crony" charge is one of the most compelling of the broad arguments against Justice Miers, especially as adumbrated in Randy Barnett's WSJ op-ed piece. It can be elucidated at length by reference to the Federalist Papers, as well as pithily summed up in caustic editorial cartoons such as the one posted above. It also provides a broad armature from which to hang specific concerns, such as a lack of a clearly articulated judicial philosophy.
10.7.2005 12:44pm
Trainer Joe (mail):
Bush asked all his male SC candidates for the first seat about their exercise plans. There was a long story (front page) on Judge Harvie. Bush scolded him when the judge said he did not cross-train.

Why no question to HM? Is Bush discriminating against women? That is, women do not deserve to be fit? This explains his reluctance on title 9. Off with Bush. HM needs to withdraw. Bush needs to find a woman who exercises. Period. End of story. That is the litmus test -- do you exercise daily? Yes, Mr. Bush, I spend each day about two-hours excercising. Great, Judge, you are hired for SC.
10.7.2005 3:45pm
Cicero (mail):
Strange, the only thing I know Justice Burger to be famous for is that when he saw a vote would not be going his way, he would change his vote so that he could choose who to assign the opinion to so that he could insure the opinions would be writen in the weakest and narrowest manner.
10.7.2005 7:45pm