President Bush nominated a relatively unknown Harriet Miers to
the Supreme Court on Monday morning in a decision that has many on
Capitol Hill and across the country wondering who she is.
Nominated to succeed retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor,
who was known for her “swing” vote, Miers may become
the third woman ever to grace the Supreme Court bench.
But before she is confirmed there will be much to uncover about
this longtime friend of the president. The announcement came on the
heels of the ceremony Sunday initiating John Roberts as the
country’s 17th chief justice.
Miers has experience as White House counsel and as a private
attorney, but has never served as a judge.
“Miers will strictly interpret our Constitution and laws.
She will not legislate from the bench,” the president said of
Miers from the Oval Office.
Miers will now have to face a barrage of questions from senators
who will attempt to ascertain her stance on a number of issues,
from abortion to the right to death.
“If confirmed, I recognize I will have a tremendous
responsibility to keep our judicial system strong and to help
ensure the court meets their obligations to strictly apply the laws
and Constitution,” Miers said.
And though some question her lack of experience as a judge, the
60-year-old private attorney has a long history of working with the
Texas Bar Association and the White House.
The positions she has held under the Bush administration include
White House staff secretary and deputy White House chief of
staff.
In addition, it was Miers who took over Alberto Gonzales’
position as White House counsel when he left to become attorney
general at the start of Bush’s second term.
Her lack of judicial rulings has made for a candidate who has
many, including UCLA professors, wondering who she is and how
capable she may be as a Supreme Court justice.
“I don’t know anything about her. … I suspect
she’ll get confirmed, but I just don’t know a lot about
her,” UCLA law Professor Grant Nelson said.
He added that it’s not uncommon to appoint a close friend
of the president or someone without judicial experience.
“It’s been overblown lately. It’s true that
more recently candidates have come directly from judgeships … but
it’s only one consideration,” said Jonathon Varat, also
a UCLA law professor.
In fact, it’s not at all uncommon for justices to come
from various fields throughout the government, including
governorships. In addition, 10 of the 34 justices appointed since
1933 have worked for their nominating president in some
capacity.
“All I’ve been able to discern is that she’s
been involved in professional bar association activities. That
suggests she is likely to have had to deal with a lot of people
with different points of view. Beyond that, I don’t know if
it means anything,” Varat said.
The upcoming confirmation will likely focus on attempting to
figure out where Miers stands on some of the country’s most
divisive issues.
As president of the Texas State Bar in 1993, Miers led an
unsuccessful fight to persuade the American Bar Association to
reconsider its pro-abortion rights stance.
Miers did not publicly say where she stood on the issue at the
time, but did say that the American Bar Association should not
“be trying to speak for the entire legal community” on
an issue that “has brought on tremendous
divisiveness.”
Among friends and colleagues, Miers is often thought of as a
trailblazer, becoming the first woman to head a major Texas law
firm and the first woman to head the Texas and Dallas bar
associations.
With reports from Bruin wire services.