Yesterday the media announced that Harriet Miers had written a letter to President Bush requesting that he withdraw her name from nomination as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Reluctantly, he did so.
Now President Bush is not someone who ever revisits a decision; rather he forges ahead holding to his point of view at all costs. Some might call this focus or determination or commitment, and sometimes it is. However, at other times it’s blinder-vision or obstinance or a refusal to admit that one can be wrong on occasion.
Given the media spin, I’m not sure what exactly happened. Did Harriet really write a letter of withdrawal? Did the President ask her to do so, so that he wouldn’t have to pull her nomination himself. Did the conservative Republicans pressure either of them into it? What I am sure of is that I admire Harriet for accepting the realities of the situation. Regardless of how or why it came to be, she is stepping aside.
I studied Miers’ credentials; and, outside of being female, they seemed to be lacking in what it takes to sit for a lifetime appointment on the High Court. In fact, her nomination smacked of patronage. And I don’t believe the High Court should be subject to patronage appointments.
At the same time, it’s ironic that I will probably like the next Bush appointment to the Supreme Court even less than I liked Harriet Miers. This is because the next person will mostly likely be more overtly conservative, more overtly right wing, more overtly moral in tone. I only hope that person is not one of Bush’s intimate circle but rather someone who is knowledgeable in constitutional law and can separate that law from his or her own personal opinion.
I thank Harriet for giving the President that opportunity, even if I won’t like the outcome.
Leave a Reply