Ongoing Miers Nomination Furor

Developments even in the past twenty four hours have been too numerous for my slow typing fingers to keep up with. I have heard conflicting clues regarding Ms. Miers' qualifications and judicial philosophy. Debate is a healthy thing, but I think the rhetoric on both sides has at times gotten a little too heated.

As one of millions who worked hard for W's re-election last year, I do not feel 'betrayed' by the President's nomination of someone he has reason to be confident reflects his (and many of our) view of the constitutional role of the judiciary. I also feel that some of the comments regarding Ms. Miers' limited qualifications were too sweeping. Not all Supreme Court justices have been constitutional scholars, but have come from various experiences with the law.

At the same time, the critics of the nomination do raise some serious question that deserve attention, especially given the importance of the Supreme Court's involvement with fundamental issues of life and liberty. Comments, some from within the White House itself, referring to critics of the nomination as 'sexist', 'elitist', or 'disloyal' are also overly heated.

Some have urged the President to withdraw the nomination or for Ms. Miers to withdraw herself. I'm not joining this call, as I'm reluctant to support pressuring a nominee to withdraw before she has a chance to speak for herself in the Senate hearings (though, given the turns this nomination fight has taken, I admit that I might be relieved if she does take that course).