With the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, President Bush may have played his cards just right.
He satisfied the requests of women around the country, including First Lady Laura Bush, who felt it would only be right to replace the court's first female justice, Sandra Day O'Connor, with another woman. Bush's selection came recommended by both Democratic and Republican members of the Judiciary Committee, according to C-SPAN.
Bush chose a person he has worked with for years, first as his personal lawyer in the 1980s and most recently as White House counsel. In doing so, he has come to know her character and thus ensured his nominee isn't likely to surprise him with her rulings down the road.
Yet, like any judicial nominee, Miers is not without her critics. Those who oppose Bush's nomination argue that Miers was selected more for her loyalty to the president than for her qualifications for the position.
Many are quick to point out that, if confirmed, Miers would be the only current justice on the Supreme Court without prior practice in the judiciary. The Supreme Court, they argue, is not the place to gain your first experience as a judge.
Diversity should refer not only to our gender and skin color but to our diversity of ideas and experiences. Miers is not a poor choice because she lacks experience on a federal appellate court. On the contrary, she stands out from the crowd because she offers a unique background and a practical experience that the rest of the bench cannot offer.
Following the announcement of Justice O'Connor's retirement, Bush appealed to more than 60 members of the Senate for advice regarding the process of nominating a replacement.
The Associated Press reported in July that, following their meeting with Bush, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., and Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., emphasized to the media that they had discussed with the president their desire for a variety of professional background for the court. "I've talked ... with a number of the current justices," Leahy said, "I know they see a number of benefits that could come from having somebody from outside the judicial monastery."
There is certainly no constitutional requirement that Supreme Court justices have previous experience as a judge; rather, there exists a historical precedent for presidents to appoint non-judges to the highest court. The Associated Press reports that "33 of 61 justices confirmed since 1900 were not federal judges at the time of their selection."
In fact, some of the most influential justices in the court's history are on that list: John Marshall, Felix Frankfurter Louis Brandeis, Earl Warren, even William H. Rehnquist. Specter explained that Supreme Court justices who moved up through the ranks "to the district court and then the circuit court ... have very narrow parameters ... and have very little contact with people."
Miers brings to the court her reputation as a trailblazer for women as well as her legal acumen. Miers clerked for a U.S. district judge for two years before establishing her career as a trial litigator. In 2001, she moved through the ranks of the White House from assistant to the president, to deputy chief of staff, to White House counsel.
She has been honored for her work by being named one of the 100 most influential attorneys in America by the National Law Journal.
Rehnquist was tapped for the court from the Department of Justice, and O'Connor had served in the Arizona Senate before serving on the bench in state courts.
The departure of these two justices from the court also indicates a loss in the diversity of perspectives they were able to offer to their seven associates who were groomed for their Supreme Court positions through federal appellate courts.
Selecting Miers was a wise and balanced choice on Bush's part. The choice has earned praise from Senate Democrats, such as Harry Reid who said Monday that, "the Supreme Court would benefit from the addition of a justice who has real experience as a practicing lawyer ... a nominee with relevant non-judicial experience would bring a different and useful perspective to the court."
Whether or not the Judiciary Committee can agree on Miers deserving a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court, it seems senators from both sides of the aisle can agree on what Miers critics cannot: The professional diversity she brings would be a welcome addition to our evolving court.
Laura Thorson is a political science and history junior. Reach her at laura.thorson@cox.net.
