San Diego Union Tribune: Miers' stumbles are hurting her prospects

[question everything]

UNION-TRIBUNE EDITORIAL

Up to the job?

Miers' stumbles are hurting her prospects

October 25, 2005

Almost from day one, the Supreme Court nomination of White House Counsel Harriet Miers has had a "what can go wrong will go wrong" feel. The administration's initial decision to focus on Miers' religious views and her abject loyalty to President Bush backfired. Then the Bush team's suggestion that elitism and sexism motivated her GOP critics infuriated many normally loyal Republicans. But now it is Miers herself who is harming her chances of confirmation.

First came her one-on-one meetings with senators, in which her command of the law was almost uniformly found underwhelming. She stumbled even with softball questions such as who her favorite justice was. In a discussion of privacy rights, she managed to completely confuse Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter – a moderate Republican who is presumably sympathetic to her selection. His verdict: Miers needs a "crash course on constitutional law."

This seemed to be confirmed by her rudimentary error on the Judiciary Committee's questionnaire. Asked about voting rights, she cited "the proportional representation requirement of the Equal Protection Clause." There is no such thing. Such a requirement – that legislative seats be apportioned by race – is unconstitutional, the Supreme Court has held.

Miers apparently was referring to one-man, one-vote rules that require legislative districts to be the same size so each voter has equal influence. Scholars called the mistake astounding and unacceptable from a first-year law student, much less a high court nominee.

More..

Find this article at:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20051025/news_lz1ed25middle.html

[longship]

1. Awww! Too bad.

:nopity: