Rove Redux

"Judging takes work, but the folks who think 'constitutional reasoning' is a talent requiring divination, intense effort and years of monastic study are the same folks who will inevitably give you 'Lemon tests,' balancing formulas, 'penumbras' and concurrences that make your head spin. The President sees through that mumbo jumbo and recognizes that good Justices are the ones who focus on the Constitution's text, structure and history and who call balls and strikes.

"I actually think the length of modern Supreme Court decisions is ridiculous, and the 'brilliant thinkers' who produce the cleverest arguments aren't necessarily the best judges. The Supreme Court's job is to provide guidance to lower courts, not to produce absurdly subtle arguments that mere mortals can neither understand nor apply coherently.

"In other words, the fact that Harriet Miers isn't the most brilliant legal mind in the country isn't necessarily a strike against her. On the other hand, it would be nice if she had at least a teensy bit of background in interpreting constitutional law, wouldn't it? Surely we can all agree that President Bush has taken his signature anti-intellectualism to indefensible levels here?"

Captain's Quarters doesn't like the religious emphasis:

"The push by more enthusiastic Miers supporters to consider her religious outlook smacks of a bit of hypocrisy. After all, we argued the exact opposite when it came to John Roberts and William Pryor when they appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee for their appointments. We derided Chuck Schumer and his references to "deeply held personal beliefs." Conservatives claimed that using religion as a reason for rejection violated the Constitution and any notion of religious freedom. Does that really change if we base our support on the same grounds?"

Is Bush making a self-interested nomination here? Justin Frank thinks so:

"By appointing his personal lawyer after appointing a Chief Justice who helped him out in the 2000 Florida election, he is 'stacking' the court with justices who will protect him and his colleagues at all costs. After all, Miers kept Bush from one particular jury duty which, had he served it, would have exposed his DWI arrest record before he even had a chance to cover it up. As it stands, the court will protect even more White House secrets than ever, against any and all investigators."

But Frank loses me with this sentence: "The only thing this appointment could be about is self-protection from impeachable offenses." Um, other than the chief justice ceremonially presiding over a Senate trial, the court plays no role in impeachment.

Peggy Noonan is the latest conservative to say Bush screwed up:

"Miers pick was another administration misstep. The president misread the field, the players, their mood and attitude. He called the play, they looked up from the huddle and balked. And debated. And dissed. Momentum was lost. The quarterback looked foolish.

"The president would have been politically better served by what Pat Buchanan called a bench-clearing brawl. . . .

"The headline lately is that conservatives are stiffing the president. They're in uproar over Ms. Miers, in rebellion over spending, critical over cronyism. But the real story continues to be that the president feels so free to stiff conservatives. The White House is not full of stupid people. They knew conservatives would be disappointed that the president chose his lawyer for the high court. They knew conservatives would eventually awaken over spending. They knew someone would tag them on putting friends in high places. They knew conservatives would not like the big-government impulses revealed in the response to Hurricane Katrina.