Caligula's Horse Flunks Conlaw 101
Don't conservatives oppose proportional representation?
In describing one matter on the Dallas City Council, Miers referred to "the proportional representation requirement of the Equal Protection Clause" as it relates to the Voting Rights Act.Unlike Cass Sunstein, I'm not a constitutional law professor, so the Washington Post would probably not contact me to confirm that "There is no proportional representation requirement in the Equal Protection Clause." I was, however, aware of that fact. Furthermore, I received a passing grade in Phil 325b, Philosophy of Law, last spring, which means, I believe, that I have sounder credentials in dealing with disputes of the sort that the Supreme Court adjudicates than does Harriet Miers. Ergo, I am more qualified for a SCOTUS appointment than Miers, QED.
My erstwhile colleague Julian Sanchez made the crucial point here:
What's depressing here is that the debate over Miers is almost certainly going to be about teasing out her legal views and trying to figure out whether she's going to rule the "right" way on this or that issue, rather than over what you'd think would be a screamingly obvious problem: Someone whose only qualifications (beyond a pair of X chromosomes) are fanatical loyalty to the president and decent lawyering skills is the right choice for White House counsel—not the highest court in the land.Remember all the months of Republican carping about how senators should vote to confirm based on an appraisal of a nominee's qualifications, not his/her ideology? Well, they were (partly) correct. And every single senator has an obligation to vote against this nominee, regardless of her views. That point entails, by the way, that Democrats must vote against her, even if she promised to uphold Roe v. Wade.
Incidentally, is anyone still in control at the White House? These confirmation hearing processes are not that difficult to get through. All Miers had to do was clam up like John Roberts and give no substantive answers of any kind---and have one of the lawyers at the White House who knows more about SCOTUS-type issues than she does fill out her judiciary committee questionnaire for her.