{"id":4127,"date":"2005-10-03T14:12:52","date_gmt":"2005-10-03T18:12:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/formerlyknownas\/2005\/10\/03\/bushs-terrible-twos-choosing-"},"modified":"2011-08-05T14:54:32","modified_gmt":"2011-08-05T18:54:32","slug":"bushs-terrible-twos-choosing-harriet-miers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/2005\/10\/03\/bushs-terrible-twos-choosing-harriet-miers\/","title":{"rendered":"Bush’s Terrible Two’s: choosing Harriet Miers"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

With a petulant cry of “cronyism\/schmonyism”, GW Bush has shown <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
the world that he will to<\/EM> appoint old friends and cronies if he wants to — <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
even to the most important and consequential positions. (see <\/FONT>CNN.com<\/FONT><\/A>, <\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/DIV>
\n
“Bush picks <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>White House counsel for Supreme Court”) <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>President Bush’s <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
second choice for a Supreme Court justice looks from here<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT> to be a bad <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
case <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>of Terrible Two’s<\/FONT><\/A> — the need to prove just how independent and in <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
charge he is, while <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>still needing the reassurance of  unqualified love and <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
devotion, which he <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>apparently receives from Harriet Miers<\/A><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>.  <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
\"MiersBush\"  Of course, I’m willing to be persuaded otherwise, but my initial <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
reaction <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>is similar to that of Prof. Bainbridge<\/FONT><\/A>: “This appointment reeks of <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
cronyism, <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>which along with prideful arrogance seems to be the besetting <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
sin of the Bush presidency.”  And, Steve asks a great question: “Why is <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
the <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>leader of a <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>party that [is] supposedly about merit and against affirmative <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
action <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>making <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>an appointment that can only be explained as an affirmative <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
action <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>choice?” [can you say “spousal suasion<\/EM>“?]<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
Naturally, unlike Prof. B, it’s not Miers’ lack of a “public track record <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>of <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
proven <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>conservative judicial values” that concerns me.  It’s the scarcity of <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
information for evaluating her likely judicial temperament (especially <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>open-<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
minded fairness) or the <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>excellence <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>of her mind.  Her blind devotion to the <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
policies of George W. Bush, obviously worries me.  Making it all much <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
worse is the fear that <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>neither party is likely to give us a <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>confirmation process <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
that will enlighten or edify the public. <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n

\n
\"tiny  I’ve often opined that I will gladly choose a person <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
with an excellent <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>and open mind<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>, with whom I often disagree, <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
over a person who always agrees with me but has either an  <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
agenda or a mediocre mind.  I can’t expect Pres. Bush to <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
name someone with whom I am likely to always agree, but <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
I do expect a nominee of high intelligence with no secret <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
agendas. <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n
<\/FONT>\"issa orig<\/FONT><\/A>.<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
 <\/DIV>
\n
Gimme that moon!<\/EM><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
cries the crying<\/EM><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
child <\/EM><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
 
\n
Kobayashi Issa<\/FONT><\/A> <\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
  translated by <\/FONT>David G. Lanoue<\/FONT><\/A> <\/FONT><\/FONT> <\/FONT><\/DIV><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
\"tiny  You will, as expected, find much more on this topic <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
at the SCOTUSblog<\/FONT><\/EM><\/A>‘s roundup<\/A>, and at <\/FONT>The Volokh Conspiracy<\/FONT><\/EM><\/A><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>.  <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
Plus, more from Steve Bainbridge <\/FONT>here<\/FONT><\/A> and <\/FONT>there<\/FONT><\/A>.<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
 <\/DIV>
\n

\n
telling her its time
for a diaper change:
   “I did not”<\/DIV>
\n
 <\/DIV>
\n

\n
<\/SPAN><\/SPAN>    Tom Clausen<\/STRONG><\/FONT><\/A> <\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/DIV>
\n
      from Homework<\/EM> (<\/FONT>Snapshot Press<\/FONT><\/A> 2000) <\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/DIV><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>update<\/FONT><\/STRONG><\/EM> (Oct. 4, 2005):  Receiving a tip from Randy Barnett<\/A>, <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>Lawrence Solum <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
at Legal Theory Blog<\/FONT><\/EM><\/A> offers this very cogent <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>excerpt from Alexander Hamilton <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
in Federal Papers No. 76<\/A> (emphases removed, because it’s all important):<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>\"HamiltonA\"  Federalist No. 76<\/EM><\/STRONG> <\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>To what purpose then require the co-operation of the Senate? I answer, <\/FONT>that <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>the necessity of their concurrence would have a powerful, though, in general, <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
a silent operation. It would be an excellent check upon a spirit of favoritism <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
in the President, and would tend greatly to prevent the appointment of unfit <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
characters from State prejudice, from family connection, from personal <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
attachment, or from a view to popularity. In addition to this, it would be an <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
efficacious source of stability in the administration. <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>                                                                                                     <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
It will readily be comprehended, that a man who had himself the sole disposition <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
of offices, would be governed much more by his private inclinations and interests, <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
than when he was bound to submit the propriety of his choice to the discussion <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
and determination of a different and independent body, and that body an entier <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
branch of the legislature. The possibility of rejection would be a strong motive to <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
care in proposing. The danger to his own reputation, and, in the case of an elective <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
magistrate, to his political existence, from betraying a spirit of favoritism, or an <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
unbecoming pursuit of popularity, to the observation of a body whose opinion would <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
have great weight in forming that of the public, could not fail to operate as a barrier <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
to the one and to the other. He would be both ashamed and afraid to bring forward, <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
for the most distinguished or lucrative stations, candidates who had no other merit <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
than that of coming from the same State to which he particularly belonged, or of <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
being in some way or other personally allied to him, or of possessing the necessary <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
insignificance and pliancy to render them the obsequious instruments of his pleasure.<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n

\n

\"seesaw\"  <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/P>
\n

<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>update<\/FONT><\/STRONG><\/EM> (Oct. 6, 2005): As Prof. Bainbridge points out<\/FONT><\/A> today, Robert Novak wrote<\/A><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
today that Pres. Bush was irked by those who kept insisting he satisfy his base<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
and who opposed the selection of other Bush <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>cronies <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>(like AG Gonzales).  So, <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
(like a two-year-old, we’d say) GW “showed them” who’s in charge. Steve collected<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
a few links and adjectives for us:<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
“It fits the picture of a President who’s got a short fuse<\/FONT><\/A>, intense loyalty<\/FONT><\/A> <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
to a very select group of people, a strong stubborn<\/FONT><\/A> streak, a reputation f<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
or holding grudges<\/FONT><\/A>, and who maybe never really was a true believer<\/FONT><\/A> <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
himself.”<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
 <\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n

\n

\n

\n
<\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/DIV>
\n

                                                                                                                     \"hand<\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P>
\n

<\/SPAN><\/SPAN> <\/P><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

With a petulant cry of “cronyism\/schmonyism”, GW Bush has shown the world that he will to appoint old friends and cronies if he wants to — even to the most important and consequential positions. (see CNN.com, “Bush picks White House counsel for Supreme Court”) President Bush’s second choice for a Supreme Court justice looks from here to be a […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":94,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[2926],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4127","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-pre-06-2006"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p6kP1R-14z","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4127","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/94"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4127"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4127\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12997,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4127\/revisions\/12997"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4127"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4127"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4127"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}