WorldNetDaily: Harriet Miers withdraws

There it is. Just after Concerned Women for America declared themselves against her nomination, and after Americans for Better Justice spent a quarter of a million dollars buying time to run a TV ad against her, Harriet Miers withdrew her name this morning from consideration as a Justice of the Supreme Court.

The ostensible reason for her withdrawal was that the Senate kept insisting on requesting privileged documents that she had had a hand in writing or otherwise creating. Absolutely any attorney must protect his correspondence with his clients--and moreover, the doctrine of executive privilege goes clear back to the Presidency of George Washington. This might mean that a White House counsel can never be a Justice of the Supreme Court--and that might not be such a bad idea after all, seeing that for someone who worked for the President to become a Justice of the Supreme Court might violate separation of powers. (Except that this country has had at least one Chief Justice who was President before he got on the Court: William Howard Taft.)

But let's not kid ourselves, nor permit Harriet Miers to kid us: she withdrew because conservatives wouldn't stand for her being on the Court. As a conservative myself, I say the above without shame. I say that she was singularly unqualified to serve on that Court because:

1. She was not ready. She had never even been a judge, nor argued any cases before the Court. The contrast between her and John Roberts could not have been more striking.
2. Her judicial philosophy remained unknown to the very end. Moreover, I found it disturbingly malleable during her career. Yes, a person has the right to change her mind. But if you change your mind, you should declare forthrightly that you are changing your mind, and why.

Add to it that her involvement with the Texas Lottery Commission was raising far more questions than she seemed willing to answer.

Now, perhaps, the President can send to the Senate the sort of candidate he ought to have sent in the first place: Edith Jones, Janice Rogers Brown, Matthew Luttig, or any of a number of similar appellate Justices from several powerhouse Federal Circuits.