What About John Roberts, anyway?
Mr. Roberts seems to have been an ideal choice. There may still remain some doubt about his views in specific cases--but those are off limits anyway. As for qualifications, what doubt could there be? What a resume. His only flaw may be the way he hedged about his membership in the Federalist Society, an organization Bork referred to in a WSJ article today asa farm team full of future judicial candidates. As a Federalist myself, I was surprised by the hesitation. But otherwise, Roberts was a good choice. Still, Bush passed up a handful of possibly better candidates, though none might have been as easily confirmed as Roberts.
Then again, why don't Republicans pick the clear conservatives? Democrats sent up Ginsberg, general counsel to the ACLU, and no one said boo. Now the GOP has the majority. Use it.
posted by S. at 12:18 AM
3 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
What about Robert Bork? Can a person be resubmitted? Or would that be a silly thing to do?
Great question. I'm sure Bush can nominate anyone. But Bork would probably say no. And after what happened before many seem left with the completely false impression that Bork was a sexist and a racist. In spite of the fact that he refuted every charge. Ted Kennedy would get up and lie about Bork...
Anyway, he's the very best choice I can think of--but it'll never happen.
What would be great though, would be if Bush would tap Bork to help him select the next candidate. The job is just too big for Miers or any non-lawyer, like Bush. Not to be elitist, it's just that you wouldn't ask the provost of Harvard to hire medical faculty, you know? No matter how good an administrator is, you simply must use people trained in the field. And many, even most lawyers, are not qualified to offer Bush much help on this either. I'm certainly not. But Bork is. No one is better qualified perhaps.
Or, now that Rhenquist is out, you could ask him--but that probably crosses some lines too.
Post a Comment
<< Home