Miers withdraws

Harriet Miers, Bush's nominee to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court, withdrew her name from consideration 15 minutes ago according to the Chicago Tribune.

Frankly, I don't believe the spin that Bush "reluctantly accepted her decision to withdraw." And of course the arsehole would blame the Senate's request for some relevant information demonstrating her qualification to sit on the highest court in the land for her decision--and not the fact that she's barely qualified to practice law, much less interpret it.

I didn't expect it to happen quite this soon, but when I heard, on the BBC last night, that senators were still waiting for her to submit her revised questionnaire to the Judiciary Committee by the deadline, I figured we were in the endgame. Given that Limbaugh and Schlafly's ad only got its first run yesterday, I doubt the ad itself had much of an impact on this decision to withdraw--but I have to wonder whether there was also private pressure in addition to the public criticism. And that, I have to think, probably had far more to do with Miers' decision to step down, and Bush's decision not to press her to stay, than anything the Senate did (or did not) do.

The waiting game now begins to see whom Bush will tap in Miers' place. And if he knows what's good for him, it will not be another non-entity, it will not be a wingnut, and it had better be done quickly and in very public consultation with the Senate. I think even the Senate Republicans are getting tired of this three-ring circus crap.

Comments

[Steve Bates]

IIRC, Krauthammer suggested this ploy... refusing the document request and blaming the Senate... in a column a while back. Or maybe Rove is still hard at work.

In my admittedly amateur readings of the history of the Supreme Court, I've come to realize how very, very specialized and difficult it is to practice before it, let alone sit on it. Miers, however bright and capable a lawyer she may have been (and one does have to wonder about someone who thinks the Shrubbery is "brilliant"), simply did not have either the background or the experience to be among the Supremes. Understanding that Bush will nominate someone on the far right, I nonetheless insist that a nominee must be one or more of the following: a well-respected Constitutional scholar, a federal judge with some experience, or at least, at a minimum, someone admitted to the Supreme Court bar with several years of experience practicing before the Court. Bush could begin to dig himself out of the hole by nominating such a person. But of course he won't.

[ProgressiveDepot]

We have the first draft of Miers' withdrawal letter at Now That's Progress if you want to see what she was originally thinking.