Dobson Drops the Other Shoe on Miers
I mentioned earlier how I don’t trust James Dobson any further than I can throw him when it comes to his hemming and hawing about whether or not he received any assurances about Harriet Miers and what she might do on the Supreme Court. Now, via DailyKos and SCOTUSBlog, comes this Wall Street Journal editorial suggesting that Dobson received assurances from other judges that Miers would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade
It might, however, have been part of another discussion. On Oct. 3, the day the Miers nomination was announced, Mr. Dobson and other religious conservatives held a conference call to discuss the nomination. One of the people on the call took extensive notes, which I have obtained. According to the notes, two of Ms. Miers’s close friends–both sitting judges–said during the call that she would vote to overturn Roe.
…Mr. Dobson says he was surprised the next day to learn that Justice Hecht and Judge Kinkeade were joining the Arlington Group call. He was asked to introduce the two of them, which he considered awkward given that he had never spoken with Justice Hecht and only once to Judge Kinkeade. According to the notes of the call, Mr. Dobson introduced them by saying, “Karl Rove suggested that we talk with these gentlemen because they can confirm specific reasons why Harriet Miers might be a better candidate than some of us think.”
What followed, according to the notes, was a free-wheeling discussion about many topics, including same-sex marriage. Justice Hecht said he had never discussed that issue with Ms. Miers. Then an unidentified voice asked the two men, “Based on your personal knowledge of her, if she had the opportunity, do you believe she would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade?”
“Absolutely,” said Judge Kinkeade.
“I agree with that,” said Justice Hecht. “I concur.”
Dobson got off the call shortly afterwards, claiming he had some calls to make. I just bed he did.
So maybe Dobson wasn’t dissembling about the nature of his discussion with Rove so much as he was just not telling us about other conversations in which he did receive assurances about Miers and Roe v. Wade.
If this doesn’t come up during the confirmation hearings, then somebody somewhere isn’t doing their job. Fortunately, the columnist goes on to say quote an unnamed Judiciary Committee staffer as saying that the call may definitely be an issue in the confirmation hearings.
Some participants in the Oct. 3 conference call fear that they will be called to testify at Ms. Miers’s hearings. “If the call is as you describe it, an effort will be made to subpoena everyone on it,” a Judiciary Committee staffer told me. It is possible that a tape or notes of the call are already in the hands of committee staffers. “Some people were on speaker phones allowing other people to listen in, and others could have been on extensions,” one participant told me.
This will probably cause some on right to take a deep breath and wipe the foam from their mouths. But even if Miers makes it past the Judiciary Committee, as far as I’m concerned Senate Dems need to fight this nomination tooth and nail.
Technorati Tags: courts, current events, politics, supreme court
October 17th, 2005 at 12:13 pm
I agree that Miers shouldn’t become an Associate Justice, but I am not sure that the reasons you give are all that powerful. When Ruth Bader Ginsburg was nominated, was there any real doubt how she would vote on Roe v Wade?
It should certainly be investigated as to whether there have been any backroom deals. But private parties can discuss, bluster and bloviate to their hearts’ content, and I am not convinced there is anything other than that here.
Miers shouldn’t make it to the Court because she is unlikely to be able to demonstrate that she is brilliant enough to overcome the shortcomings of her resume.