by David Sirota
Working for Change blog
October 4, 2005

As any quick look at Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers' record shows, the distinguishing feature of her career has been her blind loyalty to President Bush. Few have argued that her selection is anything more than a reward for her loyalty - it certainly isn't because of her highly controversial legal career helping defraud investors. And we need look no further than America's founding fathers to see just how antithetical they viewed such a nomination.

Just look at the Federalist Papers #76, in which Alexander Hamilton discusses why the founding fathers gave the U.S. Senate the power to confirm - or reject - the President's Supreme Court nominees:

"To what purpose then require the co-operation of the Senate? I answer, that the necessity of their concurrence would have a powerful, though, in general, a silent operation. It would be an excellent check upon a spirit of favoritism in the President, and would tend greatly to prevent the appointment of unfit characters from State prejudice, from family connection, from personal attachment..." (emphasis added) [...] Read the rest at: http://tinyurl.com/9gmr4 Aren't these guys who are going along with Bush members of the Federalist Society? I guess I am getting forgetful or something ...


© Virginia Metze