Temperamental contrarian that I am, I'm trying hard to find something nice to say about the Harriet Miers nomination. It isn't easy! But here's my first stab:
2. She's a member of an evangelical church, and she advocated changing the ABA's official stance on abortion (they're for it). You don't have to be pro-life to be anti-Roe, but it's very unusual to find pro-lifers who are pro-Roe. (It is theoretically possible, I suppose, for a person to think that abortion should be illegal but that Roe was correctly decided, or at least sacrosanct on stare decisis grounds. This hypothetical person, who would presumably be a vocal proponent of a Human Life Amendment, is not someone I've ever met.)
The big problem is that there are important issues apart from just abortion to worry about in contemporary jurisprudence -- and someone like Miers, who hasn't worked on constitutional law much, probably hasn't thought much about those issues. So I'm not completely sanguine, but I'm trying.
Share this Article
Like this Article
Print this ArticlePrint Article