I've noticed that we live in an age in which judges and legal minds seem to hide their own judicial philosophy from themselves. And that might explain why a Harriet Miers has reached the age of 60 and no one seems to know what she thinks.
Having a philosophy is all too big and too dangerous--paper trails, insights inadequately phrased that come back to haunt. Lawyers with ambition seem to have become adept at hiding their essential intellectual nature from themselves. They break the law down into tiny chewable pieces and endlessly masticate them. They break it down into small manageable bits, avoiding the larger abstractions. It's one of the reasons they're so boring.
In a highly politicized climate it's not really convenient for lawyers to know their deepest beliefs and convictions. Robert Bork, serious thinker and mature concluder, became bork, living verb. Or rather living past-tense verb.
Only reluctantly and only with time do lawyers now develop a philosophy. They get on the court, and reveal it to us day by day. And reveal it, one senses, to themselves.
Right Wing News polled right-leaning bloggers about the Harriet Miers nomination. See the results here.
Glenn Reynolds wonders if there is a Meirs meltdown in process.
To see more Newsmaker Caricatures by John Cox, click here.
UPDATE -- Oct. 11 From FoxNews: Conservative Critics Question Miers' Abilities.
Conservatives continue to criticize President Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court although no senators have joined the opposition yet.
Almost half of GOP senators are not convinced that Miers is the right person for the job, according to a survey conducted by the Washington Times. Most senators said they plan to announce whether they will vote for the nominee after her confirmation hearings, which aren't yet scheduled.
Posted by Forkum at October 10, 2005 07:29 PM