Say Anything Blog

Oh my...

...several constitutional law scholars said they were surprised and puzzled by Miers’s response to the committee’s request for information on cases she has handled dealing with constitutional issues. In describing one matter on the Dallas City Council, Miers referred to “the proportional representation requirement of the Equal Protection Clause” as it relates to the Voting Rights Act.

“There is no proportional representation requirement in the Equal Protection Clause,” said Cass R. Sunstein, a constitutional law professor at the University of Chicago. He and several other scholars said it appeared that Miers was confusing proportional representation — which typically deals with ethnic groups having members on elected bodies — with the one-man, one-vote Supreme Court ruling that requires, for example, legislative districts to have equal populations.

Miers has just gone from a poor nomination to an astoundingly bad nomination.

More here and here.

Update:

It looks like Bush didn't read the questionaire:

...Bush has steadfastly defended his Miers, who is the White House counsel, and said he picked her because she had never been a judge and would bring a "fresh outlook" to the bench.

"She will strictly interpret the Constitution," Bush said at a news conference with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.

"I said that when I ran for president. I said, 'If you elect me, I will name people that will have that judicial philosophy,'" Bush said.

He said the questionnaire shows Miers' judicial philosophy, which was the main reason he chose her for the Supreme Court.

Bush needs to withdraw his nomination of Miers and pick somebody better before this thing drags the remainder of his Presidency and the domination of Republicans in Congress underwater.