Remember how all Republicans spoke with one voice about the confirmation of Roberts? Don't ask questions about his judicial philosophy. Don't go probing to find out how he would vote on this or that issue. Don't have a litmus test. He has a great mind. And he will interpret the law, not make it. The far Right had some doubts, but when they heard the code words "interpret the law" they joined in confirming Roberts. Not enthusiastically, because they were not positive about Roberts' future rulings.
Now, along comes Harriet Miers, with no judicial record. Bush tells the world that she will "interpret the law and not make it." This code encourages some theocratic Conservatives like James Dobson to favor her. But some of the things Miers has said in the past seem to contradict Bush's message. In speeches Miers gave in the early 1990s she supported
"The freedom of the individual woman's right to decide for herself whether she will have an abortion."
Holy mackerel! This is not what Jan LaRue, chief counsel of Concerned Women for America, thinks is meant by "interpreting the law" and "strict constructionist." She thinks that Miers' speeches
"Indicate a radical feminist worldview, a penchant for judicial activism, race and sex quotas, a liberal characterization of the abortion debate and government spending, and an inability to articulate her positions clearly. We do not think there is anything she could say at her hearing that would satisfy our concerns."
That statement and the vicious statements of prominent Republicans sealed the fate of Miers. She withdrew - more likely, she was told to withdraw - her nomination.
Now, Dobson knows better, and joins those denigrating Miers. He realizes now that she did not pass the Conservative Right's judicial litmus test.
For those of you who do not believe that "strict constructionist" and "interpreting the law" are synonyms for "anti-abortion," perhaps you could tell me why Justices Scalia and Thomas, the leading proponents of this code also are against abortion and for overturning Roe v. Wade. A review of the Constitution finds no place where abortion is mentioned.
Maybe you can explain why Bush insisted that Miers was an evangelical Christian. This is more than code. This is practically screaming that she would be against abortion.
Just wait and see how Bush announces his new nominee. He will tell us that she or he is a "strict constructionist" and would "interpret the law, not make it." This is the code that says the candidate passed the Conservative Right's judicial litmus test.
