October 21, 2005

"She is not going to legislate from the bench. She will strictly interpret the Constitution."

Sound familiar? President Bush said that yesterday. In the midst of all the controversy about the Miers nomination, Bush just keeps saying the one thing he always says. How exasperating! And what galls me the most is that it's not at all believable, because Miers has no demonstrable commitment to constitutional interpretation. She's been presented to us as someone who will simply vote the right way. That's the very essence of acting like a legislator.

11 comments:

F said...

In fairness she does give some thoughts on interpretation in her questionnaire....

Mark Daniels said...

From the standpoint of political "strategery," the President and the White House have imperiled Miers' confirmation by saying too much. It's amazing that they seem to have totally forgotten the successful manner with which they pursued Roberts' confirmation. I posted on this very subject yesterday: http://markdaniels.blogspot.com/2005/10/if-harriet-miers-doesnt-get-confirmed.html.

Guy Murray said...

"She's been presented to us as someone who will simply vote the right way. That's the very essence of acting like a legislator."

Whether as overt as Miers or as subtle as Justice Roberts, acting like a legislator, i.e., voting the "right way" is exactly what George Bush, and conservatives have been wanting for decades. This should come as no surprise. Strict construction, legislate from the bench, are nothing more than code words for justices who will "vote the right way.?

amba said...

And don't you have the impression that when George Bush mouths the words ""She is not going to legislate from the bench. She will strictly interpret the Constitution," he has no idea what he's talking about?

Wade_Garrett said...

Please, George Bush, show me one person in history who has 'strictly interpreted' the Constitution. Please, tell me what 'commerce' means, strictly defined. Please, tell me what 'necessary and proper' mean, strictly defined. This is so frustrating!

It occurs to me that, though Conservative politicians claim to want somebody who will strictly interpret the Constitution, conservative LAWYERS, even those who desire the same results as those Conservative politicians, never phrase things that way. I really doubt that many people with a legal education would say that the Republican party's political goals would be achieved if only more justices interpreted the Constitution 'strictly.'

Pastor_Jeff said...

And don't you have the impression that when George Bush mouths the words, "She is not going to legislate from the bench. She will strictly interpret the Constitution," he has no idea what he's talking about?

Short answer: Yes, I think that.

Medium answer: I think Bush thinks he knows what he's saying (maybe it's meant to be a code phrase to conservatives), but he's certainly not articulated what that means.

"You keep using that phrase. I do not think it means what you think it means."

Crank said...

I believe it was Orin Kerr who dug up a quote from GHWB saying almost exactly the same words about David Souter.

Brando said...

I think everybody here is misunderestimating the President. After he's done catapulting the propaganda, i am everyone will support her.

downtownlad said...

We'll strictly interpret the Constitution. Except the 9th amendment of course. We'll pretend that amendment doesn't exist. Oh yeah - and "liberty". We'll pretend liberty doesn't exist either.

James d. said...

Doesn't Bush generally stick to one phrase or signature line for almost any issue? Beyond whether that's good or not, it does keep his side on message and united.
The difference here is that he doesn't already have his base lined up behind him. Or rather, he's scattered them with this nomination.

Political FootBall said...

Bush says: "She is not going to legislate from the bench. She will strictly interpret the Constitution." He also chose her because she reflects his values. So which is it?