This Ain't Rocket Science

A number of commentators have sniffed at Harriet Mier's resume. I happen to think that it is very solid. However, what I really want to take issue with is this crazy notion that the work of a US Supreme Court Justice requires extraordinary genius. What garbage!

First, let's remember that Thurgood Marshall cranked out votes that thrilled his liberal backers for many years long after he had become a doddering old fool. His liberal clerks and colleagues made sure of that.

Second, any person with the natural intelligence to gain acceptance at a decent law school can learn the essentials of constitutional law by reading any decent commercial outline in an afternoon. It ain't rocket science! And for the cases themselves, any reasonably bright lawyer can figure out exactly the issues at stake in a case by simply reading the appellate briefs the first time through. It really is pretty simple. The briefs and the record actually identify the issues raised on appeal. What could be easier than that?

Now add three law clerks who have recently finished clerkships for some of the finest judges from the Courts of Appeal (having been chosen for those posts because of their brilliant scholarship at the best law schools in the land). Does anyone really think that a justice at SCOTUS might actually fail to grasp the essential issues after reading memos and being briefed by 3 young John Roberts wanna-bes?

Now add the input, influence and reasoning of Justice Scalia, Justice Thomas, Justice Roberts and their typically brilliant law clerks.

With that kind of help available, does anyone really want to argue that any person of reasonable intelligence who had passed a bar exam couldn't figure out how to vote on these cases?! Let's face it. A state trial judge without benefit of a clerk and burdened by an overflowing docket needs to be a lot smarter in order to rule properly on any Constitutional issue raised in his court than a SCOTUS justice who is surrounded by dozens of brilliant folks who can offer guidance.

This stuff just isn't hard to understand.

Now I will readily grant that those of us on the right would all like to have a justice whose legal brilliance and persuasive writing style were capable of making Ginsberg, Breyer, or Souter see the light and renounce their evil ways. If anyone can, perhaps Roberts can fulfill that role. But people like John Roberts are kind of rare and we don't really expect that kind of miracle, anyway.

I'll be thrilled if Miers simply votes the same way as we expect all of those judges who have been nominated for appellate posts by Bush under her watchful eye.