The Gang of 14’s Democratic and Republican senators met yesterday and gave "preliminary approval" to Harriet Miers' nomination to replace Justice Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court:
Emerging from a meeting at the offices of Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said, “This nomination didn’t set off any alarm bells with any of us.”
According to The Hill, this "provisional endorsement" could be huge. Absent the revelation of some damning evidence during confirmation hearings Miers is unlikely to be filibustered, and a party-line vote would mean confirmation.
The Hill is certainly right about a Democratic filibuster, but can Miers count on a party line vote? Not likely.
A lot will depend on conservative Republican senators such as Sam Brownback, Jeff Sessions, Tom Coburn and John Thune.
In an interview with ABC News Brownback said that if Miers testifies during the Judiciary Committee’s hearings that she views Roe v. Wade settled law he would likely vote against her. Can anyone see her saying anything else?
Thune, Coburn and Sessions have not made any commitments to supporting Miers.
Defeating the Miers’ nomination.
It is possible some Republican senators might vote against Miers. It is more likely, with the Gang of 14's endorsement, a number of Democratic senators will vote for Miers.
The Gang of 14’s endorsement of Miers makes her confirmation more likely.
Which suggests my dismay about the Miers nomination was well-founded.
Posted by: No Oil For Pacifists | Thursday, October 06, 2005 at 06:17 PM
I concur, but there's still one more wildcard: will the ABA rate her "unqualified," and if so, then how do senators respond?
Posted by: KipEsquire | Thursday, October 06, 2005 at 08:42 AM