By now, if you are still paying attention to Harriet Miers updates, you have seen John Fund's report of the conference call involving James Dobson, in which two Texas judges expressed their opinion that Harriet Miers would "absolutely" vote to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Later today, Harriet Miers denied revealing any such information. According to Charles Schumer, she responded to the story by stating, "No one knows how I would rule on Roe v. Wade." The fact is that she is treading on thin ice:

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) emerged from a 100-minute meeting with the nominee and said that she stated she believes that a right to privacy exists. Initially, Specter told reporters that Miers had said "she backs Griswold ," referring to a 1965 case that dealt with access to contraceptives on the basis of privacy considerations.

But last night, a spokesman for Specter issued a statement saying that Miers had called him after his public comments "to say that he misunderstood her and that she had not taken a position on Griswold or the privacy issue."

Still later, former Senator Dan Coats of Indiana, who has been tasked with helping Miers through the Senate, said that Miers acknowledges that the "liberty clause" of the 14th Amendment "implies a right of privacy," but Miers would not embrace Griswold. Remember, Griswold involved a challenge to the following Connecticut statute: "Any person who uses any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purpose of preventing conception shall be fined not less than fifty dollars or imprisoned not less than sixty days nor more than one year or be both fined and imprisoned." Miers accepts a right of privacy, but has trouble embracing the invalidation of this statute? I wonder what that right of privacy might look like in Miers' world.

In fairness to her, she has been placed in an untenable position. She was nominated precisely because she has no positions of her own, but with the understanding that her votes will be in the right place. Wink, wink. Of course, she cannot confirm how she will vote on any particular issue, but she must appear open to arguments. Then again, if she is too open ...

Can Harriet Miers uncrack the privacy egg?

My hunch is that she will have many more clarifying problems of the sort she experienced with Specter. The risk from her perspective is that she will appear slippery, which will lead to distrust on both sides of the aisle. Perhaps I am blinded by my own negative feelings about this nomination, but I have a hard time seeing how she can be confirmed.

Supreme Court | Bookmark

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/38673/3397737

Links to weblogs that reference The Issue of Privacy Has Been Broached: