Uh-huh. I can't wait until Sen. Hatch asks her about her views on original jurisdiction and substantive due process, and how she'd interpret the breadth of the Commerce Clause. That should be a hoot.
Do you think perhaps the esteemed politician Hatch is more knowledgeable on these facets than the well educated lawyer Miers?
Granted, Sen. Hatch graduated from law school in 1962, so perhaps his education wasn't tainted by the kind of legal education people like Bill and Hillary Clinton received in the Sixties.
I have heard many detractions of the SJC candidate, but there is nobody who is even the least bit interested in whether she has a great, good or non-existent grasp of constitutional law.
I would agree with the previous poster: Bork, who was an example of the worst nomination process ever to occur on Capitol Hill (in so many way including the the partisanship and the lack of organization and support by his own people) has some insight into a lousy process. But if it is true that Bork supported Ginsberg, then...he doesn't have any room to talk at all. None. End of story.
If he supported Ginsberg, he must have done it out of sheer sympathy for someone going through the process. I cannot believe he would have supported her otherwise.
That said, I don't care HOW bad Meirs is, can she be worse than Ginsberg? If someone can nominate Ginsberg, and get, what, only two dissenting votes, how can this nomination be an abomination?
Your point is well made, but these concepts can be learned rather quickly if you are a truly smart lawyer. I just took the Bar exam, and I can tell you that 3 solid weeks of nothing but Conlaw can get her through the process. Scalia and Thomas can get her up to speed from there once she had been confirmed.
The Holy Spirit will cause her to become ill when in the presence of the liberal 4, so I don't think they will sway her.