October
13, 2005
Does This Law Degree Make My Resume Look Fat?
By Ann
Coulter
A Supreme
Court nomination may not have been the ideal time for Laura Bush
to start acting like "Buy One, Get One Free" Hillary
Clinton. At least President Clinton only allowed his wife to choose
the attorney general. (Remember the good old days when first ladies
only got to pick the poet laureate and the White House china pattern?)
Between cooking
segments on the "Today" show this week, Laura rolled
out the straw man – sorry, "straw person" –
argument that the criticism of Miers was rooted in "sexism"
(which is such a chick thing to say).
I'm a gyno-American,
and I strenuously object.
The only
sexism involved in the Miers nomination is the administration's
claim that once they decided they wanted a woman, Miers was the
best they could do. Let me just say, if the top male lawyer in
the country is John Roberts and the top female lawyer is Harriet
Miers, we may as well stop allowing girls to go to law school.
Ah, but perhaps
you were unaware of Miers' many other accomplishments. Apparently
she was THE FIRST WOMAN in Dallas to have a swimming pool in her
back yard! And she was THE FIRST WOMAN with a safety deposit box
at the Dallas National Bank! And she was THE FIRST WOMAN to wear
pants at her law firm! It's simply amazing! And did you know she
did all this while being a woman?
I don't know
when Republicans became the party that condescends to women, but
I am not at all happy about this development. This isn't the year
1880. And by the way, even in 1880, Miers would not have been
the "most qualified" of all women lawyers in the U.S.,
of which there were 75.
By 1950,
there were more than 6,000 women lawyers, three female partners
at major law firms and three female federal judges. She may be
a nut who belonged to a subversive organization, but Ruth Bader
Ginsburg graduated first in her class from Columbia Law School
– and that was before Harriet Miers was applying to law
school.
Women have
been graduating at the top of their classes at the best law schools
for 50 years. Today, women make up about 45 percent of the students
at the nation's top law schools (and more than 50 percent at all
law schools).
Which brings
us to the other enraging argument being made by the Bush administration
and its few remaining defenders – the claim of "elitism."
I also don't know when the Republican Party stopped being the
party of merit and excellence and became the party of quotas and
lying about test scores, but I don't like that development, either.
The average
LSAT score at SMU Law School is 155. The average LSAT at Harvard
is 170. That's a difference of approximately 1 1/2 standard deviations,
a differential IQ experts routinely refer to as "big-ass"
or "humongous." Whatever else you think of them, the
average Harvard Law School student is very smart. I gather I have
just committed a hate crime by saying so.
Contrary
to the Bush administration's disingenuous arguments, it's not
simply that Miers did not attend a top law school that makes her
unqualified for the Supreme Court. (But that's a good start!)
It's that she did not go on to rack up any major accomplishments
since then, either.
Despite the
astonishing fact that Miers was THE FIRST WOMAN to head the Texas
Bar Association – a dumping ground for losers, by the way
– Miers has not had the sort of legal career that shouts
out "Supreme Court material"! That is, unless you think
any female who manages to pass the bar exam has achieved a feat
of unparalleled brilliance for her gender.
There are
more important things in life than being Supreme Court material,
but – oddly enough – not when we're talking about
an appointment to the Supreme Court. According to the Associated
Press, Sen. Arlen Specter defended Miers on the grounds that "Miers'
professional qualifications are excellent, but she lacks experience
in constitutional law" – and Specter ought to know.
This is like recommending a plumber by saying, "He's a very
professional guy, but he lacks experience in plumbing."
The other
straw-man argument constantly being hawked by the Bush administration
is that Miers' critics object that she's never been a judge. To
quote another Bush – Read my lips: No one has said that.
So please stop comparing Miers to Justice Byron White (first in
his class at Yale Law School) or Justice William Rehnquist (first
in his class at Stanford Law School).
It's also
not what the New York Times claims, which is that conservatives
oppose Miers because they don't know how she will vote. We didn't
know how Roberts would vote! As I recall, I was the only conservative
complaining about that.
The problem
with Miers is something entirely different – and entirely
within the meaning of "advice and consent": Miers is
no more qualified to sit on the Supreme Court than I am to be
a sumo wrestler. The hearings aren't going to change that; they
will just make it more obvious.
I genuinely
feel sorry for Miers. I'm sure she's a lovely woman, brighter
than average, and well-qualified for many important jobs. Just
not the job Bush has nominated her for. The terrible thing Bush
has done to Miers is to force people who care about the court
to say that.
Copyright
2005 Ann Coulter
Distributed
by Universal Press Syndicate
