George Bush’s presidency hit a new low on Thursday when his supreme court nominee, Harriet Miers, was forced to withdraw in the face of overwhelming resistance from within Bush’s own party.
The embarrassing rejection of the president’s former personal lawyer and White House counsel, despite his enthusiastic backing, helped make this week probably the most miserable of his five years in office.
It could well get even worse on Friday, when a special prosecutor is expected to conclude a 22-month investigation into a White House intelligence leak. Bush’s political strategist, Karl Rove, and the vice-president’s chief of staff, Lewis Libby, have been implicated in the leak and risk indictment.
This week also witnessed the 2 000th American death in Iraq, and the president’s personal ratings dropped to 37%. In such conditions the withdrawal of an increasingly controversial court nominee appeared aimed at stopping the haemorrhage of support among conservatives.
”I am concerned that the confirmation process presents a burden for the White House and our staff that is not in the best interest of the country,” Miers said in her withdrawal letter.
She will continue to serve as White House counsel and will help to choose the next nominee, who could be named within days. An announcement as early as Friday would help to distract attention in the event of indictments.
Miers and Bush presented the decision to withdraw as necessary to avoid a looming constitutional clash, after the Senate requested White House documentation of the nominee’s work, which the president insisted was confidential.
He said Miers’ decision to pull out ”demonstrates her deep respect for this essential aspect of the constitutional separation of powers — and confirms my deep respect and admiration for her”.
But senators said they had not asked for privileged documents, and most observers portrayed the explanation as a face-saving way out of a political deadlock. The nomination was abandoned in the face of a mutiny by conservatives who believed Miers was insufficiently committed to banning abortion and reversing other liberal court rulings.
That revolt intensified after a 12-year-old speech surfaced on Wednesday in which Miers argued abortion and other emotive moral issues were best dealt with through ”self-determination”.
Other critics pointed to her lack of experience — she had been a corporate lawyer, not a judge — and her close links to the president, which they said could imperil the court’s independence. – Guardian Unlimited Â