Harriet E Miers

The Supreme Court nomination of Harriet E. Miers appeared to gain some ground with Republicans and lose some with Democrats on Tuesday after she turned over to senators a 57-page background questionnaire and 12 boxes of supporting documents.

A federal appeals court rejected House Democrats' demands to force two of President Bush's top aides to cooperate with an investigation about the firings of nine federal prosecutors in 2006. Time will run out on this year's congressional session before the battle between two branches of government can be resolved, according to the ruling by a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. The ruling blocks a July order by U.S. District Judge John D. Bates to force former White House counsel Harriet E. Miers to testify before the House Judiciary Committee and current White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten to turn over documents.

White House chief of staff Joshua B. Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet E. Miers asked a federal judge to delay an order to cooperate with Congress while they appeal the ruling. The court filings indicate that Bolten and Miers will continue to resist subpoenas from the House Judiciary Committee as the Bush administration heads into its final months. Lawmakers are seeking testimony and documents related to the controversial firings of nine U.S. attorneys in 2006.

The Bush administration seems to be trying to run out the clock on its resistance to Congress' legitimate request to have present and former officials testify about White House involvement in the still murky firing of nine U.S. attorneys in 2006. A federal appeals court should reject this maneuver. It has been a year and half since Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) expressed concern about the firing of a handful of U.S. attorneys, including Carol Lam, the prosecutor in San Diego whose pursuit of former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Rancho Santa Fe)

Re "Cronyism as a core value," Opinion, Oct. 7 Thank you, Jonathon Chait, for pointing out the dangers of cronyism in presidential appointments. The framers of the Constitution gave the Senate the power to confirm or reject nominees to guard against the court being packed with under-qualified presidential favorites. Harriet E. Miers' main qualification for the Supreme Court seems to be her admiration for President Bush. Surely the American people deserve better. LAUREL GORD Venice

Re "Miers Backed Abortion Ban in 1989 Survey," Oct. 19 At what point did abortion become the kingpin of American liberties, that freedom by which we measure the effectiveness of all things judicial in this country? The media's obsessive appetite for U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet E. Miers' position on abortion rights is just plain weird and unnatural. In case you haven't noticed, the American public has a few other things on its mind. PEGGY NORMANDIN Costa Mesa

Re "Miers' Faith in Spotlight," Oct. 13 If it is not proper to express concern about the impact of Harriet E. Miers' fundamentalist views on her ability to function on the Supreme Court, why is it acceptable to cite those same views as an argument in support of her confirmation? Presidential advisor Karl Rove's insider assurance to Christian conservative Dr. James C. Dobson of Miers' fundamentalist credentials (presumably to indicate that her religious convictions would influence her judicial practice)

Re "Miers' Faith in Spotlight," Oct. 13 If the president has been assuring the religious right that Harriet E. Miers is qualified for the Supreme Court because she attends a conservative evangelical church, then he has violated Article VI of the Constitution, which reads, "No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." This is one of our founding fathers' greatest legacies. When our chief executive blatantly flouts it, how can America have any moral standing as its tries to persuade Iraq to write its own constitution to ensure equal participation in government by religious minorities?

Re "Miers' Answer Raises Questions," Oct. 22 Harriet E. Miers possesses President Bush's greatest qualification, proving her uniquely qualified for any nomination, whether for a Cabinet post or as a justice of the Supreme Court. Miers is totally loyal to the president. Who could ask for anything more? JEROLD DRUCKER Tarzana First, Supreme Court nominee Miers is not qualified. Second, she is both an evangelical Christian and a conservative Republican but, because of the lack of a judicial record, we don't know to what degree she would allow her religious beliefs to affect her view of constitutional issues.

A federal appeals court rejected House Democrats' demands to force two of President Bush's top aides to cooperate with an investigation about the firings of nine federal prosecutors in 2006. Time will run out on this year's congressional session before the battle between two branches of government can be resolved, according to the ruling by a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. The ruling blocks a July order by U.S. District Judge John D. Bates to force former White House counsel Harriet E. Miers to testify before the House Judiciary Committee and current White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten to turn over documents.

White House chief of staff Joshua B. Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet E. Miers asked a federal judge to delay an order to cooperate with Congress while they appeal the ruling. The court filings indicate that Bolten and Miers will continue to resist subpoenas from the House Judiciary Committee as the Bush administration heads into its final months. Lawmakers are seeking testimony and documents related to the controversial firings of nine U.S. attorneys in 2006.

A House committee voted Wednesday to endorse the criminal prosecution of President Bush's chief of staff, Joshua Bolten, and former White House Counsel Harriet E. Miers for refusing to cooperate with a congressional probe into the firings of U.S. attorneys last year. The 22-17 party-line vote of the judiciary committee calling for contempt-of-Congress proceedings against the two aides was referred to the full House for consideration.

Former White House Counsel Harriet E. Miers will continue to refuse to appear before a House committee, her lawyer said Tuesday, despite Democrats' threats to hold her in contempt. "Ms. Miers will not appear before the committee or otherwise produce documents or provide testimony," lawyer George T. Manning said in a letter to the committee. The House Judiciary Committee had given Miers, who defied a subpoena to appear before the committee, until Tuesday to change her mind about testifying.

The investigation into the firing last year of eight U.S. attorneys could soon be moving from congressional hearing rooms to the courts. Congress is threatening to hold former White House Counsel Harriet E. Miers in contempt of Congress for failing to honor a congressional subpoena. Miers, acting on orders from President Bush, cited the doctrine of executive privilege in explaining her decision not to appear before a House panel last week. Congressional leaders have given her until Tuesday to change her mind.

House Democrats began laying the groundwork for finding former White House counsel Harriet E. Miers in contempt of Congress on Thursday when, as expected, she failed to appear at a congressional hearing on the firing of eight U.S. attorneys last year. In a party-line 7-5 vote, a House judiciary subcommittee dismissed claims of executive privilege that Miers invoked through her lawyer in refusing to appear despite a subpoena.

Harriet E. Miers, a member of a diminishing circle of allies who came to Washington in 2001 with President Bush, is resigning as White House counsel at the end of this month, the White House announced Thursday. The ill-fated nomination of Miers to the Supreme Court, in 2005, left Bush tangled in complaints of cronyism and in dispute with his conservative allies.

By nominating right-wing judicial activist Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court, President Bush has squandered an opportunity to heal the nation's wounds. A centrist candidate would have appealed to a greater number of Americans, but our feckless leader has determined that conservatives are more important than centrists or progressives. A Senate filibuster regarding this nomination would be a positive development. DAN FREEDLAND Rolling Hills Estates How ironic that Rosa Parks is being honored in Washington at the same time that the right wing of the Republican Party wants Bush to nominate the type of justice who would have never voted, in Brown vs. the Board of Education, to overturn previous court decisions rationalizing the "separate but equal" doctrine.

A conservative author and former speechwriter for President Bush has raised money to finance a TV advertising campaign aimed at sinking Harriet E. Miers' nomination to the Supreme Court. David Frum of the conservative American Enterprise Institute said Friday that he expected the first ads to air next week.

By nominating right-wing judicial activist Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court, President Bush has squandered an opportunity to heal the nation's wounds. A centrist candidate would have appealed to a greater number of Americans, but our feckless leader has determined that conservatives are more important than centrists or progressives. A Senate filibuster regarding this nomination would be a positive development. DAN FREEDLAND Rolling Hills Estates How ironic that Rosa Parks is being honored in Washington at the same time that the right wing of the Republican Party wants Bush to nominate the type of justice who would have never voted, in Brown vs. the Board of Education, to overturn previous court decisions rationalizing the "separate but equal" doctrine.