By MICHAEL ZITZ
The carefully measured statements of Virginia's two Republicans in the U.S. Senate reflected the division within the party after Harriet Miers withdrew as a nominee for the Supreme Court yesterday.
John Warner, Virginia's senior senator, was critical of the right wing of the party for going after White House counsel Miers immediately after President Bush nominated her.
"I deeply regret the withdrawal of Harriet Miers as a nominee to the Supreme Court before she was given a fair chance to express her views and credentials for this important position," Warner said in a statement. "In effect, she was denied due process by members of her own party."
Meanwhile, Sen. George Allen, who reportedly has been considering a run for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, issued a statement in step with Miers' opponents who contend she lacked certifiable credentials both as a conservative and as a constitutional scholar.
"I appreciate Harriet Miers' decision to withdraw her nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court," Allen said. "I wish her well as she continues to honorably serve our country in the White House.
"I believe that President Bush should now nominate a person with a demonstrable, clear, consistent and appropriate judicial philosophy," Allen continued. "This crucial vacancy marks an important opportunity for those of us who want to see a Supreme Court that will adhere to the Constitution and will not attempt to legislate from the bench."
The Rev. Patrick Mahoney, a Spotsylvania County resident who leads the Washington-based Christian Defense Coalition, commended Miers for withdrawing and sparing the country "what would have been a very contentious and, I think, at the end of the day, unproductive confirmation process.
"I think this is an extraordinary opportunity for the Bush White House to get it right this time," Mahoney said during a phone interview from New York.
He called Miers "a talented woman," but added: "It was a disaster for the White House to nominate her. It splintered the coalition that helped elect the president in '04."
Many conservative Christians want Bush's Supreme Court nominees to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 abortion-rights ruling.
"This is a chance to energize the base," Mahoney said. "As Sept. 11 defined the president's first term, we believe the Supreme Court is the single most important issue the president has to deal with in his second term."
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., a Miers supporter, blamed radical Republicans.
"Apparently, Ms. Miers did not satisfy those who want to pack the Supreme Court with rigid ideologues," he said in a statement. "In choosing a replacement for Ms. Miers, President Bush should not reward the bad behavior of his right-wing base."
Mark Rozell, director of the Master of Public Policy Program at George Mason University in Fairfax, said the nomination of Miers, a longtime Bush friend from Texas, faced inevitable defeat.
"It was a flawed choice to begin with," Rozell said. "Bush is always vulnerable to the charge of cronyism, and this smacked of the worst kind of that.
"To me it says that the system of separated but shared powers works," Rozell said. "The Senate has the confirmation power exactly to stop presidents from appointing unqualified people--and political cronies--to high-level posts such as federal judgeships.
"Reid may be partially right that many in the GOP opposed her for ideological reasons, but many also were uncomfortable with her lack of the usual credentials of a Supreme Court nominee."
In her withdrawal letter, Miers herself blamed senators who wanted to see White House records showing communications between Bush and his counsel.
"I have been informed that in lieu of records, I would be expected to testify about my service in the White House to demonstrate my experience and judicial philosophy. Protection of the prerogatives of the executive branch and continued pursuit of my confirmation are in tension. I have decided that seeking my confirmation should yield."
Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., an influential conservative opponent of the Miers nomination who serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee, disputed that interpretation.
"We were not asking for documents regarding attorney-client privilege, or privileged communications," he told CNN. "We were saying, 'Show us documents of policy issues discussions,' so we could get some framework of her policy views."
Some pundits said raising the documents issue was merely a face-saving device for the White House.
The president issued a statement saying he "reluctantly accepted" Miers' withdrawal.
To reach MICHAEL ZITZ: