The White House is mobilizing the religious right to back the appointment of Harriet Miers to the U.S. Supreme Court. Are "leak-meister" Karl Rove and other officials providing confidential information to extremist preachers while defying the Senate Judiciary Committee and the American people?

he nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court of the United States has set off a mad scramble by political advocacy groups to learn more about the women who serves as President Bush's official counsel, and -- if confirmed -- could cast a crucial swing vote in key cases affecting civil rights, abortion, and the separation of church and state.

   Liberals and conservatives have burned the midnight oil tracking down what thus far is a less-than-revealing paper trail on Miers. There is debate over her "judicial philosophy," an obfuscatory buzz-phrase that translates into how she might decide those hot-button legal cases sure to wind their way on to the docket of our nation's highest court. Indeed, Mr. Bush made another one of his neo-logisms earlier this week when asked if he and Miers had discussed abortion or other specific issues over the years, to which the president glibly responded: "There is no litmus test. What matters to me is her judicial philosophy."

   Despite support from the White House, much of the controversy surrounding Harriet Miers focuses on her credentials as a reliable judicial conservative.

   "She's got to convince the conservative world that she understands the word 'strict constructionist," (sic) warned Senate Judiciary Committee member Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) who met with Miers this past week. "She's going to have to fill in those blanks and create a comfort level."

   But others expressed frustration, citing the fact that groups like the Federalist Society have spent over 20 years grooming prospective candidates from elite schools with impeccable legal credentials to fill vacancies on the Supreme Court. Religious right groups fear that the Miers nomination is a "missed opportunity" to replace the moderate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor with a more strident ideologue in the image of Antonin Scalia or Clarence Thomas. There are also concerns that Mr. Bush may be risking "a Souter," referring to the move by his father, President George H.W. Bush who nominated David Souter to the high court. Justice Souter ended up becoming a disappointing swing vote for many religious right advocates in a number of cases, especially several having to do with the separation of church and state.

   The Bush Administration has been doing its part to calm fears of key religious conservatives that Miers was ideologically unreliable. Most disturbing, though, are reports that the White House has been providing special access to religious right leaders like James Dobson, founder of the influential Focus on the Family organization, and providing "confidential" information about Miers to shore-up support for her nomination.

   The charge becomes even more serious since the Senate Judiciary Committee has had little success in obtaining many confidential documents on nominees like newly-minted Chief Justice John Roberts. Democrats on the committee say that is essential for the administration to be more forthcoming about memos, E-mail and other information having to do with the Miers nomination.

   Bottom line: Are religious right gurus like James Dobson privy to compartmentalized information not even being given to the U.S. Senate and the American people?

   The first indication that evangelical groups and leaders had some kind of "inside track" on the Miers nomination came in a Denver Post story authored by staffer Eric Gorski ("Dobson leads evangelicals to Miers.") Among those being tapped for special briefings by the White House were Dobson and Colorado Springs pastor Rev. Tim Haggard "whose growing national prominence has earned him a place on the White House phone tree."

   Haggard heads New Life Church, and serves as president of the National Association of Evangelicals which is a network of churches claiming 30 million followers.

   "Haggard said he, like Dobson, received a phone call from the White House before Miers' nomination," noted the Post story. "Like Dobson, Haggard isn't talking about the conversation."

   Then there is the October 5 statement made by James Dobson to Associated Press, Washington Post and other media that he came out in support of the Miers appointment after receiving "confidential" information he had been made "privy to" (Media Matters for America). The Miers information was compartmentalized to such an extent that even members of the Senate Judiciary Committee were not "privy" to the content. That evening, CNN's "Lou Dobbs Tonight" program included a segment by congressional correspondent Ed Henry revealing that Dobson "had basically said he's been assured that (Miers) is pro-life."

   The following day, The New York Times ran with the story, stating that Dobson "had been given confidential information about Ms. Miers's views." This, reported the Times, had prompted Vermont Democrat Sen. Patrick Leahy to ask Miers if she had authorized release of the presumably confidential information.

   USA TODAY then backtracked to an October 4 statement on the Fox News Channel which reported:

"Leahy, the top-ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, said he asked Miers on Wednesday about statements by one of her conservative backers, Focus on the Family President James Dobson, who is strongly opposed to abortion. 'I do know that I am not prepared to talk about (it) here,' Dobson said of Miers' conservative credentials...'"

   Other news sources fill in more of the blanks about the White House "confidential" pipeline to America's religious right. The Christian Science Monitor reported that Dobson originally waffled on backing the Miers nomination, but changed his position "after extensive lobbying by the White House."

   Bush, according to Dobson, had earned trust with the nation's politicized evangelicals because "he would appoint judges who will interpret the law rather than create it."

   Other reports:

    ¶       The New York Sun identified White House senior strategist and accused "leakmesiter" Karl Rove as the person who "convinced" Dobson to mobilize the evangelical organizational base to support the Harrier Miers nomination.

    ¶       The Boston Globe revealed that Dobson was among a number of "high-profile" religious conservatives who are "standing by Bush's decision" to push Miers onto the Supreme Court bench and replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

   The Miers nomination signals the collapse of Democratic strategy that hoped to forestall Mr. Bush from replacing Justice O'Connor or other vacancies that might arise on the high court. A number of key Democrats and more moderate Republicans went along with the nomination of Judge John Roberts following the death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Unlike Miers, Roberts had been a sitting judge in the Circuit Court and gave some clues as to his ideological leanings thanks to memoranda, written decisions and documented legal advice. Roberts was vague and, say some, evasive when grilled by the Senate Judiciary Committee, however, about how he might vote on specific issues.

   Democrats had hoped that in exchange for not putting up a major fight or even a filibuster against Roberts, the White House would "horse trade" and wait several months before proposing a replacement for Justice O'Connor. O'Connor had announced her retirement, but expressed willingness to continue on until a later date. Bush, sensing the opportunity to dramatically alter the ideological complexion of the court, demurred and rushed ahead with the Miers nomination.

   While Harriet Miers remains even more of a mystery than her nomination predecessor John Roberts, a key indicator of how she may reshape the legal landscape if appointed to the high court is revealed by her religious background.

    ¶       The 60-year old White House counsel has been part of George Bush's inner circle since the mid-1990s. Knight-Ridder newspaper correspondent Dave Montgomery did a profile piece on Miers last week ("A Christian fundamentalist on the Supreme Court: Miers' ties to conservative church may offer insights," 10/5/05), and noted: "Snippets from Miers' background have given only a partial and inconclusive glimpse into her possible views on priorities embraced by the Christian right..."

   Miers is considered "reticent" in discussing her religious views and affiliation. She converted from Roman Catholicism to Protestant evangelicalism, and joined the Valley View Christian Church of Dallas, TX. two decades ago. Other members of this stern evangelical denomination include Texas Supreme Court Justice Nathan Hecht, who has spoken out against legal abortion rights.

   Hecht is quoted in the Knight-Ridder piece as saying that Miers "hasn't said a lot, but you don't go to a church for 25 years if you're not comfortable with what they think." Hecht also admitted to a "semi-romantic" friendship with Miers going back three decades, and told Dave Montgomery, "I'm sure she's consistent with the church's position."

   Columnist Molly Ivins, known for her inside sources in Texas politics, noted that Miers "was pro-choice when a young woman, but later changed her mind as a result of a Christian experience of some kind..." While in Texas, Miers managed one of the state's top blue-chip law firms (Locke, Liddell & Sapp), headed the Texas Bar, and held a powerful position within the American Bar Association.

   Interestingly, Miers brought Nathan Hecht into the firm; he at the time was organist at the Valley View Christian Church and wooed her to her first church service. (Miers' firm had previously been known as Locke, Purness, Boren, Laney & Neely, "one of the most prestigious law firms in the South," according to a New York Times piece. Miers would later serve as the church's legal counsel, and an adult sponsor of the congregation's youth ministry.

    Even as a member of Valley Christian, Miers seemed to occasionally "play the game" in Texas politics and service the interests of Locke, Liddel & Sapp. She soireed Democratic candidates to the firm's social events, and ran for Dallas City Council in 1989 as a moderate. According to Ivins and other sources, however, Miers "struggled" through her interviews with social cause groups including the city's gay-lesbian coalition.

   "The Dallas Police Department did not then hire gays or lesbians," said Ivins, "and when asked about the policy, Miers replied the department should hire the best-qualified people, the classic political sidestep answer."

   Miers also donated money to the anti-choice Texans for Life Coalition in 1989. During her city council race, she voiced support for civil rights for gays and lesbians. The Knight-Ridder piece, however, says that according to Judge Hecht, Miers "shares the church's view opposing gay and lesbian marriage."

    ¶       Another portrait of Harriet Miers comes from an October 5, 2005 story in the New York Times authored by Edward Wyatt and Simon Romero. It is a revealing, also disturbing portrait of a successful career woman who, like Paul on the road to Damascus, is smitten by evangelicalism after feeling "something was missing in her life." Miers had "long discussions -- rambling discussions about family and religion and other matters that typically stretched from early evening into the night -- with Nathan L. Hecht, a junior colleague at the law firm..."

   Hecht: "She decided that she wanted faith to be a bigger part of her life... One evening she called me to her office and said she was ready to make a commitment," to accept Jesus Christ and undergo the experience of being "born again." The duo "prayed and talked," and Miers was soon baptized at the Valley View Christian Church.

   Wyatt and Romero observed that, "It was a pivotal personal transformation for the woman now named for a seat on the United States Supreme Court, not entirely unlike that experienced by President Bush and others in the Texas political and business establishment of that time."

    ¶       It is those reports of a "pivotal personal transformation," the "being born again experience" that may well resonate with evangelicals and fundamentalist Christians originally conflicted over the nomination of Harriet Miers.

   Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice, a religious legal advocacy group founded by televangelist Pat Robertson, senses an enormous theo-political opportunity if she is approved for the high court. Miers would be the first evangelical Protestant on SCOTUS since the 1930s, prompting Sekulow to remark: "This is a big opportunity for those of us who have a conviction, that share an evangelical faith in Christianity, to see someone with our positions put on the court."

   There is, of course, the fashionable doublespeak that prospective court appointees are somehow not free nor required to voice opinions on specific issues or cases like abortion, gay rights and the separation of church and state. But there is a coded Aesopian language known throughout America's religious right. While it claims to abhor any "litmus test" that might reveal a nominee's thinking, it praises the born-again experience, and the embrace of a stern religious agenda that seeks to "Christianize" a secular republic.

[text only]