On Judicial Clerks

Hugh Hewitt has articulated so many arguments against reflexive anti-Mierism so well that's it's ridiculous and duplicative for me to try to summarize them here. His entry is a must read.

I'd add something only to one of his points. Of the whole argument that being a justice requires a lifetime of study of constitutional law (a "con law priesthood" of sorts), let me mention this. As many know, all justices have law clerks -- the top students from the top law schools. Although it varies from chambers to chambers, some justices' clerks play an extensive role in drafting their opinions and articulating theory. This has been particularly true in the case of old or infirm justices (though not, I would hasten to add, in Chief Justice Rehnquist's case).

To the extent that the Washington legal elites haven't protested this system (and many, indeed, are products of it), I'd ask this: Do they really believe that a young person two years out of law school -- brilliant though he/she may be -- is more capable of understanding the Constitution than a practicioner of many years' experience with the credentials of Harriet Miers?