I’ve spent a bit of time this morning reading a few of the comments on Harriet Miers’ SCOTUS nomination. And, as usual, while everyone lacks any real information on her, it seems everyone has an opinion. The common thread seems to be familiarity, or cronyism – the choice of word dependant upon the individual commenter’s predisposition concerning the President. The most measured and insightful comment I’ve seen thusfar is in this post from Eugene Volokh, where he compares Miers to Justices who have preceded her:

My point is simply that when one is looking at Miers’ career and credentials, it may be helpful to avoid comparing her to the current crop of Justices — the natural tendency whenever one is considering a new nominee — but rather to nominees who come from a different, but just as historically well established, mold.

Read the whole thing,