The next justice: Finally, a nominee who understands real people

Although the ink is still drying on her nomination, the president's selection Monday of Harriet Miers to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor has already been met with praise from senators on both sides of the aisle. As one would expect, her nomination has also been met with questions by those who do not yet know her. But those of us who do know and have worked with Ms. Miers think very highly of her, and we believe she will make a valuable contribution to the Supreme Court.

Nonetheless, some have criticized the president because he did not select an Ivy-League-credentialed federal appeals court judge for the open seat. I think this criticism is misplaced. For one thing, there is no evidence that service on the federal court of appeals is a prerequisite for distinguished service on the Supreme Court: 41 of the 109 justices who have served on the Supreme Court had no judicial experience at all when they were nominated. These include several luminaries from the school of judicial restraint, including the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist.

Furthermore, Harriet Miers' background as a legal practitioner is an asset, not a detriment. She has spent her career representing real people in courtrooms across America. This is precisely the type of experience that the Supreme Court needs. The court is full of justices who served as academics and court of appeals judges before they were nominated to the bench. What the court is missing is someone who understands the consequences of its decisions on the American people.

This experience gap is a real one. With the exception of the newly confirmed chief justice, John Roberts, no justice on the court has been an advocate in a court of law in the past 25 years, and Chief Justice Roberts was involved only at the appellate level.

Harriet Miers, by contrast, has a long and successful career as a lawyer representing corporate and individual clients in a variety of state and federal courts. I am confident that this background provides her with an understanding of the burdens of modern litigation, a recognition of the problems with frivolous lawsuits and an appreciation for tort reform.

Others have criticized the president because Ms. Miers is a close confidante, implying that she would not be qualified but for their relationship. I could not disagree more. Of course, the president is going to be inclined to nominate someone he knows, likes and has confidence in. He is not going to nominate someone he does not know or someone he does not like. So long as she is otherwise qualified to the Supreme Court, Ms. Miers' long and valuable service to the president should count in her favor, not against her.

And, moreover, there is little question that she is up to the job. She has been a true trailblazer for women in the law. She was the first woman hired by her law firm - one of the most prominent in Texas. She was the first woman to serve as president of her law firm. She was the first woman to serve as president of the Dallas Bar Association. She was the first woman to serve as president of the Texas Bar Association. And her accomplishments do not end at the Lone Star border.

For the past five years, she has worked at the highest levels in the White House, including serving as the president's closest legal adviser. Few lawyers in America have a more impressive resume. And none have more of the president's confidence.

It is true that she was not educated at East Coast universities and has not spent her entire career inside the Beltway. This, again, is a plus in my book, not a minus. Anyone who has followed the Supreme Court in recent years knows that what the institution needs most is a dose of life beyond Washington. Last year, the court permitted a public display of the Ten Commandments in Texas, but not in Kentucky. It took nine justices on the court 10 different opinions to explain why this was so. The court is dangerously out of touch with America. Ms. Miers will help bring it back down to earth.

Ultimately, I think some people are uneasy about Harriet Miers because they are unfamiliar with her.

To some extent, this is understandable. She has worked outside the limelight her entire career, always serving others. But it is important to take a deep breath and not rush to judgment. As the confirmation process unfolds, Americans will learn a great deal more about Ms. Miers, and they will like what they see.

I have been fortunate enough to know Harriet for much of her career. I know that she believes, as I do, that judges should not legislate from the bench. I know that she believes, as I do, that judges are not some sort of elite anointed to impose their preferences on the rest of us. I know that she understands that unelected judges who serve in a democracy have a limited role - to apply the law as it was written by the people's representatives. She aptly described her judicial philosophy on Monday when she said, "It is the responsibility of every generation to be true to the founders' vision of the proper role of the courts and our society." The courts, she continued, have "obligations to strictly apply the laws and the Constitution." I am confident that when the American people get to know Ms. Miers as I have, they will be as supportive as I am of her nomination.

John Cornyn is a Republican senator from Texas and a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He served previously as attorney general of Texas, as well as a justice on the state Supreme Court.