For the Love of Mary - Blurring the Lines Between Church and State Some More

I almost passed out when I read that religion was a factor when Bush picked Harriet Miers. CNN reports:

President Bush said Wednesday his advisers were telling conservatives about Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers' religious beliefs because they are interested in her background and 'part of Harriet Miers' life is her religion.'

Was I sleeping through two semesters of Constitutional Law? I remember stuff like:

[F]or the men who wrote the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment the 'establishment' of a religion connoted sponsorship, financial support, and active involvement of the sovereign in religious activity.

See Walz v. Tax Comm'n, 397 U.S. 664, 668 (1970).

Now it's evident now that both Miers and W need a crash course in this relatively important document (and the part of that document that sort of infers that stuff like appointing Supreme Court Justices based on their religious beliefs is probably not such a good idea.) I think they might benefit from learning about the Constitution. Miers will have to interpret it if she gets her new job, and Bush swore to uphold it.

It just blows my mind that Bush admitted that Miers' religious views were a reason to appoint her. I guess Bush needed some reason.

On a side note, there is a wonderful book by Marci Hamilton, Professor of Law at Cardozo Law School which addresses the role of religion in the law. It's required reading if you're interested in these issues. She's a brilliant scholar and even though I sometimes disagree with her viewpoint, her scholarship commands a tremendous amount of respect.

For more information about Professor Hamilton, you can read some of her posts on FindLaw.