The Politics of Joy

If the rumors are true (and when aren't they?), Bush will nominate Edith "Joy" Clement to the Supreme Court this evening. I know very little about her as a judge, but that's because there isn't that much to know. What will be interesting is how staunch conservatives will take the nomination. Last week on NRO Hadley Arkes previewed the unease about her among conservatives:

I would vouch for Joy Clement myself, and I would vouch for Edith Jones. But as I commend Joy Clement, I open myself to these searching questions from friends who have suffered the lessons of experience: If we know little, really, about her philosophy or jural principles, how do know that she will not alter when she is suddenly showered with acclaim from the law schools at Harvard and Columbia? Will she not be lured as she is praised in measures ever grander, as a jurist of high rank, as she “grows” with each step ever more “moderate” and liberal? Those who commend her face the risk of joining the ranks of those who offered assurance on Kennedy and Souter, and lost forevermore their credibility.

If this sentiment is widespread, will conservatives hold their noses and go along, assured by Bush that since he is one of them, she will be too? Or will they take notice of Bush's lame duck status and decide that the conservative cause requires standing up to the White House? Stay tuned.