IS THE MIERS NOMINATION ALREADY IN TROUBLE? I discuss, over at GlennReynolds.com.

UPDATE: The Wall Street Journal (free link) has a roundup of reaction. And, of course, scroll down for more here. And there’s this observation: “Bush’s back-to-back appointments of Roberts and Miers is a clear indication that his goal is at best to merely change the voting pattern of the Court rather than to change the legal culture.”

If you’re looking for the pro-Miers stuff, Hugh Hewitt is undertaking the somewhat lonely task of rounding that up. My concerns are akin to Todd Zywicki’s above: Miers may or may not vote as I’d wish — actually, she’s probably more likely to than Roberts, Thomas, or Scalia if the social-conservatives’ fears bear out — but the appointment seems to me to be a poor one for reasons that go beyond the votes.