WASHINGTON, Oct. 27 - The withdrawal of Harriet E. Miers from Supreme Court consideration was greeted today with a blend of regret, relief and a general feeling that she had not been treated very well.
"This is a sad episode," said Senator Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who heads the Senate Judiciary Committee and who not long ago said Ms. Miers needed "a crash course in constitutional law."
"Whether or not she would have been confirmed is an open question," Mr. Specter said, voicing regret that Ms. Miers did not last long enough for a committee hearing, where "she would have had a major voice in determining her own future."
Another Republican on the panel, Senator John Cornyn of Texas, had a stronger reaction. "This was a fundamentally unfair process, because people prejudged this nominee without getting to know her," said Mr. Cornyn, a former judge and a strong supporter of Ms. Miers. "Certainly, every senator is entitled to vote the way they choose to vote once they're in command of the facts, but she was denied the opportunity to even have a hearing - and I think that's a shame."
Democrats on the committee, while stopping far short of endorsing her, nonetheless expressed sympathy for the erstwhile nominee.
"The right wing effectively killed this nomination," Senator Dianne Feinstein of California said on CNN. Ms. Feinstein said Ms. Miers "may not be the best thing since sliced bread" as far as her qualifications, but "I don't think she deserved the treatment she got."
Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, another Judiciary Committee member, said: "Harriet Miers is a fine and capable person, but this was clearly the wrong position for her. Her gracious withdrawal saves Harriet Miers and the nation from a difficult and agonizing process and decision."
Some senators said Ms. Miers had been the victim of bad handling by a White House that capitulated to people in the far right wing of the Republican Party who doubted the depth of her conservative beliefs.
Other senators, like Mr. Schumer, said the nomination had been bungled from the start, and that President Bush should never have chosen a person who was not qualified for the Supreme Court, whatever her other legal credentials and personal attributes.
"This nominee deserved better," said Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts and a committee member. While by no means indicating he would have voted for her, Mr. Kennedy said he respected Ms. Miers. "She has been a woman of achievement in her career," he said.
The other Democrat from Massachusetts, Senator John Kerry, said President Bush had surrendered to "right wing interest groups" and let them determine the fate of Ms. Miers. "This nomination was mishandled from the beginning," said Mr. Kerry, who is not on the Judiciary Committee. "The president nominated someone whose qualifications he alone knew, then refused to disclose the only documents that would give the Senate even a hint of his nominee's judicial philosophy."
Senator George V. Voinovich, Republican of Ohio, said, "Various groups, particularly on the Republican side, didn't give her the opportunity to share why she's qualified."
And Judge Robert H. Bork, who knows the pain of being nominated for the Supreme Court and never getting there, said, "We all have to have some sympathy for her."
Judge Bork, who was rejected by the Senate in 1987, said in a CNN interview that Ms. Miers had been nominated for a position for which she was not really qualified and "I think it was appropriate for her to withdraw."
Fairly or not, the nomination of Ms. Miers was accompanied by charges of cronyism. The White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, was asked today whether it was a safe bet that the president's next choice would not be a White House employee.
"He will let you know who the next nominee is in due course," Mr. McClellan replied.