← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · albion
Thread ID: 18937 | Posts: 4 | Started: 2005-07-01
2005-07-01 20:54 | User Profile
[img]http://hp.msn.com/4_/M78H5Q134E4T,`!BGS4AWH.jpg[/img]
WASHINGTON - Justice Sandra Day Oââ¬â¢Connor, the first woman appointed to the Supreme Court and a key swing vote on issues such as abortion and the death penalty, said Friday that she is retiring after 24 years on the bench. A bruising Senate confirmation struggle loomed as President Bush pledged to name a successor quickly.
Oââ¬â¢Connor, 75, said she will leave before the start of the courtââ¬â¢s next term in October, or when the Senate confirms her successor.
Bush praised O'Connor's contributions saying that "our nation is deeply grateful." In brief comments at the White House, he did not announce a nominee for the seat but said he hoped to do so in "a timely manner."
[url="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8430976/"]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8430976/[/url]
2005-07-01 20:56 | User Profile
O'Connor retires, say hi, er hola!, to Justice Gonzales!
I wonder how many Freepers are holding their breath, just certain that Bush will nominate a "real" conservative?
That's right Freepers, take the GOP back and vote for 'em. They swear this beating was "the last one." After all, the democrats are "even worse."
2005-07-01 21:16 | User Profile
O'Connor Retires From Supreme Court
O'Connor's decision ââ¬â so closely held that a son did not know in advance ââ¬â marked the first retirement in 11 years on an aging court. It came as a modest surprise, particularly since Chief Justice William Rehnquist has been the subject of retirement rumors for months. Rehnquist, 80 and ailing with thyroid cancer, has offered no hint as to his future plans. O'Connor's decision capped a pioneer's career. President Reagan broke nearly 200 years of tradition when he tapped her ââ¬â a top-ranked graduate of Stanford law school ââ¬â for the high court.
Over time, she evolved into a moderate conservative, but more importantly, a majority maker.
She voted with a 5-4 majority, for example, on the case that effectively awarded the disputed 2000 presidential election to Bush. She was on the winning side again when the court upheld the right of women to have an abortion if their health were in danger.
[url="http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050701/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_o_connor"]http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050701/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_o_connor[/url]
2005-07-01 22:43 | User Profile
None of this matters. To quote myself:
... Bush could overturn Roe tomorrow by simply declaring an end to "judicial supremacy" as stated in Cooper vs Aaron in 1958. He could simply say, "I declare equal rights to the executive branch to define the constitution. If the court wants Roe, let them enforce it. My attorney general will not." Congress could do the same. The whole issue gets tossed back to the states, where it belongs.
That's why Bush and the whole pro-life movement are such frauds and shams. Don't send them any money. This stupid circus over every judgeship that comes up is just a farce.