Straight Up with Sherri

Friday, July 01, 2005

The Supreme (UNELECTED and UNACCOUNTABLE Constitution Revising Committee) Court Losing a Robed Royal?

O'Conner steps Down

Justice Sandra Day O'Conner announced her retirement today.


O'Conner, a swing vote on issues such as abortion and the death penalty, said she plans to leave before the start of the court's next term in October.


In a letter to President Bush, she wrote: "This is to inform you of my decision to retire from my position as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, effective upon the nomination and confirmation of my successor. It has been a great privilege indeed to have served as a member of the court for 24 terms. I will leave it with enormous respect for the integrity of the court and its role under our constitutional structure."

More to come ...

7 Comments:

  • My greatest fear is that George Bush will nominate another supremist liberal like O'Connor to replace her. He could go with a Federalist such as Alberto Gonzales (Booooo!!!) who would strip the American people of every last vestige of their God-given rights. That really frightens me. Or, he could go with another "Constructionist" like J. Michael Luttig (Yaaaayyy!! my personal favorite). It would be wonderful to have two constructionists on the SCOTUS (including Antonin Scalia) to add their weight to the Conservative Clarence Thomas (who is not a constructionist). This would bring the court to 5 liberals only instead of 6, making us a bit closer to the control of judicial activism. Rhenquist is the only "neutral" jurist currently on the Court.

    That being said, it is possible to have rightist judicial activism, but incredibly unlikely since there is only one rightist judge currently sitting (Thomas). I wish all seven were Constructionist - those who strictly interpret the Constitution and don't worry about doing the "right" thing or "what's good for America".

    A good compromise may be Theodore Olson. True, he is personally a liberal, but he has always showed a good deal of contructionism in his briefs and presentations. As Solicitor General, I think he did an admirable job.

    By Blogger Right Wing Nut Job, at 5:08 PM  

  • it is possible to have rightist judicial activism, but incredibly unlikely since there is only one rightist judge currently sitting (Thomas)

    What does the number of rightist judicial activists currently in SCOTUS have to do with the likelihood of a rightist judicial activist being nominated?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:32 PM  

  • The summer just got alot hotter.
    I don't think Bush has the guts, but I would like to see a true conservative in there.

    By Anonymous Marine Momma, at 10:14 PM  

  • Anonymous,
    What does the number of rightist judicial activists currently in SCOTUS have to do with the likelihood of a rightist judicial activist being nominated?

    Your question is absolutely vaid. The answer is nothing. But it does not address my point. Two rightist judges (even if activists, which Thomas really isn't) can't result in enough clout to render a single activist outcome. As opposed to a horrendous litany of lefty activist rulings brought about by six leftist-activist jurists!

    Marine Momma,
    I would rather see an honest constructionist than a contemporary conservative. The true advantage of a constructionist is that they may not feel that their opinions are "good" or "benificent", but they must uphold the Contitution of the United States. I do not like it when a Conservative "bends" the rules in order to help the right any more than when the left does it. The Constitution is capable of standing on its own, as written, though not on the way the the Supreme Court defecates on it, routinely. We need that to stop!

    In my opinion, the only way to do that, since Congress is such a bunch of tepid, spineless, evil, nincompoops (incapable of reading Article III, Section 2, Clause 2) is to fill the Court with Constructionists who:
    1) can read at the third grade level
    2) can resist the desire to play god

    It really is that simple.

    By Blogger Right Wing Nut Job, at 12:57 AM  

  • I'd have to go with Janice Rogers Brown to replace O'Connor. Aside from being absolutely perfect, Brown is a part of the deal between the 14 'moderate' Senators. She has already gotten the necessary votes for cloture and she has already been proven to have majority support in the Senate.

    Getting Brown on the SCOTUS would be well worth losing her on the DC Circuit.

    By Anonymous JWL, at 12:00 AM  

  • JWL,
    I am not familiar enough with Janice Rogers Brown, yet. I need to do a lot of reading pretty quick.

    By Blogger Right Wing Nut Job, at 1:38 PM  

  • When you are that far up in the government, I do not believe in surprises, I really feel that her retirement was in the works for quite a long time. Now the media might play it as something out of the blue, I do not. The political vaccum is sucking hard to find a suitable replacement when there is already one found....

    Just my 2 cent

    CBA 7120

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:21 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home