Posted on 07/18/2005 4:35:57 PM PDT by CHARLITE
Reading his majority opinion in the last case on the last day of the U.S. Supreme Court's term, Chief Justice William Rehnquist was in a joking mood.
He was reviewing those who'd voted with him and against him in the Texas Ten Commandments case, and by the time he'd finished with the concurrences and dissents, he'd rattled off 12 names.
This was the moment the 80-year-old chief justice – hobbled since October by thyroid cancer – was supposed to resign. But he didn't. And he hasn't. And now it appears that he won't.
One theory is as good as another, and only he can know that calculus.
Yet there is something else to consider: Each day that passes without his retirement is building toward something else that could be propelling his determination to stay on the job – the pull of history. By staying just one more term – less than one year – he can become the chief justice with the longest tenure ever on the nation's highest court.
Jan. 7, 1972 Justice Rehnquist has been on the court since Jan. 7, 1972. In mid-August, he would pass Joseph Story as the seventh-longest-tenured justice. It's a small distinction, but one that he has worked more than 33 years to achieve. More important, however, it marks the beginning of what would be a rapid rise through the ranks of history.
(Excerpt) Read more at dallasnews.com ...
| Sworn in | Tenure ended | Age | Days served | Rehnquist would reach | ||
| 1 | William O. Douglas | 4-17-1939 | 11-12-1975 | 77 | 13,359 | Aug. 3, 2008 |
| 2 | Stephen Johnson Field | 5-20-1863 | 12-1-1897 | 81 | 12,615 | July 21, 2006 |
| 3 | John Marshall * | 2-4-1801 | 7-6-1835 | 79 | 12,571 | June 7, 2006 |
| 4 | Hugo Black | 8-19-1937 | 9-17-1971 | 85 | 12,448 | Feb. 4, 2006 |
| 5 | John Marshall Harlan | 12-10-1877 | 10-14-1911 | 78 | 12,361 | Nov. 9, 2005 |
| 6 | William Brennan | 10-16-1956 | 7-20-1990 | 84 | 12,331 | Oct. 10, 2005 |
| 7 | Joseph Story | 2-3-1812 | 9-10-1845 | 65 | 12,274 | Aug. 15, 2005 |
| 8 | William Rehnquist* | 1-7-1972 | 80 | |||
| *Denotes a chief justice | ||||||
Moron.
As long as he outlasts Stevens and Ginsburg, I'll be happy!
Rehnquist has been a pretty solid justice for us. He can stay as long as he likes, just so long as he leaves before Mr. Bush is out of office. We need an originalist appointed by the current administration to replace Rehnquist.
I always marveled at how we had both a Justice Burger AND a Justice Frankfurter. It made for a damn loud growl in the stomach during Constitutional Law lectures.
I don't think he'll make it that long. He looks like he could keel over any moment now.
Therefore, this is cobbled together by a reporter having no connection with reality. Pure, irrelevant theory.
Congressman Billybob
I think Rehnquist is staying to make it easier for President Bush to deal with one appointment at a time.
As long as he can hold out, my guess is that Rehnquist will resign shortly after a judge has been confirmed to replace O'Connor.
I think Rehnquist is a good soldier to the end.
God bless him.
I agree. I think Rehnquist is trying to block a package deal to replace O'Connor with another O'Connor and himself with another conservative. His pledge to stay on as long as his health permits is a soft pledge for a man his age in his condition. One trip to the hospital, one trip to the doctor would give him a legitimate out.
If he and O'Conner went at the same time, there would be tremendous political pressure from the left and media on Bush (via the RINOs in the Senate) to appoint a "solid" conservative and a moderate ("Two conservatives would be just too much!" they would howl). And the RINOs would probably knuckle under to this, I think. On the other hand, if only O'Conner goes, then Bush can appoint an originalist with less pressure (as it is only one Justice). The Libs will still scream, but they will have less of a case for "fairness", less leverage on the RINO's. Then, after O'Conner's replacement is seated, Rehnquist can retire at his leisure, giving Bush another chance to fight one battle at a time (always preferrable to fighting two at once). Would this even be in the realm of the Chief Justice's thinking (or, even more interesting, would this be something he would agree to if it were requested by the Administration)...?
LOL! (see post 11) Guess I'm not the only person to be thinking along those lines, after all...
Rehnquist snapped, "You people can be like a bunch of vultures" to the reporters staking out his home.
The reason he decided to delay his retirement announcement is so the reporters don't have the satisfaction. Once they leave him alone he'll announce his retirement after a suitable interval.
Obviously you're an intelligent and perceptive observer!
I agree. I think Rehnquist is trying to block a package deal to replace O'Connor with another O'Connor and himself with another conservative. His pledge to stay on as long as his health permits is a soft pledge for a man his age in his condition. One trip to the hospital, one trip to the doctor would give him a legitimate out."
Agree totally with both of you. He's a conservative patriot ......... to the bitter end, and he's nobody's fool.
God bless Rehnquist. He is a very good soul.
Thanks, omega and QQQQ, for your comments!
Char :)
LOL!!!
bttt
I don't think Rehnquist really cares about setting any records for tenure. I think O'Connor's retirement sort of blindsided him (perhaps O'Connor's husband's health is worse than we know). My guess is that Rehnquist wants to see how the confirmation for O'Connor's replacement goes before he does anything. If Bush is successful in appointing an originalist and having them confirmed, it will make Rehnquist feel a lot better about stepping down.
I like Rehnquist, but it is time for the old boy to go.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.