Posted on 10/27/2005 5:34:57 PM PDT by Crackingham
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement has been delayed again, putting her at the center of upcoming Supreme Court debates on abortion, the death penalty and gay rights. Until Thursday, the White House had been pushing to have Harriet Miers confirmed before the court took up some of the most contentious cases of the year. Miers' withdrawal means O'Connor will hear those cases - and could control the outcome. O'Connor said Thursday of her stay on the high court, "It sounds like it may go on a little longer."
She is a moderate who has backed abortion rights and limits on capital punishment. And she has not been hesitant to oppose the Bush administration.
Nearly four months after O'Connor, 75, announced that she was stepping down to care for her ill husband, it's unclear when she will actually retire. She has said she will stay until a successor is confirmed. She could quit before then, but that is unlikely because it would leave the court with just eight members and the potential for deadlocks.
O'Connor has been hearing cases and voting at closed-door meetings. But if she leaves the court before decisions are announced, her votes will not count. Cases with a 4-4 outcome would likely require a new argument session so O'Connor's successor could participate.
"She remains the pivotal figure on the court," said David Alistair Yalof, author of a book on Supreme Court vacancies and a University of Connecticut professor.
Justices have already heard one major case, the administration's challenge to Oregon's physician-assisted suicide law, and O'Connor seemed ready to support the law. On Nov. 30, the justices will review a state abortion law, and on Dec. 6 they will take up an appeal that involves gay rights, as part of a protest against the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Two death penalty cases are scheduled for Dec. 7.
As long as O'Connor is on the court, she should actively participate in cases, Yalof said.
"It would look bad for the institution if they were manipulating opinions to avoid one of the justice's influence," he said.
O'Connor, speaking Thursday to women leaders in Long Beach, Calif., declined to say when she would be leaving the court.
"When I announced my intention to retire, I said it would become effective on the nomination and confirmation of my successor. Life took an unfortunate turn when our chief justice passed away after the nomination of John Roberts to fill my seat. ... (Now) it sounds like it may go on a little longer," said O'Connor, who has been on the court 24 years.
A deadlock would be preferable to the roll of the dice
Nearly four months after O'Connor, 75, announced that she was stepping down to care for her ill husband, it's unclear when she will actually retire.
There is a petition started today for her to withdraw her resignation. If her husband were to die quickly is this possible.
Disgusting! The old beast wants to resign, she should
go ahead and *LEAVE*!!! Hypocrite baby slaughtering
beast.
I'll take a few months over decades when her clone would have been up there.
Am I the only one picking up on this being written by the AP as a sour grapes inspiring story for conservatives that got Miers withdrawn? I heard on Rush Harry Reid pleading in the most respectful tones to Bush to put up another one like Miers. I think today's events have sent fears down the spine of the Dems, their all important "groups" and the media that supports them. They realize this powerplay could be the awakening of a giant, and the beginning of the end of 50 years of and overstepping Judicial branch-and with it, liberalism as a serious movement in the United States.
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.