My own opinion about Rehnquist's assertion that he isn't retiring, is that he didn't want to complicate matters for President Bush, or step on the confirmation process for O'Connor's replacement.
Various journalists have speculated that Rehnquist is somehow ego-driven, and is just hanging in there to achieve the historical distinction of being the longest serving Chief in American history. Well, he'll have that sometime in August, if my math is correct, but I think that he deliberately wanted to remove himself from the spotlight, so that this one (John Roberts) could go forward unimpeded by any "competition" from yet another resignation.
Just my 2 cents.
Char :)
ym opinion too, I believe he wanted Pres. Bush to be able to nominate one at a time. To un-complicate matters.
Very good points, to which I agree.
WHEN THAT HAPPENS, if we get yet another conservative confirmed, watch for Stevens and Ruth Buzzi to pack it in. They won't want to be on the losing end of 5-4 decisions every time.
I read somewhere (can't remember exactly) Rehnquist was very protocol-minded. When this very private man made a very public statement regarding his employment status 2 things came to mind:
1. He is po'd the press had relegated him to "Dead Man Walking."
2. The speculation was bad for the process of picking a replacement for O'Connor and bad for the court.
{Please Justice O'Connor--please stay. Your husband won't know the difference. And we will have you sitting in the "Big Chair" while it is still warm.")
I agree with you. And, I think there is nothing wrong with him "hanging in there" for that distinction...he's earned it IMO, although I doubt that is a major concern on his part. I think his main concerns have been, and are, for the best interests of the country and the court itself, and his hanging in there can only help the process in our favor.