STYLETHREAD -- LET'S TALK SHOP!

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
stylethread site home page -> stylethread forum -> current events -> sandra day o'connor to retire
Post Info TOPIC: sandra day o'connor to retire
erin


Chanel

Status: Offline
Posts: 3274
Date:
sandra day o'connor to retire
Permalink Closed

this is totally selfish of me, but part of me is pissed that she can't just wait until bush is out of office to retire. (not that she was my favorite justice anyhow, but still!)

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/07/01/oconnor.resigns.ap/index.html

Sandra Day O'Connor leaving Supreme Court
Friday, July 1, 2005; Posted: 10:38 a.m. EDT (14:38 GMT)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Justice Sandra Day O'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 she is retiring.

O'Connor, 75, said she will leave before the start of the court's next term in October, or when the Senate confirms her successor. There was no immediate word from the White House on who might be nominated to replace O'Connor.

It's been 11 years since the last opening on the court, one of the longest uninterrupted stretches in history. O'Connor's decision gives Bush his first opportunity to appoint a justice.

"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."

The White House has refused to comment on any possible nominees, or whether Bush would name a woman to succeed O'Connor. Her departure leaves Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as the only other woman among the current justices.

Possible replacements include Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and federal courts of appeals judges J. Michael Luttig, John Roberts, Samuel A. Alito Jr., Michael McConnell, Emilio Garza and James Harvie Wilkinson III. Others mentioned are former Solicitor General Theodore Olson, lawyer Miguel Estrada and former deputy attorney general Larry Thompson, but Bush's pick could be a surprise choice not well known in legal circles.

Another prospective candidate is Edith Hollan Jones, a judge on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals who was also considered for a Supreme Court vacancy by President Bush's father.

O'Connor's appointment in 1981 by President Ronald Reagan, quickly confirmed by the Senate, ended 191 years of male exclusivity on the high court.

She wasted little time building a reputation as a hard-working moderate conservative who emerged as a crucial power broker on the nine-member court.

O'Connor often lines up with the court's conservative bloc, as she did in 2000 when the court voted to stop Florida presidential ballot recounts sought by Al Gore, and effectively called the election for President Bush.

As a "swing voter," however, O'Connor sometimes votes with more liberal colleagues.

Perhaps the best example of her influence is the court's evolving stance on abortion. She distanced herself both from her three most conservative colleagues, who say there is no constitutional underpinning for a right to abortion, and from more liberal justices for whom the right is a given.

Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

__________________
halleybird


Hermes

Status: Offline
Posts: 6400
Date:
Permalink Closed

I SDOC, but she was very unpredictable. She was a deciding vote in one of the worst decisions ever IMHO (Hazelwood).

__________________
"We live in an age where unnecessary things are our only necessities." --Oscar Wilde
erin


Chanel

Status: Offline
Posts: 3274
Date:
Permalink Closed

first i want to note that these are my opinions following, and i hope if you don't agree, you can respectfully agree to disagree.

i respect her accomplishments and her as a person, but i definitely was not thrilled with her voting to stop the recount and not permitting further recounts. (which i feel she let her own personal bias dictate her vote)

that aside, i sort of feel like we're going to get f'd in the a with a future choice from dubya. even if he doesn't pick someone that would vote to overturn roe v. wade, i still believe he would pick someone religious who would let their "moral" obligations color their voting.

__________________
sfcaligirl


Dooney & Bourke

Status: Offline
Posts: 896
Date:
Permalink Closed

erin wrote:

that aside, i sort of feel like we're going to get f'd in the a with a future choice from dubya. even if he doesn't pick someone that would vote to overturn roe v. wade, i still believe he would pick someone religious who would let their "moral" obligations color their voting.

i think he's going to appoint somebody whose views coincide with his moral agenda- and that scares the hell out of me.  roe v. wade would be in huge trouble...



__________________
esquiress


Marc Jacobs

Status: Offline
Posts: 2053
Date:
Permalink Closed

halleybird, what was hazelwood about again?  i'm trying to remember but keep drawing a blank...


oh and as for who will replace her--who knows?  and i don't necessarily think roe v. wade will get overruled per se, but maybe substantially diluted (like more of what casey v. planned parenthood did to it).  but again, who knows?



__________________
Cricket


Gucci

Status: Offline
Posts: 2766
Date:
Permalink Closed

esquiress wrote:

halleybird, what was hazelwood about again?  i'm trying to remember but keep drawing a blank... oh and as for who will replace her--who knows?  and i don't necessarily think roe v. wade will get overruled per se, but maybe substantially diluted (like more of what casey v. planned parenthood did to it).  but again, who knows?
I think Hazelwood had to do w/ censorship of students writing for school newspapers, but I could be wrong.

__________________
theotherjess


Chanel

Status: Offline
Posts: 3388
Date:
Permalink Closed

Cricket wrote:

esquiress wrote: halleybird, what was hazelwood about again?  i'm trying to remember but keep drawing a blank... oh and as for who will replace her--who knows?  and i don't necessarily think roe v. wade will get overruled per se, but maybe substantially diluted (like more of what casey v. planned parenthood did to it).  but again, who knows? I think Hazelwood had to do w/ censorship of students writing for school newspapers, but I could be wrong.
Nope, you're right.

__________________
Bad taste is like a nice dash of paprika. We all could use more of it. It's no taste I'm against. -Diana Vreeland
gingembre1


Kate Spade

Status: Offline
Posts: 1116
Date:
Permalink Closed

I agree that Bush will appoint someone who will coincide with his own moral agenda. If the SC doesn't manage to overturn Roe v. Wade, I'm sure, as Esquiress noted, that it will at least be significantly diluted. I think this is the worst possible time for SC justices to step down...who is appointed in their place will affect us for many years to come. We're going to be feeling the consequences of this for a long time.

__________________

http://doseofginger.blogspot.com/
RyanJ


Coach

Status: Offline
Posts: 1915
Date:
Permalink Closed

YEAH!!!!!!

__________________
I don’t want no part of your tight-ass country-club, you freak bitch!
blubirde


Chanel

Status: Offline
Posts: 4845
Date:
Permalink Closed

They say every person/generation/etc. has to pick its issue right? I think this is mine. The Supremes have A LOT of power in our country. Bush has been eroding our civil rights and liberties bit by bit in his presidency. I tried to be active in the election but it got us nowhere, so I think I'll do whatever I can to protect the SC from Bush's blatent disregard for everything America stands for. What can we do though? I could contact my senators (and I do) but with John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison, it's not really very productive. And my congressman is very liberal, so I'm good there too.


It's just so hard to feel like we have a voice today. Everything I say and feel is disregarded by this administration. What can we do?



__________________
http://dailypointers.blogspot.com/
sephorablue


Marc Jacobs

Status: Offline
Posts: 2159
Date:
Permalink Closed

I don't know what you guys have heard, but I read somewhere that W is apparently giving serious thought to the attorney general--enough so that even some within the party are upset at the thought. I believe I have read that the atty. gen. is actually a supporter of roe v. wade, which accounts for his unpopularity on the far right.

__________________
http://designers-brew.blogspot.com/
blubirde


Chanel

Status: Offline
Posts: 4845
Date:
Permalink Closed


sephorablue wrote:
I don't know what you guys have heard, but I read somewhere that W is apparently giving serious thought to the attorney general--enough so that even some within the party are upset at the thought. I believe I have read that the atty. gen. is actually a supporter of roe v. wade, which accounts for his unpopularity on the far right.


yeah he also helped support the administrations stance on the use of torture in interrogation. nice guy. i'd oppose him vehemently. although the fact that far right groups don't like him does make him a more attractive candidate. not enough for my support though. he's a scary, bad guy, imo.

__________________
http://dailypointers.blogspot.com/
sephorablue


Marc Jacobs

Status: Offline
Posts: 2159
Date:
Permalink Closed

oh damn I knew there was something objectionable about him but I couldn't remember what it was. Oh well, pick your poison, I guess?

__________________
http://designers-brew.blogspot.com/
Dizzy


Marc Jacobs

Status: Offline
Posts: 2130
Date:
Permalink Closed

I think Roe v. Wade is pretty much finished. Can you imagine a world without abortion? I can't believe how fast this country is changing.

__________________
sephorablue


Marc Jacobs

Status: Offline
Posts: 2159
Date:
Permalink Closed

the thing I am having a hard time with, is that with so many things happening that I don't like or approve of, I can't even tell myself that they are unfair or a result of government oppression. The majority rules, and in these cases, the majority either tacitly or explicity approves. For me one of the hugest issues is the erosion of the line between church and state--that was one of the absolute most important ideas on which this country was founded, and it was so wise, and so visionary. But it's changing very quickly, and the fact that it was one of the founding principles of the country doesn't ultimately matter now--because if the majority of the country wants that to change, then it should. Me mentally screaming in frustration about it leaves me nowhere, because it's already happened and will continue happening. Same with Roe v Wade. So that leaves me, potentially, living as a citizen of a country I do not respect or love in its current form. Which also, depending on how things turn out in the next few years, leaves me wondering whether I ought to leave, and when, and to where.

-- Edited by sephorablue at 14:26, 2005-07-07

__________________
http://designers-brew.blogspot.com/
halleybird


Hermes

Status: Offline
Posts: 6400
Date:
Permalink Closed

what I should have said earlier is what erin pointed out -- I respect her and her accomplishments, but she has disappointed me.


SDOC was one of my idols growing up (she is from AZ too), and I have even met her, but I often disagree with her decisions. And I guess I am a little pissed that she couldn't have waited until 2008 to retire.



__________________
"We live in an age where unnecessary things are our only necessities." --Oscar Wilde
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
stylethread site home page -> stylethread forum -> current events -> sandra day o'connor to retire
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse 		Powered by ActiveBoard