The first woman ever appointed to the Supreme Court, Judge Saundra Day O?Connor resigned last week. She was appointed during the Reagan administration and served on the Supreme Court for 24 years.
Sandra Day O'Connor is the first woman and the 102nd person to sit on the Supreme Court of the United States. She was born in 1930 in El Paso, Texas.
O?Connor went to Stanford in 1950, where she studied economics and law. O'Connor finished law school in two years instead of the usual three and graduated third in her class, just two seats below Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who was in the same class.
While on the Supreme Court, she was often called the swing vote for issues such as affirmative action and finance, and she frequently sided with both the conservative and the liberal judges in court decisions, depending on the case. Her vote often tipped the scales one way or another with her case-by-case approach on the issues on trial.
O?Connor?s personal style of judgment gave balance to the court. President Bush wields a lot of power right now as he makes decisions about who to appoint to the court as her replacement.
A pertinent question to ask right now is what rights we as a nation might lose with a judge who has more solid political party leanings. Then again, what might we gain?
With O?Connor as an advocate for state rights, the current court has struck down more federal laws and upheld state sovereignty more than any other court in history.
O?Connor was known for defining the circumstances where a law applies and where it doesn?t. Her decisions concerning religion provide an example of what passed her scrutiny and what didn?t. Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in schools passed, while displaying the Ten Commandments on public property did not.
O?Connor sided with a woman?s right to choose when it came to abortion and whether or not to overturn Roe v. Wade. She voted to support an Ohio law requiring a 24-hour waiting period. In her minority opinion she wrote that though Roe v. Wade was written on shaky ground, she didn?t think the decision should be overturned. States retained the right to set laws concerning abortion within their boundaries.
Her decisions concerning affirmative action also walked on both sides. She voted for no quotas but government and universities can consider race as one of many factors in making decisions. She also opposed redrawing congressional district lines to benefit minorities.
Even though she held to prior decisions in the Roe v. Wade case she was willing to change her mind. Concerning the death penalty she wrote the majority opinion allowing the mentally retarded to be executed. In 2002 she changed her mind and voted with the majority to end it.
The decisions of this one judge have greatly affected the America we see today. The judges we will have in the near future have a great potential to change the course of law in America for future generations.
We urge all senators to weigh these and upcoming Supreme Court selections.