A monumental struggle for control of America’s judiciary was set in motion on Friday when Sandra Day O’Connor, the first woman to serve on the United States supreme court, announced her retirement.
President George Bush quickly emerged into the Rose Garden to say he would announce a successor in time for the next court session in October. He also called for restraint in the emotive battle over her replacement, the first new supreme court justice for 11 years.
”The nation deserves and I will select a supreme court justice that Americans can be proud of,” he said. ”The nation also deserves a dignified process of confirmation in the United States Senate, characterised by fair treatment, a fair hearing and a fair vote.”
The departure of Justice O’Connor (75) will give Bush the opportunity to replace a moderate voice with a more committed conservative, with far-reaching consequences for such issues as abortion rights and stem cell research.
Over the years, Congress has increasingly left it to the supreme court to translate the Constitution into law, increasing its power but also turning it into political battlefield.
Justice O’Connor was appointed by Ronald Reagan in 1981 and voted in the court as a conservative on political issues. She provided the swing vote in the 2000 election debacle in Florida, handing the presidency to George Bush.
But she was also relatively liberal on social issues. In particular, her vote in 1992 was crucial in upholding the constitutional protection of abortion rights, and she backed affirmative action programmes.
Religious conservatives never forgave her. Voting intentions on abortion are likely to test both sides in the looming struggle over a replacement.
Both liberal and conservative pressure groups have prepared campaign funds, staff and offices to fight the coming battle over the choice of a new supreme court justice. That battle is expected to come close to a presidential election in intensity, with up to $50-million spent on advertising.
”It’s not too much to say this is the most significant supreme court vacancy in almost 20 years,” said Dennis Hutchinson, a supreme court expert at the University of Chicago. ”Sandra Day O’Connor has been the balance wheel of the court. She has been the balance vote on abortion, affirmative action, state sovereignty and religious clauses of the first amendment. On high-profile issues, she has been central.”
Some past confirmation debates have turned into ideological struggles which engulfed the nation. Much will depend now on whom Bush chooses as a possible successor.
Democrats in the Senate are likely to put up a determined fight against an ideological conservative, and will almost certainly attempt to filibuster the debate.
A political crisis over the filibuster was narrowly avoided in May after Republicans had threatened to outlaw the parliamentary manoeuvre, in which the minority party attempts to block legislation or nominations by making extended speeches until the debate runs out of time. A confrontation was avoided by a deal struck by 14 moderate senators from both sides, but that truce may not survive a heated confrontation.
As the supreme court came to the end of its summer session this week, the chief justice, William Rehnquist, who is being treated for thyroid cancer, was being scrutinised for any sign he would resign.
However, Justice O’Connor, who is younger and healthier, was also being watched as she had privately expressed a desire to retire so she could care for her husband, who has Alzheimer’s disease.
Among the possible candidates is Alberto Gonzales, the attorney general. But Gonzales does not have much support from Christian conservatives, and alienated Democrats by his recommendation to drop Geneva convention protections for Guantánamo Bay detainees.
The president could also pick a Hispanic judge from the federal appeals courts, such as Emilio Garza, or a hardliner certain to galvanise conservative support, such as Michael Luttig or John Roberts, who are both judges on federal circuit courts. – Guardian Unlimited Â