EMail This Page - Print

Andrew E. Voris

Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's Friday announcement of her retirement may initiate a fierce battle over her replacement.

SIUC law professor Leonard Gross said O'Connor represented the deciding vote on many 5 to 4 votes. Her vote was influential most often in deciding cases on abortion and affirmative action, both of which she supported, Gross said.

"There is going to be a lot of money spent by supporters from both sides of these issues in support of a nominee with their ideology," Gross said.

The affirmative action case took place in 2003 when the court approved of the University of Michigan's law school policy that considered a person's race as a factor in the admissions process.

Scott Comparato, an assistant professor of political science, said partial-birth abortion is an issue likely to appear before the court and result in a close vote.

A statement released by Illinois Senator Dick Durbin said, "Justice O'Connor's career was marked by independence, balance and moderation."

"The president and congress owe the court a justice who will follow in her fine tradition," Durbin said.

O'Connor, who is 75 years old, was the first woman to be appointed to the Supreme Court. In a letter written to President Bush on Friday, O'Connor said she would step down from her post as soon as a successor is confirmed.

Robert Clinton, professor of political science, said O'Connor is the most moderate justice of the last 10 to 15 years.

"It is going to be difficult to find an O'Connor clone," Clinton said.

Federal judges are first nominated by the president and then presented to the Senate Judiciary Committee. After the nominee is confirmed by the committee, the entire Senate votes on the confirmation of the nominee.

"How much the Senate contends over O'Connor's replacement depends on the President," Comparato said. "If Bush were to appoint a moderate to replace the moderate O'Connor, someone slightly right of center, I think you would see some contentious hearings, but I don't think you'd see anything like a filibuster over such a nominee."

Recently a compromise was struck between seven Democratic and seven Republican senators. Democrats promised not to filibuster, a procedure used to obstruct a vote within Congress, the President's Federal Court nominees unless the nominee is deemed to be completely out of the mainstream on social issues. In return, Republicans would not vote to do away with the filibuster.

If the president nominates a conservative, Comparato said, a battle can be expected from the Democrats.

"Appointing someone from the right would also serve President Bush's interests, though, because he owes it to his political base to appoint someone who is from that demographic," Comparato said. "He is not going to be up for reelection, so he may feel more free to appoint who he likes."

All too often people do not realize how the decisions of the Supreme Court affect our lives, Comparato said.

"The decisions that the Supreme Court makes affects our lives in very concrete ways every day," Comparato said. "There is a real potential for change here with the appointment of a new Justice."

Reporter Andrew E. Voris can be reached at andrew_voris@dailyegyptian.com