Civil Rights Coalition Notes Significance of O'Connor Retirement
Feature Story by civilrights.org staff - 7/1/2005
Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor announced today that she would be retiring from the Supreme Court.Wade Henderson, executive director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR), thanked O'Connor for her years of public service, and also noted the historic significance of her resignation.
"The resignation of Justice O'Connor comes at an historic moment. At a time when our country is deeply divided, we must recognize the important role of the Supreme Court in protecting the rights and liberties of all Americans. Justice O'Connor has been a moderating voice on the Court....As a force for moderation on a deeply divided court, her leadership will be missed," Henderson said.
O'Connor's resignation would be "effective upon the nomination and confirmation of [her] successor," according to her letter to President Bush.
Her resignation creates a vacancy on the Court for the first time in 11 years and gives President Bush his first opportunity to name a justice to the Court.
Civil rights groups urged the president to choose consensus over division in making his nomination to this lifetime seat.
"The resignation of Justice O'Connor presents President Bush with two choices - continue the politics of confrontation and division or pursue consultation and consensus. It offers the President an opportunity to be a 'uniter not a divider,'" Henderson said.
O'Connor herself was a consensus candidate, recommended by Sen. Dennis DeConcini, a Democrat from Arizona, and nominated by President Ronald Reagan in 1981 to be the first woman on the Court. She was confirmed by a 99-0 vote.
While her nomination generated criticism from both the political left and right, during her time on the Court she proved to be a pivotal swing vote in decisions affecting civil rights, environmental protection, personal privacy, voting rights, protection against discrimination, and more.
Civil rights organizations have identified a number of 5-4 decisions in danger of being overturned if O'Connor is replaced by someone who is not a mainstream nominee, including Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) (affirmative action); Tennessee v. Lane (2004) (rights of individuals with disabilities); Zadvydas v. Davis (2001) (human rights/due process) and Jackson v. Birmingham Bd. Of Educ. (2005) (Title IX).
