OT - Sandra Day O'Connor, first woman on the Supreme Court, dies
From an article (emphases mine)
Retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman to serve on the court, died Friday in Phoenix, Ariz., of complications related to advanced dementia, probably Alzheimer's, and a respiratory illness, the court announced.
O'Connor was appointed to the court by President Reagan in 1981 and retired in 2006, after serving more than 24 years on the court.
While on the court, O'Connor was called "the most powerful woman in America".
She was 93 years old.
Also, Henry Kissinger (100!) died last week.
December 1st, 2023 at 12:33 PM ^
It’s amazing how she was the deciding vote in so many major 5-4 decisions affecting civil rights, environmental protection, personal privacy, voting rights, women’s rights, protection against discrimination and more:
https://www.aclu.org/documents/cases-which-sandra-day-oconnor-cast-decisive-vote
Like things as simple as a 5-4 decision that you have a right to a 2nd opinion if your HMO doctor denies treatment.
I can’t think of any Supreme Court justice that’s made a bigger impact except maybe Warren.
December 1st, 2023 at 12:59 PM ^
The problem with those 5-4 decisions were her opinions. She’d invent new legal “principles” that enabled her to modify and/or expand those rulings if a new case on the subject bubbled up. Those inventions were hazy & convoluted and attracted no support from either wing of the court.
She was a terrible judge.
December 1st, 2023 at 1:34 PM ^
So she made a lot of pragmatic decisions in support of human rights. It sounds like you prefer judges that make up legal theories just to support a political power base.
December 1st, 2023 at 12:33 PM ^
Strangest fact I remember about her is that she dated another future Supreme Court justice, Rehnquist, in law school...
December 1st, 2023 at 12:39 PM ^
Thats 3 famous people in the political world in the past week:
Sandra Day O'Connor- first female Supreme Court justice
Henry Kissinger- former Sec of State
Rosalyn Carter- former first lady
The oldest generations are quickly slipping away. I think these were all part of either the Greatest Generation (1901-1927) or the Silent Generation (1928-1945).
December 1st, 2023 at 12:43 PM ^
Jimmy Carter turns 100 exactly 10 months from today. Spouses often follow each other quickly, but as long as he's not in pain, I'd like to see him make it to the century mark.
December 1st, 2023 at 12:51 PM ^
What's crazy is how old all three were; O'Connor was the youngest at 93 (Carter was 96, Kissinger 100).
The oldest generations are quickly slipping away. I think these were all part of either the Greatest Generation (1901-1927) or the Silent Generation (1928-1945).
The event that sticks out to me is WWII; we're at that point where there are almost no WWII vets left. Pretty much the youngest that a WWII vet could be is 95, and that's if he was able to enlist at 17. For everyone else, it's 96+...
December 1st, 2023 at 12:43 PM ^
R.I.P. she had a pretty remarkable life. It's also nice to see that people do not have to serve until they die. Retirement can be a nice thing, wish more people in Washington knew this.
December 1st, 2023 at 1:17 PM ^
Your point is fair - and, wouldn't it be nice if there was consensus in the country which set an age limit regarding those in public office. The age could be - 70 or 75, IMO. But, that would require a constitutional amendment, and - that is extremely unlikely.
December 1st, 2023 at 12:44 PM ^
She was a pretty crappy judge. Her nomination was basically the Reagan equivalent of KBJ. And Sotomayor.
December 1st, 2023 at 12:55 PM ^
I am not commenting on KBJ or Sotomayor but in the vein that you are suggesting, her nomination was not like that at all. A lot of Reagan voters opposed her and were pretty upset with the nomination. She was a very moderate judge, often times voting with the liberal bloc and becoming the "swing vote" in a 5-4 conservative court.
December 1st, 2023 at 1:12 PM ^
Reagan wanted to nominate the first woman judge. Obama wanted to nominate the first Hispanic judge. Biden explicitly stated he’d nominate the first black woman to the court. None of them were anywhere near the best available.
Of the 3 Biden considered KBJ was the weakest. And I’d love to hear MGoLawyers explain to me how KBJ was a superior pick to the most obvious slam dunk Dem candidate sitting in plain sight: Sri Srinivasan.
Sandra Day O’Connor was a bad SCOTUS judge
December 1st, 2023 at 1:22 PM ^
I thought you were speaking from a ideological perspective.
I agree that O'Connor was not a particularly great Judge. I have no idea about KBJ, she has been on the Court for like 15 minutes.
December 1st, 2023 at 1:22 PM ^
None of them were anywhere near the best available.
This is a subjective statement. Some may agree. Some may disagree. Heck, for argument's sake, let's assume I agree with you, and I share your opinion that neither Sandra Day O'Connor nor Sonia Sotomayer were "the best available."
Now that we have that out of the way, objectively, only a bitter internet message board troll would exploit the news of one's death as an opportunity to call the newly deceased essentially a "token" appointment. But good for you. I hope you feel better. I feel better for mocking you, so all is good.
December 1st, 2023 at 1:28 PM ^
Somehow, this sounds like fantasy football, but different. Can you claim them off waivers?
December 1st, 2023 at 2:36 PM ^
I was thinking it was more like the heated discussion around who should be selected for the CFP, but the one from 6 years ago.
December 1st, 2023 at 1:28 PM ^
Maybe the day of her death isn’t the time to be trampling all over her? This might be a day to say “RIP” or “May her memory be a blessing” because I’m sure it is for many people.
December 1st, 2023 at 1:49 PM ^
So there are at least 2 problems with your logic here. First, "best available" in terms of hiring people is completely subjective. And given your response to the credentials of the 3 you listed, I'm sure you also think ACB is completely unqualified.
And the second problem is that your line of thinking seems to imply that before O'Connor, no woman was ever selected for the court strictly because no woman was ever qualified for the job. Which seems like a dubious proposition. Is it really the case that up to that point all the "best available" happened to be white men? If everything in the history of the court was done strictly merit based, then women, and women of color would have been on the court a long time ago.
But you really don't care about who is qualified, you just don't like their politics or their decisions. Otherwise you would be angry about other appointments as well.
December 1st, 2023 at 1:36 PM ^
99 Senators disagree with you
December 1st, 2023 at 12:45 PM ^
As she once wrote:
“Rare indeed is the legal victory — in court or legislature — that is not a careful byproduct of an emerging social consensus.”
Wise words from a Wise lady.
December 1st, 2023 at 1:09 PM ^
Cannot hear her name without thinking about how John Riggins told her at a banquet, "Loosen up, Sandy baby."
December 1st, 2023 at 1:22 PM ^
She was the speaker at my UM graduation.
It was definitely a different era. RIP.
December 1st, 2023 at 2:49 PM ^
From her western, "cowgirl" upbringing, to her Stanford (not Ivy League) education, and to her time in the Arizona Senate, Sandra O'Connor lived a life different from most of her SCOTUS colleagues. She did not graduate from Harvard or Yale, she did not clerk for a Supreme Court Justice, she did not at some point secure a federal district court judgeship, and did not rise to a federal appellate court then to the Supreme Court, which is the insulated path some of today's justices have taken. In other words, she received many years worth of paychecks that were not issued by the federal government and brought many years of real-world experience to the Court. That made her contributions to American jurisprudence all the more valuable. RIP.
December 1st, 2023 at 3:17 PM ^
Sad news. O'Conner spoke at my graduation from Michigan.