The first woman appointed to the Supreme Court, and the kind of relatively centrist Supreme Court nominee you’ll never again see from a Republican President. And she was replaced by Samuel Fucking Alito.
Good documentary about her from earlier this year:
RIP, i didn’t always agree with her, but i think she was a good person and a good Supreme Court Justice, who tried to do the right thing.
First female Supreme Court justice.
Last Supreme Court justice to not let politics get in the way of the law.
I would not go that far. She flipped once I can remember. Still, overall, I think she took the job seriously and was not overtly partisan and, overall, a good justice.
I met her a couple times (my mom knew her through some charity stuff). She was nice (but the times I met her barely amounted to more than a hello).
I would be curious on what cases she was political and not legal on. Not that I don’t believe you, but I can’t think of any.
I think this shows she was largely on the conservative side but wasn’t quite willing to go all-in with them and had the sense to never join with justice Thomas who is legit awful:
Initially, O’Connor’s voting record aligned closely with the conservative William Rehnquist (voting with him 87% of the time during her first three years at the Court).[59] From that time until 1998, O’Connor’s alignment with Rehnquist ranged from 93.4% to 63.2%, hitting above 90% in three of those years.[60] In nine of her first sixteen years on the Court, O’Connor voted with Rehnquist more than with any other justice.[60]
Later on, as the Court’s make-up became more conservative (e.g., Anthony Kennedy replacing Lewis Powell, and Clarence Thomas replacing Thurgood Marshall), O’Connor often became the swing vote on the Court. However, she usually disappointed the Court’s more liberal bloc in contentious 5–4 decisions: from 1994 to 2004, she joined the traditional conservative bloc of Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, and Thomas 82 times; she joined the liberal bloc of John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer only 28 times.[61]
O’Connor’s relatively small[62] shift away from conservatives on the Court seems to have been due at least in part to Thomas’s views.[63] When Thomas and O’Connor were voting on the same side, she would typically write a separate opinion of her own, refusing to join his.[64] In the 1992 term, O’Connor did not join a single one of Thomas’s dissents.[65] - SOURCE
There is a lot to unpack with that assertion.
I’ll just say I think she is to be commended for retiring from the bench, rather than treating it as a life peerage as so many other Justices do.
What I had not ever heard, until today, was that, in the early 1950s, Sandra Day turned down a marriage proposal from one of her fellow students at Stanford Law School, whom she had dated for a time: William Rehnquist.
Gift link to the Post:
I never knew that either. Wow…interesting.
Justices Souter, Breyer, Bader-Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson would like a word.
I’d take a different tack: all Supreme Court Justices are political. Some are just better at hiding it than others, so much so that they may even hide it from themselves.
Actually, scratch that. It’s not about how good Justices are at hiding their politics, it’s about whether the observer is capable of setting aside their own predispositions to see the politics running through every decision, every concurrence, and every dissent.
Nah…we can clearly see political leanings in the court. Overt even.
Granted each justice will have a political tilt (which should be expected) but some, like Alito and Thomas, are egregious about it.
I think O’Connor was clearly conservative but wasn’t completely beholden to conservatism. Occasionally (if rarely) she would break the mold.
I thought she was already dead.
Huh. Ignorance fought.
I’m not sure what it even means for a Justice to be “political.” Samuel Alito has long despised Roe with every fiber of his being as an unconstitutional abomination, does that mean he was being “political” when he wrote Dobbs? If a Justice has a consistent judicial philosophy that largely aligns with the positions taken by a particular party, does that make him or her “political.” Neil Gorsuch aligns with the “Republican” position on cases 90% of the time, but I would personally consider him the most apolitical Justice on the Court.
I think the job of a supreme Court Justice is inherently political. When the law is ambiguous or contradictory, what is a good solution that can lead to good law going forward? That’s a political question. O’Connor was a good justice because she tried to do what was best for the country, rather than trying to impose her personal preferences all of us. But that’s a political perspective. Just an old fashioned constructive style of politics.
Yes, exactly this. And it used to be, way way back in the early-19th century, that some judges at least both recognized and accepted this reality: that they were (and are) effectively legislators in miniature, making law as needed.
But now, the prevailing trick is to pretend that judges merely “find” law, like calling “balls and strikes.”
Agree. The SC is not a machine that you punch questions into and get faultless, unemotional and mechanical answers. It’s a body of human beings, with emotions and predjudices and faults, just like the rest of us, and charged with interpreting the intent of a document written almost 250 years ago.
Understandably. She retired from the Court seventeen years ago, and she retired from public life in 2018, when she was diagnosed with dementia.