I | INTRODUCTION |
Sandra Day
O’Connor, born in 1930, associate justice of the Supreme Court of the
United States from 1981 to 2006 and the first woman to serve on the Court. She
became one of the most influential justices, often holding the balance of power
as a crucial swing vote on abortion, religion, affirmative action, and other
issues that divided the nine-member Court. On July 1, 2005, O’Connor announced
her resignation from the Court, effective upon the confirmation of a successor.
She resigned in January 2006 when Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., replaced
her.
II | FROM LAZY B TO STANFORD |
Sandra Day O’Connor was born to Harry A. and
Ada Mae Wilkey Day on March 26, 1930, in El Paso, Texas. The oldest of three
children, she spent her childhood in southeastern Arizona on her parents’
63,000-hectare (155,000-acre) Lazy B Ranch, founded by her pioneer grandfather
in the early 1880s. On this remote ranch, which lacked electricity, she learned
to ride horseback, round up cattle, drive a truck and tractor, and fix fences
and windmills. From the age of 5 her parents sent her to live during the school
year with her maternal grandmother in El Paso. There she attended Radford
School, a private school for girls, and then Austin High School, from which she
graduated at the age of 16.
O’Connor majored in economics at Stanford
University in California, obtaining a bachelor’s degree magna cum laude in 1950.
Continuing at Stanford Law School, she earned a bachelor of laws degree in 1952,
graduating third in a 102-student class that included William H. Rehnquist, who
later became chief justice of the Supreme Court. She was one of 5 women in her
graduating class. Soon after earning her law degree she married John O’Connor,
whom she had met while working on the Stanford Law Review.
III | YEARS OF PUBLIC SERVICE |
Despite her stellar academic record, O’Connor
was offered only secretarial work at the law firms to which she applied.
Instead, she turned to the public sector, working as a county deputy attorney in
San Mateo, California, while her husband completed the requirements for his law
degree. The O’Connors then moved to Frankfurt, Germany, where they both worked
for the United States Army, Sandra as a civilian lawyer for the Quartermaster
Corps. In 1957 they settled in Phoenix, Arizona, and Sandra gave birth to the
first of three sons.
In 1959 O’Connor opened her own law firm in
Maryvale, a suburb of Phoenix. Her active involvement in civic affairs led her
into politics. She served as a district chairperson of the Republican Party from
1962 to 1965. She returned to full-time employment in 1965 as assistant attorney
general for Arizona, holding the post until 1969. That year Arizona governor
Jack Williams appointed her to a vacant seat in the state senate. The following
year she campaigned successfully on the Republican ticket for the same senate
seat.
O’Connor was less socially conservative than
some of her Republican colleagues, opposing aid to religious schools and staking
out a moderate position on abortion. She gained the respect of her colleagues
for her meticulous attention to detail. Following her reelection in 1972, she
was elected majority leader of the state senate, becoming the first woman to
hold that office in the country.
IV | MOVE TO THE BENCH |
Toward the end of her second full term in the
Arizona Senate, O’Connor decided to move to the judiciary branch of government.
In a hard-fought election in 1974, she won a seat on the Maricopa County
Superior Court. Five years later Arizona governor Bruce Babbitt chose O’Connor
as his first appointee to the Arizona Court of Appeals.
President Ronald Reagan, who had promised to
appoint a woman to the Supreme Court, nominated O’Connor in July 1981 to replace
retiring Associate Justice Potter Stewart. Conservatives of the Moral Majority
political organization opposed the nomination, criticizing her moderate record
on abortion. During U.S. Senate confirmation hearings, dominated by the issue of
abortion, O’Connor repeatedly refused to criticize Roe v.
Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that gave women the
constitutional right to obtain abortions. The Senate confirmed her unanimously
in September, making her the first woman to serve on the Court.
V | SUPREME COURT JUSTICE |
Initially a strong conservative, O’Connor
became in the late 1980s more of a centrist on a Court sharply divided between
conservatives and liberals. Having staked out a pivotal position at the center
of the Court, she held or helped define the balance of power on many important
issues, including affirmative action, the death penalty, abortion rights, and
the separation of church and state.
O’Connor established a reputation of voting on
a case-by-case basis rather than committing herself to consistent overarching
principles. She wrote majority opinions as narrowly as possible, focusing on the
unique circumstances of each case and the practical effects of each decision.
O’Connor may have best summarized her approach in a dissenting opinion from a
1995 decision in Vernonia School District v. Acton, in which she
wrote, “The only way for judges to mediate these conflicting impulses is to do
what they should do anyway: stay close to the record in each case that appears
before them, and make their judgments based on that alone.”
This approach freed her to make future
decisions based on the merits of each case, which made her vote largely
unpredictable. An often repeated phrase, “the O’Connor Court,” reflected her
powerful position as a critical swing vote on controversial issues that divided
the Court. From 1994 to 2005, she sided with the majority in more 5-to-4
decisions than any other justice. In one of her best-known deciding votes, she
sided with the majority in the 5-to-4 decision in Bush v. Gore,
which effectively called the 2000 presidential election for George W. Bush.
See also Disputed Presidential Election of 2000.
O’Connor’s pragmatic, case-by-case approach
was perhaps most evident on the issue of abortion. In 1983 she proposed her own
test for evaluating restrictions on abortion, asking whether the restriction
“unduly burdened” the right to choose. O’Connor used this test throughout her
tenure to decide whether she considered a particular abortion restriction
permissible. From 1983 to 1992, O’Connor upheld every abortion restriction put
before the Court. But in a 1989 case, Webster v. Reproductive Health
Services, O’Connor refused to provide the swing vote to overturn Roe
itself. Three years later in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern
Pennsylvania v. Casey, she joined liberal justices in upholding the
“core holding” of Roe—namely, that states may not place serious
restrictions on abortion prior to a fetus’s “point of viability.” However, this
ruling abandoned the trimester framework that had been established in
Roe, which had set a fetus’s viability at six months.
O’Connor demonstrated consistency in several
areas. Most notably, she was a staunch proponent of the so-called federalism
revolution led by Chief Justice Rehnquist, joining the majority in a series of
cases that strengthened the sovereignty of the states while limiting the role of
Congress. She also showed sensitivity to issues of sex discrimination throughout
her tenure. On several occasions she joined the Court’s four liberal justices to
uphold a broad interpretation of a federal statute addressing sex
discrimination.
VI | RETIREMENT AND WRITINGS |
O’Connor was widely viewed as a likely
successor to Rehnquist as chief justice. However, on July 1, 2005, she announced
her resignation from the Court, effective upon the confirmation of a successor.
O’Connor’s principal reason for stepping down was reportedly to spend more time
with her husband, who was said to have Alzheimer’s disease. Justice Samuel A.
Alito, Jr., replaced O’Connor on the Court.
O’Connor collaborated with her brother, H.
Alan Day, to write a bestselling memoir, Lazy B: Growing Up on a Cattle Ranch
in the American Southwest (2002). She also authored The Majesty of the
Law: Reflections of a Supreme Court Justice (2003), which includes an
account of her experiences working with Justice Thurgood Marshall and her
thoughts on women and the law.
No comments:
Post a Comment