July 1, 2005 by lonbud

It’s Showtime Now

Justice Sandra Day O’Connor resigned today after 24 years of service adjudicating the Law of the Land for the United States Supreme Court. Appointed by Ronald Reagan in 1981, she cast the deciding vote in 13 of 15 decisions handed down by 5-4 majorities during her term, and is seen by many to have been the crucial centerweight between the uber-reactionary Scalia/Thomas wing of the court, and the activist, secular liberalism of John Paul Stevens, Anthony Kennedy, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

In the end, despite having effectively decided questions of civil rights, equal protection, federal jurisdiction, abortion rights, campaign finance, free speech, and –in her final term– religious freedom, Ms. O’Connor ought not soon be forgotten for having also handed George W. Bush the presidency in 2001.

One cannot know the extent to which Mr. Bush appreciates Justice O’Connor’s effect on his career, or whether he feels any indebtedness to the first woman ever to sit on the nation’s highest court.

And, while some are surprised to see Ms. O’Connor (whom one-time Washington sports hero John Riggins famously implored, “lighten up, Sandy!”), instead of the ailing Chief Justice William Rhenquist become the first Supreme Court justice to step down during Mr. Bush’s tenure in office, all eyes are now on the President, anxiously awaiting his choice for her replacement.

Nutbag religious fanatic Gary Bauer was out in front of the coming debate on whoever the President may offer the nation, hoping to gain traction for the idea that the country is no longer interested in anyone so centrist or moderate as Ms. O’Connor (or, God forbid, Justice David Souter). In an e-mail to supporters of his conservative lobbying group, American Values, Bauer declared that America must resist the “shrill cries [of] the radical left and Senate liberals” (emphasis added), who will “demand” the President tender someone reasonable to interpret the nation’s laws.

Senate minority leader Harry Reid staked out the constitutional obligation of the patrician wing of the Legislative Branch, offering tentatively, “The Constitution gives the president and the Senate shared responsibility to fill this vacancy, ” and said he hoped Mr. Bush would “give life to the advice and consent clause by engaging in meaningful consultation with senators of both political parties.”

Suddenly in play again are arguments over procedural rules in the Senate, which hold Republicans hostage to the minority Democrats’ occasional resort to filibuster in keeping Mr. Bush’s most wildly unqualified appointments from positions of power and discretion.

The Democrats’ willingness last month to look the other way while ultra-reactionary Judges Janice Rodgers Brown and Priscilla Owen received lifetime appointments to the Federal judiciary should gain them an opportunity to show good faith now by “consenting” to a reasonable jurist. The President could also press his advantage, and appoint a candidate in obvious service to those on the right of the divide his presidency has spawned.

In either event he will further define a leadership record notable for its questionable appointments (Negroponte, Abrams, Kissinger, Gonzalez, Bolton, and the judges, infra), an absence of planning (Afghanistan, Iraq, China, North Korea), and dismal failure by most measures, including economic performance, public health, education & welfare, the environment, global diplomatic relations, and all-around accountability.

How much worse can it get?