Judge Samuel Alito Considered by Congress for the Supreme Court vacancy created by Sandra Day O'Connor.

\
 


Click image for larger view.

Sandra Day O'Connor    Associate Justice United States Supreme Court

Born: March 26, 1930

The 102nd Supreme Court Justice  and First Female Member

BOOKMARK THIS GREAT SITE TO FIND IT LATER WHEN YOU WANT TO RE-LOOK AT SOMETHING HERE ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT OR WHEN YOU WANT TO SEND IT TO A FRIEND. 

1/3  

Directory of Video Sites
Blue Box 1
Scan Below

Click Brian Nelson's www.PartyTentCity.com for party tents, canopies and awnings. Today's Sale 26'x40' Tarp.   Silver. Regular price is $104.00. With this ad it is on sale for only $88.00. Shipping is $15. No charge for shipping if tarp is picked up at  31 Gessner Rd.  in Houston, TX  77024  Use PayPal to Brian@NelsonIdeas.com or Call Brian 713-467-3025.  
Blue Box 1 Contact Brian at 31 Gessner Rd. Houston, TX  77024 Tel. 713-467-3025 Cell 713-927-4479 Click: E-mail me 
www.IamFightingCancer.com   Bookmark this page now!   Anything Internet   
http://www.NelsonIdeas.com/Directory-All-Websites/Alphabetical.html

  09/24/2009 02:35 PM -0500

 

1

2/3

2

 Directory of Sites
Blue Box 2  Brian Nelson

 Do you need a party tent of white or silver tarp? Go to www.PartyTentCity.com or to see all my links go to:  http://www.PartyTentCity.com/PTC/Websites.html

Today's  special sale: Business is slow. Call me right now while this include page is up and get a 23% discount off any www.PartyTentCity.com  order.  No charge for shipping if picked up at  31 Gessner Rd.  in Houston, TX  77024 Use PayPal to Brian@NelsonIdeas.com or Call Brian 713-467-3025. http://www.NelsonIdeas.com/Directory-All-Websites/Alphabetical.html
Blue Box 2  Bookmark this page now!  
Contact Brian at 31 Gessner Rd. Houston, TX  77024 Tel. 713-467-3025 Cell 713-927-4479
Click: E-mail me 
www.IamFightingCancer.com   
 

-----------------

3/3  

 

Alito, Samuel A. Jr.
Born 1950 in Trenton, NJ

Federal Judicial Service:
U. S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Nominated by George H.W. Bush on February 20, 1990, to a seat vacated by John Joseph Gibbons; Confirmed by the Senate on April 27, 1990, and received commission on April 30, 1990.

Education:
Princeton University, A.B., 1972

Yale Law School, J.D., 1975

Professional Career:
Law clerk, Hon. Leonard I. Garth, U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, 1976-1977
Assistant U.S. attorney, District of New Jersey, 1977-1981
Assistant to the U.S. solicitor general, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, 1981-1985
Deputy assistant U.S. attorney general, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, 1985-1987
U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey, 1987-1990

Race or Ethnicity: White

Gender: Male

Alito, Samuel A. Jr.
 
See Samuel Alito Supreme Court nomination for details on his nomination.
Samuel A. Alito, Jr.

Samuel A. Alito, Jr.

Samuel Anthony Alito Jr. (born April 1, 1950) is a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. On October 31, 2005, President George W. Bush nominated him to the position of Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court, to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Contents

[hide]

 

edit]

Personal life

Standing in front of a portrait of former President Bill Clinton, Martha Alito (right), daughter Laura (left) and son Philip (center) look on as President Bush announces Samuel Alito's nomination on October 31, 2005

Standing in front of a portrait of former President Bill Clinton, Martha Alito (right), daughter Laura (left) and son Philip (center) look on as President Bush announces Samuel Alito's nomination on October 31, 2005

Alito in the 1972 Princeton yearbook: "Sam intends to go to law school and eventually to warm a seat on the Supreme Court."

Alito in the 1972 Princeton yearbook: "Sam intends to go to law school and eventually to warm a seat on the Supreme Court."

Alito was born in Trenton, New Jersey to Samuel A. Alito Sr., and his wife, the former Rose Fradusco. He attended Steinert High School in Hamilton, New Jersey. He graduated from Princeton University with an A.B. in 1972, and attended Yale Law School, where he served as editor on the Yale Law Journal and earned a J.D. in 1975. Alito's father, who is now deceased, was a high school teacher and then became the first Director of the New Jersey Office of Legislative Services, a position he held from 1952 to 1984. Alito's mother is a retired schoolteacher. Alito's sister, Rosemary, is regarded as one of New Jersey's top employment lawyers.

At Princeton, Alito led a student conference in 1971 called "The Boundaries of Privacy in American Society" which, among other things, supported curbs on domestic intelligence gathering; called for the legalization of sodomy; and urged for an end to discrimination against homosexuals in hiring by employers. [1]. During said conference, Alito stated that "no private sexual act between consenting adults should be forbidden." Alito also was part of the conservative Concerned Alumni of Princeton which formed in 1972.[2] The executive committee of CAP published a statement in December 1973 that opposed "adoption of a sex-blind admission policy". By 1985, thirteen years after his Princeton graduation, Alito touted his membership in the conservative group while readying his job application for the Reagan Administration. [3] However, Alito has recently distanced himself from the Concerned Alumni group, saying that he doesn't remember being a part or anything about it. This may be because the group has been decried as far-right and extremist, especially in a report that was contributed to by recent Princeton alumnus Bill Frist. Many Alito opponents say that Alito's affiliation with Concerned Alumni points to his extreme conservative ideaology.

While a sophomore at Princeton, Alito received the (low) lottery number of 32, in a Selective Service drawing on December 1, 1969. In 1970, he became a member of the school's Army ROTC program, attending a six-week basic summer camp that year at Fort Knox, Kentucky, in lieu of having been in ROTC during his first two years in college. Graduating in 1972, Alito left his lofty aspirations in his yearbook, hoping he said to "eventually warm a seat on the Supreme Court."[4]

He was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant in the Signal Corps after his graduation and assigned to the Army Reserve, one of nine in his class to receive a commission in the Army Reserve. Following his graduation from Yale Law School in 1975, he served on active duty from September to December, 1975, while attending the Officer Basic Course for Signal Corps officers at Fort Gordon, Georgia. The remainder of his time in the Army was served in the inactive Reserves. He had the rank of Captain when he received an Honorable Discharge in 1980.[5][6]

Since 1985, Alito has been married to the former Martha-Ann Bomgardner, once a law librarian with family roots in Oklahoma. They live in West Caldwell, New Jersey and have two children: Philip and Laura.

Judge Alito's friends describe him as "a studious, diligent, scholarly judge with a first-rate mind and a deadpan sense of humor, a neutral arbiter who does not let personal beliefs affect his legal judgments." [7]

[edit]

 

Career

Alito upon his induction as a U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals judge, 1990

Alito upon his induction as a U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals judge, 1990

Alito argued twelve cases before the Supreme Court for the federal government during his tenure as assistant to the Solicitor General. While serving as an attorney for New Jersey, he prosecuted many cases that involved drug trafficking and organized crime. [8]

In his 1985 application for Deputy Assistant to the Attorney General, Alito espoused conservative views, naming William F. Buckley, Jr., the National Review, Alexander Bickel, and Barry Goldwater's 1964 campaign as major influences. He also expressed concern about Warren Court decisions in the areas of criminal procedure, the Establishment Clause, and reapportionment. He stated he was proud to prepare cases arguing that "racial and ethnic quotas should not be allowed and that the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion." [9]

Alito was nominated by George H. W. Bush on February 20, 1990 to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Alito was rated by the American Bar Association as “Well Qualified” at the time of his nomination. He was confirmed by unanimous consent in the Senate on April 27, 1990[10]. As a Third Circuit judge, his chambers are in Newark, New Jersey.

As adjunct professor at Seton Hall University School of Law, Alito has taught courses in Constitutional Law and an original course on terrorism and civil liberties. In 1995, Judge Alito was presented with that law school’s Saint Thomas More Medal, "in recognition of his outstanding contributions to the field of law." [11]

He is known for his judicially conservative rulings. In one of his most well-known opinions, he dissented in a 2–1 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1991. In that case, he voted to uphold a Pennsylvania law that required women to inform their husbands before having an abortion, noting that the law allowed certain exceptions, such as an abusive spouse. The Supreme Court struck down the law in 1992. In another case involving a warrant, Judge Alito took the dissenting viewpoint which allowed the unauthorized strip search of a mother and her 10 year old daughter in their home although the warrant did not name them. Lawrence Lustberg, a criminal defense attorney and friend of Alito, says that he is "very prosecutorial from the bench. He has looked to be creative in his conservatism, which is, I think, as much a Rehnquist as a Scalia trait." [12] Affectionate law clerks created a blend of coffee, a mixture of Colombian, Java and New Guinea with a bit of espresso, in his honor. At the T.M. Ward Coffee Co. coffeehouse in downtown Newark, "Judge Alito's Bold Justice Blend" sells well.[13]

[edit]

Nomination to U.S. Supreme Court

Samuel Alito acknowledges his nomination, with President George W. Bush looking on.
Samuel Alito acknowledges his nomination, with President George W. Bush looking on.
Main articles: Samuel Alito Supreme Court nomination, and [[{{{2}}}]], and [[{{{3}}}]], and [[{{{4}}}]], and [[{{{5}}}]]

Bush nominated Alito to the position of Associate Justice of the Supreme Court on October 31, 2005. Alito is the third nominee to Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's seat, which she will not vacate until a replacement is confirmed. Following O'Connor's announcement, on July 1, 2005, that she would retire, it was widely reported that Alito had been narrowly passed over as her replacement; President Bush instead nominated John Roberts, who was then re-nominated to fill William Rehnquist's post following the Chief Justice's death on September 3, 2005. On October 3, White House counsel and Bush confidante Harriet Miers was nominated to fill O'Connor's spot. Miers withdrew her acceptance of the nomination on October 27 after encountering wide-spread opposition.

Alito was initially interviewed for the job June 24, 2001, by then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales. He was again interviewed May 5, 2005 by Vice President Dick Cheney, Attorney General Gonzales, White House Chief of Staff Andy Card, Karl Rove, White House Counsel Harriet Miers and the Vice President's chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby. President Bush interviewed him in person on July 14, 2005. [14]

In announcing his nomination, Bush stated, "He's scholarly, fair-minded and principled and these qualities will serve him well on the highest court in the land. [His record] reveals a thoughtful judge who considers the legal merits carefully and applies the law in a principled fashion. He has a deep understanding of the proper role of judges in our society. He understands judges are to interpret the laws, not to impose their preferences or priorities on the people." [15] Alito, in accepting the nomination, said, "Federal judges have the duty to interpret the Constitution and the laws faithfully and fairly, to protect the constitutional rights of all Americans, and to do these things with care and with restraint, always keeping in mind the limited role that the courts play in our constitutional system. And I pledge that if confirmed I will do everything within my power to fulfill that responsibility." [16]

[edit]

Case history

LexisNexis reports that Alito has written more than 700 opinions.

[edit]

Abortion

  • Samuel Alito supported limited abortion rights in 3 out of 4 rulings as described below. [17]
  • A dissenting opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 947 F.2d 682 (3d Cir. 1991), arguing that a Pennsylvania law that required women seeking abortions to inform their husbands should have been upheld. Judge Alito wrote:
"[t]he Pennsylvania legislature could have rationally believed that some married women are initially inclined to obtain an abortion without their husbands' knowledge because of perceived problems — such as economic constraints, future plans, or the husbands' previously expressed opposition — that may be obviated by discussion prior to the abortion." He added some exceptions: "These exceptions apply if a woman certifies that she has not notified her husband because she believes [FN4] that (1) he is not the father of the child, (2) he cannot be found after diligent effort, (3) the pregnancy is the result of a spousal sexual assault that has been reported to the authorities, or (4) she has reason to believe that notification is likely to result in the infliction of bodily injury upon her."
The Supreme Court ruled against Alito's position in a plurality decision, in which five justices ruled that a spousal notification requirement violated the woman's rights. Rehnquist's dissent quoted Judge Alito and expressed support for his reasoning.
  • A majority opinion in Planned Parenthood of Central New Jersey v. Farmer, 220 F.3d 127 (3rd Cir. 2000), [18] in which Judge Alito recognized that a New Jersey law banning intact dilation and extraction (commonly called "partial-birth abortion") was unconstititional in light of the then recent Supreme Court case of Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914, 120 S.Ct. 2597, 147 L.Ed.2d 743 (2000), which struck down a nearly identical law in Nebraska.
  • In 1995, voted to strike down an abortion restriction in a Pennsylvania law that required women seeking to use Medicaid funds to abort a pregnancy resulting from rape or incest to report the incident to law enforcement officials and identify the offender.
  • Ruled the Constitution does not afford protection to the unborn in a 1997 challenge to a New Jersey law that prevents parents from suing for damages on behalf of the wrongful death of a fetus.
[edit]

Federalism

[edit]

First Amendment

  • A majority opinion in Saxe v. State College Area School District, 240 F.3d 200 (3d Cir. 2001) [19], holding that the public school district's anti-harassment policy, which prohibited harassment based on sexual orientation among other criteria, was unconstitutionally overbroad and therefore violated First Amendment guarantees of free speech. Alito wrote: No court or legislature has ever suggested that unwelcome speech directed at another's 'values' may be prohibited under the rubric of anti-discrimination.
  • A dissenting opinion in Banks v. Beard, 399 F.3d 134 (3d Cir. 2005), arguing that the prison policy prohibiting inmates of a segregated unit from accessing news media or family photographs was not a violation of the First Amendment. Alito reasoned:[20]
[T]here is a "rational" relationship between that restriction and the legitimate penological objective of deterring misconduct. It is "rational" for corrections officials to think that inmates who are not in Level 2 will be deterred from engaging in serious misconduct because they do not want to be transferred to that unit and thus to be subjected to the restrictions that accompany that assignment. It is also "rational" for corrections officials to think that inmates who are in Level 2 will be deterred from engaging in serious misconduct while in that unit because they wish to be transferred out and thus to escape such restrictions.
  • A majority opinion in Child Evangelism Fellowship of N.J., Inc. v. Stafford Twp. Sch. Dist., 386 F.3d 514 (3d Cir. 2004) involving the Establishment Clause. The court found that a school district could not preclude an evangelical group from distributing its newsletters where the school district permitted other private groups to do the same.
  • A majority opinion in Blackhawk v. Pennsylvania, 381 F.3d 202 (3d Cir. 2004), involving the Free Exercise Clause. The case involved a Native American's ritual that used black bears. The state denied the plaintiff an exemption to a $200/year exotic wildlife dealer permit to keep the bears under the state's Game and Wildlife Code. The court found that the code invoked strict scrutiny. The majority found the code was "substantially" under-inclusive and did not satisfy strict scrutiny.
  • A majority opinion [21] in ACLU v. Schundler, 168 F.3d 92 (3d Cir. 1999), addressing the circumstances under which a government-sponsored holiday display may or may not contain religious symbols. The case held that a holiday display consisting solely of religious symbols was impermissible, but a mixed display including both secular and religious symbols was permissible if balanced in a generally secular context. The decision relied on a previous Supreme Court decision that had permitted such mixed displays. The ACLU had argued that a previous city display that was ruled unconstitutional because it lacked secular symbols colored the purpose of the new display.
  • A dissenting opinion in C.H. v. Oliva et al. (3rd Cir., 2000)[22] arguing that the removal and subsequent replacement in "a less conspicuous spot" of a kindergartener's religious themed poster was, at least potentially, a violation of his right to Free Expression
  • A unanimous opinion in Police v. City of Newark, 1999; [23] allowing Muslim police officers in Newark to keep their beards because "the Department makes exemptions from its policy for secular reasons and has not offered any substantial justification for refusing to provide similar treatment for officers who are required to wear beards for religious reasons."
  • A unanimous opinion in The Pitt News v. Pappert, 2004, [24] upholding the right of student newspapers to carry alcohol advertisements on First Amendment grounds. "If government were free to suppress disfavored speech by preventing potential speakers from being paid, there would not be much left of the First Amendment. "

Harassment and discrimination

  • A majority opinion in Williams v. Price, 343 F.3d 223 (3d Cir. 2003), [25] granting a writ of habeas corpus to a black state prisoner after state courts had refused to consider the testimony of a witness who stated that a juror had uttered derogatory remarks about blacks during an encounter in the courthouse after the conclusion of the trial.
  • A dissenting opinion in Sheridan v. Dupont, 74 F.3d 1439 (3d Cir. 1996)(en banc). [26]. Alito would have required a plaintiff to meet a higher standard of evidence to survive a motion for summary judgment in a sex discrimination case, agreeing with a ruling by the 5th Circuit. Alito earlier wrote the majority opinion when the case was heard before a three-judge panel, [27] expressing a preference for the 5th Circuit's reasoning, but ruling according to 3rd Circuit precedent.
  • A dissenting opinion in Bray v. Marriott Hotels, 110 F.3d 986 (3d Cir. 1997), [28] arguing that, when a Marriott housekeeping manager sued Marriott over being allegedly denied promotion on the basis of race, summary judgment in favor of the defendant was appropriate because the plaintiff had not presented enough evidence to allow a reasonable jury to conclude that every one of the reasons Mariott offered for having promoted someone else was a mere pretext. The majority responded that finding in favor of Marriott would have protected racist employers by “immuniz[ing] an employer from the reach of Title VII if the employer’s belief that it had selected the ‘best’ candidate was the result of conscious racial bias.”
[edit]

 

Other case decisions

  • A majority opinion in Fatin v. INS, 12 F.3d 1233 (3d Cir. 1993), rejecting an Iranian woman's petition for review of a deportation ruling and denying her asylum in the U.S. in spite of her gender and feminist ideas and the human rights issues in her home country. The opinion did establish, however, that women in slightly different situations might be able to establish an asylum claim if they would absolutely refuse to wear Islamic dress and would face death as a result.
  • A majority opinion in Shore Regional High School Board of Education v. P.S., 381 F.3d 194 (3d Cir. 2004) [29], reinstating an administrative law judge's ruling in favor of parents who claimed the school system's failure to protect their child from bullying justified their placing him in a different high school.
  • A dissenting opinion in Homar v. Gilbert, 89 F.3d 1009 (3d Cir. 1996), arguing that a state university need not hold a hearing before suspending a campus policeman without pay after he had been arrested on drug charges. The Supreme Court later agreed with Alito.
  • A majority opinion in Southco, Inc. v. Kanebridge Corp., 390 F.3d 276 (3d Cir. 2004), [30] a copyright case discussing the issue of originality. Alito held that "the creative spark... utterly lacking in [a part's numbering system, and thus] these numbers are examples of works that fall short of the minimal level of creativity required for copyright protection."
  • A majority opinion in United States v. Lee, 359 F.3d 194 (3rd Cir. 2004). Alito rejected a defendant's argument that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated by the introduction into evidence of a videotape recording of a meeting with an informant who consented to the videotaping.
  • In a dissent to Doe v. Groody, Alito argued that qualified immunity should have protected police officers from a finding of having violated constitutional rights when they strip-searched a mother and her ten-year-old daughter while carrying out a search warrant that authorized the search of a residence. The mother and daughter were not referred to in the warrant, although the affidavit with the warrant requested permission to "search all occupants of the residence and their belongings". The court's opinion found that the warrant did not grant such permission, arguing that references to the affidavit in the Warrant were specific and the omission of the language in question from the warrant was not found to be the result of an error, clerical or otherwise.[31]
[edit]

Conflict of interest question

On a questionnaire for the Senate Judiciary Committee in his court-of-appeals confirmation process in 1990, Alito said he would avoid a conflict of interest by not voting on cases involving First Federal Savings & Loan of Rochester, NY, and two investment firms, Smith Barney and Vanguard Group, because he held accounts with them. However, in 2002, Alito upheld a lower court's dismissal of a lawsuit filed against multiple investment company defendants, including Vanguard Group. When notified of the situation, Alito denied doing anything improper but recused himself from further involvement in the case.

On November 10, Judge Alito wrote Senator Specter, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, explaining his participation in the case [32]. He said that when he had originally listed Vanguard and Smith Barney in 1990, "my intention was to state that I would never knowingly hear a case where a conflict of interest existed. [...] As my service continued, I realized that I had been unduly restrictive."

[edit]

Related Documents

  • Response to a Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire [33](Nov. 30 2005) (PDF), (Appendix1 Appendix2 Appendix3 Appendix4)
  • ‘Personal Qualifications Statement’ when applying to be an Assistant Attorney General under Pres. Ronald Reagan. [34] (Nov. 15, 1985)
  • Legal Memo written as Deputy Asst. Attorney General to the OMB’s General Counsel regarding OMB authority of FDIC funds. [35] (1986) (PDF)
  • House Committee on the Judiciary testimony regarding unpublished court opinions opinions. [36](1990) (PDF)
  • 2004 Financial Disclosure [37]
  • 2003 Financial Disclosure [38]
[edit]

Additional Information

Those who compare his ideology to that of conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia have nicknamed him "Scalito" (a portmanteau of "Scalia" and "Alito" that appears to have originated in a 1992 National Law Journal article). Philadelphia journalist Shannon P. Duffy claims to have coined the nickname. [39] The National Italian American Foundation, a bipartisan organization that has supported Nancy Pelosi [40], has stated the use of the "Scalito" nickname "marginalizes [Alito's] outstanding record."[41]

If confirmed by the Senate, Alito would be the eleventh Catholic to serve on the Supreme Court (the others being Roger Taney, Edward Douglass White, Joseph McKenna, Pierce Butler, Frank Murphy, William J. Brennan, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, and John Roberts) and the fifth on the current Court (along with Chief Justice Roberts and Associate Justices Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas), creating the first majority-Catholic Supreme Court in history, and together with the two Jewish justices (Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer), a court with the most religious minorities (7 of 9 justices). See also: demographics of the Supreme Court of the United States.

He is a member in good standing of the Federalist Society, a group of conservatives and libertarians dedicated to reforming the current legal order.[42]

[edit]

Notes

  1. ^  "Alito joined conservative alumni group", Daily Princetonian, November 18, 2005
  2. ^  "Alito needs to shed his CAP", Daily Princetonian, November 22, 2005
  3. ^  "Alito has a record of steady conservatism, reputation for civility", Chicago Tribune, October 31, 2005
  4. ^  "The appeals court judge is a contender", Philadelphia Inquirer, July 3, 2005
[edit]

 

References

[edit]

 

External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related to:
Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to:

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Sandra Day O'Connor was born on March 26, 1930 in El Paso, Texas. She grew up on her family's 198,000 acre cattle ranch. In 1952, she graduated from Stanford Law School and married fellow law student John O'Connor. The O'Connors settled in Phoenix, Arizona.

O'Connor served as an Arizona assistant attorney general from 1965 to 1969, when she was appointed to a vacancy in the Arizona Senate. In 1974, she ran successfully for trial judge, a position she held until she was appointed to the Arizona Court of Appeals in 1979. Eighteen months later, on July 7, 1981 President Ronald Reagan nominated her to the Supreme Court. In September 1981, Sandra Day O'Connor became the Court's 102nd justice and its first female member.

Her votes are generally conservative, but she frequently surprises observers with her political independence. A quietly determined woman who has blazed new trails for her sex, Sandra Day O'Connor has become a role model for Americans of both sexes and all ages.

During the final action of the Supreme Court to resolve the 2000 Presidential election, Justice O'Connor sided with the majority in blocking the hand recount of votes in the state of Florida.

In their conclusion the majority stated that, "None are more conscious of the vital limits on judicial authority than are the members of this court, and none stand more in admiration of the Constitution's design to leave the selection of the President to the people, through their legislatures, and to the political sphere. When contending parties invoke the process of the courts, however, it becomes our unsought responsibility to resolve the federal and constitutional issues the judicial system has been forced to confront."
Politics & Society

Samuel Alito: Another Nominee, Another Fight

by  

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA) welcomed Samuel Alito, right, to his Capitol Hill office. Reuters

Senators Weigh In

 

An anti-abortion demonstrator at the Supreme Court.

An anti-abortion demonstrator at the Supreme Court after President Bush nominated Samuel Alito as associate justice. Reuters

NPR.org, October 31, 2005 · The nomination of Samuel Alito, a proven conservative with a track record of opposing abortion, to the Supreme Court helps President Bush regain some of the political capital he lost amid the failed Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers. But the President will almost surely have to spend some of it pushing Alito's nomination through the Senate.

That's because the nomination is anything but a slam dunk with social moderates -- especially moderate Republicans -- many of whom oppose limits on abortion. And it's sure to rile up Democrats worried that the nominee's swing vote could undo decades of legal precedent on everything from abortion to affirmative action.

The battle has already begun for the minds of those in the political middle. It hinges on which side can successfully characterize the 15 years Alito has spent as an appellate court judge in the 3rd District. Liberals will portray him as a constitutional ideologue akin to Justice Antonin Scalia (the origin of his nickname, "Scalito") and unwilling to accept court precedents on controversial issues like abortion. Conservatives will describe him as a thoughtful judicial scholar "who considers the legal merits carefully and applies the law in a principled fashion," as President Bush said when he announced Alito's nomination on Monday.

Liberal groups are promising to wage a massive campaign to defeat the nomination. "This is going to be the most important, most controversial Supreme Court confirmation battle since Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas," said Ralph Neas, chief executive of People for the American Way.

But some conservatives are playing down the likelihood of a showdown. "I don't think we'll see an enormous political battle," said David Frum, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, who believes Alito's impressive credentials and judicial track record will win ample support among moderates in the end. Frum compared the Alito nomination to President Clinton's choice of Justice Stephen Breyer. Despite Breyer's opposing views, many conservatives see him as possessing a keen judicial mind that make him an "ornament" to the American legal system.

For their part, conservative legal scholars point to Alito's record in cases such as the Fraternal Order of Police v. City of Newark. In that case, Alito sided with a Muslim police officer who felt his religious freedom was being squelched by a police department requirement that he shave. In a separate decision, Alito backed a decision allowing a student group to advertise beer sales in their newspaper. "Sam Alito came down on the side of the First Amendment," said Pepperdine University law professor Douglas Kmeic, "even though, as a father of a college and a high school student, he would have been perfectly happy having those ads out of the newspaper."

Kmiec said Alito is "not an ideologue" and likened him to retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Both are "always careful to decide the specific case in front of them," he said.

That, of course, is not the view of Alito's opponents. They are likely to focus first on his long track record of opposing abortion rights, such as a 1991 opinion in which he favored a law requiring women seeking an abortion to notify their spouses. In addition, some of his opponents believe the key to gaining traction in the fight will be to underscore the breadth of Alito's conservatism, including a broad range of his decisions on religious freedom, privacy rights and women's rights issues. "He has an extensive track record of employment decisions to undermine women's rights in the workplace," said Marcia Greenberger, co-president of the National Women's Law Center, which lobbies for women's legal rights on issues including abortion.

She and others have already begun laying out a strategy to thwart Alito's confirmation, in part, via a multi-million-dollar media blitz that will hammer hard on two key points. "The first step is to make sure that the American public knows about Judge Alito's record, said Greenberger. "The second step is to make sure the American public understands that this is for the Sandra Day O'Connor seat."

O'Connor, who has agreed to remain on the court until a new justice has been confirmed, was the swing vote on an often evenly split Supreme Court. Even now, in a pending case involving parental notification of minors seeking abortion, O'Connor's swing vote will likely come before a new nominee is confirmed early next year. So whoever replaces her will have an unusually powerful role in deciding the rule of law.

But if Republicans unite behind this nomination, Democrats have little chance of winning a straight up-or-down vote on the Senate floor, where Republicans hold a 55-to-44 vote majority (with one independent). Both sides are expected to focus their efforts on convincing a smattering of moderate Republicans, who generally favor abortion rights. "These people will likely determine the fate of Alito's nomination," said Michael Gerhardt, a law professor at the University of North Carolina. He expects moderates like Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter will be "put very much on the hot seat" to vote against Alito's confirmation.

Meanwhile, backed by what is expected to be unflinching support from President Bush's conservative base, the White House has already begun its campaign to portray Alito as a man of "keen intellect, impartiality and temperament" who is "both tough and fair," according to a posting on the White House Web site. Talking points sent to his backers even offer a retort to questions about Alito being a white male. It says questions of race and gender are "irrelevant."

If such a view prevails, Democrats may have no other option than to attempt to block the nomination by staging a filibuster, which requires only 41 votes to prevent an up-or-down confirmation vote. That, in turn, could prompt Republicans to vote for the so-called "nuclear option," doing away with filibusters entirely and prompting a dreaded legislative showdown that could shut down the Senate.

Even before the official announcement of Alito's nomination, Sen. Specter said he was "very worried" about just that scenario playing out over the abortion issue. And by Monday morning, Specter had promised abortion would be "among one of the first items Judge Alito and I will discuss."

Other Republicans are more sanguine about Alito's prospects. "This is a grand slam for conservatives," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice. "He's going to have opposition, but he will be confirmed without any difficulty."

 
 
 
Supreme Court:
Likely Replacement Candidates

 

Religion

Alito Could Be 5th Catholic on Current Supreme Court

Published: November 1, 2005
WASHINGTON, Oct. 31 - If Samuel A. Alito Jr., President Bush's newest choice to succeed Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, is confirmed, he will become the fifth Roman Catholic on the court.

A Catholic majority on the nine-member court would be a significant historical shift. Until 1988, there had been no more than two Catholic justices at once. And for most of the court's history, there was typically only a single Catholic.

Skip to next paragraph

Go to Complete Coverage


Multimedia
Interactive Feature

The Nomination
Todd S. Purdum of The Times analyzes President Bush's choice for the Supreme Court, Samuel A. Alito Jr. Also, video of the announcement.

THE ANNOUNCEMENT
Text:
Bush | Alito

"This would add a whole new meaning to the Catholic rite of confirmation," said Barbara A. Perry, a Supreme Court expert at Sweet Briar College in Virginia. "This would mean that the religion factor no longer matters."

At least not in the same way it once did. Dr. Perry and other experts say that Judge Alito's selection after the withdrawal of Harriet E. Miers, an evangelical Christian, suggests that religious affiliation means less now than does a discernible track record on social issues.

Evangelicals recently lobbied for representation on the Supreme Court in the same way that Catholic and Jewish court watchers once did. (There are now two Jewish justices.) But religious conservatives largely rejected Ms. Miers because they said she had no clearly articulated stance on abortion.

Many of the same conservatives who publicly challenged Ms. Miers's conservative bona fides had accused Democrats of trying to keep judges off the bench because of their religion.

Earlier this year, for example, some conservatives said that any discussion of the religion of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. should be off limits in his confirmation process, and that questions about his views amounted to an unconstitutional "religious test" of his faith as a Roman Catholic.

Advocates on both sides know that historically, justices' private religious beliefs have not necessarily directed the way they vote. Judge Alito passes conservative muster because his record is closer to that of two conservative justices, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, than to that of the more moderate Anthony M. Kennedy, all three of whom are Catholic.

Justice William J. Brennan Jr., appointed in 1956 by President Eisenhower to fill the traditional "Catholic seat," voted with the majority in the Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion and was a strong supporter of abortion rights throughout his life.

Possible Nominees to the Supreme Court

The Washington Post
Friday, July 1, 2005; 11:12 AM

Here is a list of potential nominees for the Supreme Court:

Samuel A. Alito, Jr.

Samuel A. Alito, Jr., 55, is a judge on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit.

 
                                                                                                 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Nominated by President George H. W. Bush to the court in 1990, Alito was educated at Princeton University and Yale Law School. His work experience includes stints as assistant to the Solicitor General and deputy assistant to the Attorney General during the Reagan Administration, and as U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey.

Alito has voted to uphold regulations on abortion, notably as the lone dissenter in a 1991 case in which the 3rd Circuit struck down a Pennsylvania law's requirement that women tell their husbands before having an abortion. The three-judge panel preserved most elements of the abortion control law, including a 24-hour waiting period and a requirement that minors notify their parents. But Alito argued in his dissent that the spousal notification provision did not impose an "undue burden" and also should have been upheld.

In other rulings, Alito wrote for the majority in 1997 in finding that Jersey City officials did not violate the Constitution with a holiday display that included a creche, a menorah and secular symbols of the Christmas season. In 1999, he and his colleagues found that a Newark policy that allowed medical, but not religious, exemptions to a ban on police officers having beards violated the First Amendment.

-- Christopher Lee

Janice Rogers Brown

Janice Rogers Brown, 56, was confirmed last month to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. For nine years before that, she was a California Supreme Court justice.

Janice Rogers Brown
Janice Rogers Brown

Brown was born in Greenville, Ala., and educated at California State University at Sacramento and the University of California at Los Angeles School of Law. She is a self-described conservative who as a young single mother once called herself so leftist as to be almost Maoist. She was legal affairs secretary for California Gov. Pete Wilson (R) before joining the California Court of Appeals in 1994.

 

As a judge, she has written sharp opinions that opposed affirmative action, that supported a state law requiring girls younger than 18 to notify their parents before getting an abortion, and that advocated using stun guns in a courtroom to control an unruly defendant. She has strongly supported property rights and describes herself as someone who looks to the intent of the framers of the Constitution when making decisions. Some have criticized her for writing dissents and opinions that personally attack other justices.

Brown has attracted as much attention for her speeches as for her legal decisions. In recent years, she has described New Deal legal precedents as "the triumph of our socialist revolution," and two months ago, she told a Connecticut group of Catholic legal professionals that "there seems to have been no time since the Civil War that this country was so bitterly divided." She also said that "these are perilous times for people of faith" and that there's a social cost to pay "if you are a person of faith who stands up for what you believe in and say those things out loud."

Brown grew up in the segregated South, where her family refused to enter restaurants or theaters with separate entrances for black customers. Before moving to Washington, she lived in a gated community in the foothills of the Sierra Nevadas.

-- Marc Kaufman

Edith Brown Clement


 

Edith Brown Clement, 57, is a judge on the New Orleans-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.

Judge Edith Brown Clement
Judge Edith Brown Clement

Clement was nominated by President George H.W. Bush to serve as a judge on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana in 1991 and was elevated to her current post by the current President Bush in 2001.

 

Clement, a graduate of the University of Alabama and Tulane University Law School, worked as a lawyer in private practice in New Orleans for 16 years before beginning her tenure on the federal bench. She specialized in civil litigation involving maritime law, representing oil companies, insurance companies and the marine services industry in cases before federal courts. She is a member of the Federalist Society, an influential conservative legal organization.

As a district judge, Clement presided over such high-profile cases as the 2000 trials of former Louisiana governor Edwin W. Edwards (D) and former state insurance commissioner Jim Brown (D) on fraud charges. Edwards was acquitted; Brown was convicted of lying to the FBI and sentenced to six months in prison.

Lawyers who know Clement or have tried cases before her describe her as a judicial conservative who leans toward the defense in civil cases, and as a no-nonsense judge who is strict about deadlines and insists on professionalism from lawyers.

Analysts say Clement has not attracted attention for her judicial opinions, so it is unclear which of her decisions, if any, might become the focus of a confirmation battle.

-- Christopher Lee

John Cornyn

Sen. John Cornyn, 53, is the junior senator from Texas, elected in 2002.

Since his election, Cornyn -- nicknamed "Johnny Boy" by Bush -- has been an outspoken proponent of the president's administration and the conservative branch of the GOP. But prior to arriving in Washington, Cornyn's reputation as Texas Attorney General and as a Texas Supreme Court justice was that of a moderate Republican.

 

His seven-year tenure on the court was characterized by decisions favoring business and limiting government control. But he also wrote the majority decision in 1995 upholding Texas' so-called Robin Hood school finance law in which wealthier school districts share money with poorer ones, a plan that Republicans have been trying to abolish since.

 

During his four years as state attorney general, Cornyn angered some local Republicans for trying, unsuccessfully, to modify a ruling by a previous attorney general that eliminated affirmation action programs at Texas colleges. He sued auto and home insurance firms for underpaying claims and for deceptive trade practices and prosecuted unscrupulous nursing home operators, as well as appeared before the U. S. Supreme Court to defend a small Texas school district that broadcast student-led prayer before football games. The court ruled against the school-sponsored practice.

In the Senate, Cornyn, 53, has led efforts to defend Bush's judicial nominees and to fight filibusters of nominees, writing National Review articles that label opponents as "liberal special interest groups" engaged in "vicious politics." He spearheaded the push to adopt constitutional amendments banning gay marriage and flag-burning and favors school vouchers, prayer in public schools, extending the Bush-initiated tax cuts beyond 2010 and privatizing Social Security. He opposes abortion and partial birth abortions except when a woman's life is endangered.

-- Sylvia Moreno

Emilio M. Garza


Emilio M. Garza, 57, is a judge for U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit and has been on the short list for a Supreme Court nomination before.

Justice Department officials interviewed Garza in 1991, when he was among a handful of candidates being considered by President George H. W. Bush to succeed Justice Thurgood Marshall. But Garza then had only three years of experience on the federal bench and his views on many issues were unknown. Bush nominated Clarence Thomas instead.

 

Garza, who will turn 58 in August, would make history as the first Hispanic ever nominated to the high court.

The former Marine captain earned bachelor's and master's degrees from the University of Notre Dame and graduated from the University of Texas School of Law. He practiced law in his native San Antonio for 11 years and served as a state district judge for a year before President Reagan nominated him to the U.S. District Court in 1988. Three years later Bush elevated him to the 5th Circuit.

Since then Garza has developed a reliably conservative judicial record that includes criticism of the Roe V. Wade abortion decision of 1973. In 1997, Garza sided with the majority in upholding a lower court decision that struck down parts of a Louisiana law requiring parents to be notified when a minor child seeks an abortion. In his concurring opinion, however, he expressed doubts about whether Roe v. Wade was well-grounded in the Constitution.

"[I]n the absence of governing constitutional text, I believe that ontological issues such as abortion are more properly decided in the political and legislative arenas," Garza wrote. ". . . . [I]t is unclear to me that the [Supreme] Court itself still believes that abortion is a 'fundamental right' under the Fourteenth Amendment. . . ."

-Christopher Lee

Alberto R. Gonzales

Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, 49, has less time on the bench than the other likely Supreme Court candidates but has one crucial advantage: the close friendship of President Bush.

Gonzales grew up as the son of impoverished Mexican immigrants and went on to graduate from Harvard University law school. Bush, then the governor of Texas, hired him as his general counsel and later appointed him to the Texas Supreme Court. Bush brought Gonzales to Washington as his White House counsel in 2001.

The Senate narrowly approved Gonzales as attorney general in February after he faced sharp criticism from Democrats over the role he played in approving controversial detention and antiterrorism policies.

Yet legal experts say that the strongest opposition to Gonzales as a Supreme Court candidate would likely come from the right, due primarily to positions he has taken on issues like abortion and affirmative action.

While on the bench in Texas, Gonzales sided with a majority in a 2000 case allowing an unidentified 17-year-old girl to obtain an abortion without notifying her parents, finding that she qualified for an exception to that state's parental notification law. In a concurring opinion, Gonzales said that to side with dissenters in the case would amount to "an unconscionable act of judicial activism."

Gonzales also testified at his attorney general confirmation hearing earlier this year that he recognized the Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion as "the law of the land."

Advisors close to the White House have said that Bush likes the idea that Gonzales would be the first Hispanic justice. (Benjamin Nathan Cardozo, a justice in the 1930s, was of Portuguese and Jewish descent.)

-- Dan Eggen

Edith Hollan Jones


Edith Hollan Jones, 56, has been a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit in New Orleans since 1985, having been nominated by President Ronald Reagan.

Jones was born in Philadelphia. She graduated from Cornell University in 1971 and from the University of Texas Law School in 1974. She was in private practice in Houston for 11 years and specialized in bankruptcy law.

Known as a strong and outspoken conservative, she has written opinions that called into question the reasoning behind the Roe v. Wade abortion ruling, has been an advocate for speeding up death penalty executions, and is a vocal proponent of "moral values." She also wrote a 1997 opinion throwing out a federal ban on the possession of machine guns and has been an advocate for toughening bankruptcy laws.

In a recent interview with the American Enterprise Institute, she bemoaned the Senate treatment of several controversial appeals court nominees. "Nominees are accused very unfairly of things that they didn't do," she said. "For someone like Judge [Charles W.] Pickering to be called a racist is a vile lie. For someone like Judge [William] Pryor to be attacked on the basis that he is a Catholic and therefore cannot judge cases fairly strikes at the heart of the notion of religious tolerance in our society. And the character assassination of Priscilla Owen reached unconscionable bounds."

-- Marc Kaufman

J. Michael Luttig

J. Michael Luttig, 51, has been a favorite in conservative legal circles for decades, going back to his clerkship for then-Judge Antonin Scalia on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in 1982-83.

 

A graduate of Washington and Lee University and the University of Virginia law school, Luttig also clerked for Chief Justice Warren E. Burger in 1983-84, practiced law in the private sector from 1985-1989, and then served in a variety of Justice Department positions during the first Bush administration, where his duties included helping current Justices Clarence Thomas and David H. Souter win Senate confirmation.

President George H.W. Bush appointed him to the Richmond-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in 1991, when Luttig was just 37 years old. Ever since, he has been spoken of as a likely choice for the Supreme Court should a Republican president have a chance to name him. His many supporters on the right, including ex-law clerks sprinkled throughout the Bush administration, think now is Luttig's time.

This has sometimes led him to clash with other members of the 4th Circuit, including fellow conservative J. Harvie Wilkinson, also thought of as a Supreme Court contender. In 2000, he dissented from a ruling by Wilkinson that upheld a Fish and Wildlife Service regulation limiting the killing of endangered wolves on private land. He also disagreed with Wilkinson in 2003, when he wrote a dissenting opinion that supported the Bush administration's position that it could designate and detain "enemy combatants" with little judicial scrutiny.

In 1998, he upheld Virginia's ban on the procedure known as a partial birth abortion -- but agreed to let it be struck down after the Supreme Court struck down a similar Nebraska law in 2000.

-- Charles Lane

Michael W. McConnell


 

Michael W. McConnell, 50, has been a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, based in Denver, since his appointment by President Bush in 2002.

 

Before then, he was mostly a legal academic, having served as a law professor at the University of Chicago from 1985-1996 and subsequently at the University of Utah.

 

McConnell's good standing with the legal professoriate helped him immeasurably during the confirmation process; more than 300 of his fellow professors, including many liberals, endorsed him for the bench.

An eclectic thinker who served both as a law clerk for the liberal icon Justice William Brennan and as an official in the Reagan administration, McConnell has expressed his opinions on a wide range of subjects, including a Wall Street Journal op-ed in December 2000 in which he expressed doubts about the legal reasoning of the Supreme Court's Bush v. Gore decision.

But his outspoken disagreement with Roe v. Wade has earned him the condemnation of liberal advocacy groups (though at his confirmation hearing he called it "settled law.") Conservatives like his writings favoring government "neutrality" toward religion.

As a judge, McConnell has upheld Congress's power to criminalize the possession of homemade child pornography; in a case soon to be reviewed by the court, he voted to prohibit enforcement of federal anti-drug laws against people who consume hallucinogenic tea as part of a religious ritual.

-- Charles Lane

John G. Roberts

Theodore B. Olson

Theodore B. Olson, 64, is the former Solicitor General and now an attorney in private practice in Washington at the firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher.

He has been with the firm since 1965 except for two forays into government, serving as President Bush's Solicitor General from 2001-2004 and as Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel for three years during President Ronald Reagan's first term.

He argued Bush's case before the Supreme Court that decided the outcome of the disputed 2000 presidential election.

 

His other cases have included representing Cheryl Hopwood, who argued that affirmative action in admissions at the University of Texas was a violation of the Constitution. In 1996, a federal appeals court agreed with Olson and Hopwood that the university's policy was unconstitutional. That same year, he represented the Virginia Military Institute before the Supreme Court against claims that the school's admissions policy discriminated against women and lost.

 

Olson was legal counsel to Reagan during the investigation of the Iran-contra affair. And he represented Jonathan Pollard, who was convicted of selling government secrets to Israel, in his failed bid for a reduction of his life sentence.

While President Bill Clinton was in office, Olson railed against the administration in the conservative American Spectator magazine, where he was a contributing writer and a member of its board of directors.

But his passion threatened his confirmation as solicitor general. During hearings, Democrats asked Olson if he played a role in the "Arkansas Project," an attempt by American Spectator to uncover scandals involving President Bill Clinton and his wife, Hillary. Olson said he did not, but a Spectator staff writer, David Brock, told the Judiciary Committee that Olson was directly involved. Olson was confirmed, but not until after an inquiry into charges that his testimony was untruthful.

--Darryl Fears

Larry D. Thompson
Larry D. Thompson, 59, is a senior vice president and general counsel for PepsiCo.

He was the deputy Attorney General--the No. 2 person at the Justice Department--for much of President Bush's first term.

 

During his tenure at Justice, he had daily involvement in the war on terror and headed the corporate crime task force that pursued prosecutions against Enron Corp., Worldcom Inc. and HealthSouth Corp.

 

He was one of the highest-ranking African Americans in the Bush administration and if appointed to the court, would be the third African American justice.

Thompson is a longtime acquaintance of Justice Thomas and was a member of the legal team that assisted Thomas during his confirmation hearings in 1991.

Around the same time, Thompson angered some civil rights groups when he wrote that certain black leaders "stressed . . . black people as victims" and ignored problems like their "lack of respect for the law, kids having children too soon and fathers who were not taking their responsibility seriously."

He is a graduate of the University of Michigan Law School, served as a U.S. Attorney in Georgia and practiced at the Atlanta firm of King & Spalding.

--Darryl Fears

J. Harvie Wilkinson

J. Harvie Wilkinson, 61, was appointed to the 4th Circuit by President Reagan in 1984.

Before his appointment he was the No. 2 official in the Justice Department's Civil Rights Office from 1982-1983.

Unlike most other leading candidates for the court, Wilkinson has not practiced law in the private sector; he has more experience in journalism and teaching.

Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson
Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson

From 1978-1982, he was the editorial page editor of the Virginian-Pilot in Norfolk, Virginia, and from 1973-1978, he was a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, where he received his own law degree before moving on to a clerkship for Justice Lewis F. Powell.

His paper trail is, accordingly, immense. He has written not only legal opinions, but also books, speeches and journal articles in which he sketches a self-consciously moderate conservative philosophy. A typical example was a 2003 Virginia Law Review article titled "Why Conservative Jurisprudence is Compassionate."

Powell, an old family friend, is a role model and mentor for Wilkinson, whose own gentle, courtly manners remind some of the late justice's demeanor.His rulings have included a 1987 opinion striking down a minority set-aside program for city contractors in Richmond and a 1996 opinion upholding the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy for homosexual service members.

<
John Roberts
Born January 27, 1955
Buffalo, New York

John Glover Roberts, Jr. (born January 27, 1955) is the seventeenth Chief Justice of the United States. Roberts previously was a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, spent 14 years in private law practice and held positions in Republican administrations in the U.S. Department of Justice and Office of the White House Counsel.

Contents

[edit]

Personal life, education, and memberships

Roberts was born in Buffalo, New York, on January 27, 1955, son of John G. Roberts and Rosemary Podrasky. His father was an executive with Bethlehem Steel. When Roberts was in second grade, his family moved to the affluent beachside town of Long Beach, Indiana. He grew up in a devoutly Roman Catholic, upper middle-class home along with three sisters: Kathy, Peggy and Barb.

Roberts graduated first in his high school class of 1973 from La Lumiere School, a Catholic boarding school in LaPorte, Indiana. He studied six years of Latin and some French, and was known for his devotion to his studies. He was also captain of his football team, where he referred to himself as a "slow-footed linebacker." He also wrestled, participated in choir and drama, co-edited the school newspaper, and served on the athletic council and the Executive Committee of the Student Council.

Following high school, Roberts entered Harvard University as a sophomore. Roberts spent his summers working in a steel mill to help pay for college. While a student at Harvard, he won the William Scott Ferguson award for his essay, Marxism and Bolshevism: Theory and Practice. He received his bachelor's degree summa cum laude in 1976. Roberts then attended Harvard Law School, where he served as managing editor of the Harvard Law Review and graduated magna cum laude in 1979.

Roberts is currently a member of the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers, the American Law Institute, the Edward Coke Appellate American Inn of Court and the National Legal Center for the Public Interest.[1] He serves on the Federal Appellate Rules Advisory Committee. Roberts's name is listed in the Federalist Society's 1997-1998 "Leadership Directory," though he has denied ever being a member.

Roberts is married to Jane (Sullivan) Roberts, a lawyer and former legal counsel for Feminists for Life. They live in the Washington, DC suburb of Bethesda, Maryland where they are members of a Roman Catholic parish led by noted conservative Msgr. Peter Vaghi. The Robertses adopted two infants in 2000: Josephine ("Josie") and Jack Roberts. Jack's dancing during Bush's White House introduction of his father brought the four-year-old international media attention. Josie and Jack attend a private Catholic school run by Opus Dei.

[edit]

Private Practice

After graduating from law school, Roberts served as a law clerk for Judge Henry Friendly on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals for one year. From 1980 to 1981, he served as a law clerk to then-Associate Justice William Rehnquist on the United States Supreme Court. From 1981 to 1982, he served in the Reagan administration as a Special Assistant to U.S. Attorney General William French Smith. From 1982 to 1986, Roberts served as Associate Counsel to the President under White House Counsel Fred Fielding .

Roberts entered private law practice in 1986 as an associate at the Washington, D.C.-based law firm of Hogan & Hartson, but left to serve in the first Bush administration as Principal Deputy Solicitor General, from 1989 to 1993. Roberts has argued 39 cases for the government before the Supreme Court, prevailing in 25 of them. He represented 18 states in United States v. Microsoft. In 1992, George H.W. Bush nominated Roberts to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, but no Senate vote was held, and Roberts's nomination expired when Bush left office after losing the 1992 presidential election. Roberts returned to Hogan & Hartson as a partner, and became the head of the firm's appellate practice. In this capacity, Roberts argued several cases before the Supreme Court:

Case Argued Decided Represented
First Options v. Kaplan [2], 514 U.S. 938 March 22, 1995 May 22, 1995 Respondent
Adams v. Robertson, 520 U.S. 83 January 14, 1997 March 3, 1997 Respondent
Alaska v. Native Village of Venetie Tribal Government [3], 522 U.S. 520 December 10, 1997 February 25, 1998 Petitioner
Feltner v. Columbia Pictures Television, Inc. [4], 534 U.S. 1127 January 21, 1998 March 31, 1998 Petitioner
NCAA v. Smith [5], 525 U.S. 459 January 20, 1999 February 23, 1999 Petitioner
Rice v. Cayetano [6], 528 U.S. 495 October 6, 1999 February 23, 2000 Respondent
Eastern Associated Coal Corp. v. Mine Workers [7], 531 U.S. 57 October 2, 2000 November 28, 2000 Petitioner
TrafFix Devices, Inc. v. Marketing Displays, Inc. [8], 532 U.S. 23 November 29, 2000 March 20, 2001 Petitioner
Toyota Motor Mfg v. Williams [9], 534 U.S. 184 November 7, 2001 January 8, 2002 Petitioner
Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency [10], 535 U.S. 302 January 7, 2002 April 23, 2002 Respondent
Rush Prudential HMO, Inc. v. Moran [11], 536 U.S. 355 January 16, 2002 June 20, 2002 Petitioner
Gonzaga University v. Doe [12], 536 U.S. 273 April 24, 2002 June 20, 2002 Petitioner
Barnhart v. Peabody Coal Co. [13], 537 U.S. 149 October 8, 2002 January 15, 2003 Respondent
Smith v. Doe [14], 538 U.S. 84 November 13, 2002 March 5, 2003 Petitioner
[edit]

U.S. Court of Appeals

George W. Bush nominated Roberts to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on May 9, 2001, but the nomination — along with 29 others — failed to make it out of the Democrat-controlled U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary. He was renominated on January 7, 2003, to replace James L. Buckley. His nomination was approved by the Judiciary Committee by a vote of 16 to three, with Senators Richard Durbin, Charles Schumer and Ted Kennedy opposing. However, he was approved by the Senate under unanimous consent and he received his commission on June 2, 2003.

At the time Roberts left private practice to join the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, he reported in a financial disclosure filing in 2005 that he earned a salary of $1,044,399, had many stocks (including pharmaceutical and technology investments, such as holdings in Pfizer and Procter & Gamble), and a one-eighth interest in a cottage in the village of Knocklong, County Limerick, Republic of Ireland, his wife's ancestral homeland, valued at $15,000 or less.[15]

[edit]

U.S. Supreme Court

[edit]

Nomination and confirmation

Main article: John Roberts Supreme Court nomination and hearings

On July 19, 2005, President Bush nominated Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court, to fill an anticipated vacancy which would be left by the announced retirement of Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Roberts was the first Supreme Court nominee since Stephen Breyer in 1994. Bush announced Roberts's nomination in a live, nationwide television broadcast from the East Room of the White House.

President Bush announcing his nomination of John Roberts for the position of Chief Justice.

President Bush announcing his nomination of John Roberts for the position of Chief Justice.

Following the September 3, 2005 death of Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, Bush withdrew Roberts's nomination as O'Connor's successor, and on September 6, announced of Roberts's new nomination to the position of Chief Justice. Bush asked the Senate to expedite Roberts's confirmation hearings in order to fill the vacancy by the beginning of the Supreme Court's session in early October. John Roberts follows in the footsteps of former Chief Justice Warren Burger who was also elevated to the position of Chief Justice directly from the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

On September 22 the Senate Judiciary Committee approved Roberts's nomination by a vote of 13-5, with Senators Ted Kennedy, Richard Durbin, Charles Schumer, Joe Biden and Dianne Feinstein the dissenting votes. Roberts was confirmed by the full Senate on September 29, passing by a margin of 78-22. All Republicans, 22 Democrats and the lone Independent voted for Roberts; 22 Democrats voted against him. Due to Republican control of the Senate, Roberts's approval was never truly in doubt, but the final vote tally in support of Roberts was higher than many on both sides had expected only a few weeks earlier. Reasons for the total included Roberts's performance during his confirmation hearings, private conversations senators had with Roberts in the days before the final vote, and a strategy by some Democrats in preparation for the upcoming confirmation battle over Sandra Day O'Connor's seat.

[edit]

Supreme Court Career

Roberts is sworn in as Chief Justice by Justice John Paul Stevens in the East Room of the White House, September 29, 2005.

Roberts is sworn in as Chief Justice by Justice John Paul Stevens in the East Room of the White House, September 29, 2005.

On September 29, just hours after his Senate confirmation, he took the Constitutional oath of office, which was administered by Associate Justice John Paul Stevens at the White House. He took the judicial oath provided for by the Judiciary Act of 1789 on October 3, 2005 at the U.S. Supreme Court building, prior to the first oral arguments of the 2005 term. At 50, Roberts is the youngest man to have become Chief Justice since John Marshall (that said, many Associate Justices, including Justices Scalia and Thomas, have joined the Court younger). John Roberts received more Senate votes supporting his nomination than any other nominee for Chief Justice in American history. Other nominees have received higher percentages of votes, but this is usually attributable to the fact that all opposing senators voted on this nomination while, in other chief justice votes, many in opposition simply did not vote or were not present when the vote took place. It was also traditional before the latter 20th century to approve many nominees by voice vote, in which the number in opposition was not noted.

Roberts presided over his first oral arguments on October 3, 2005, when the Court began its 2005-2006 session. He presided over oral arguments in separate cases involving labor law and a Kansas case on whether states may tax motor fuel sold on Indian reservations, interrupting periodically to ask questions or advise lawyers as to when their time was up. Ending a week's worth of idle speculation, Roberts opted to wear a plain black robe on his first day, eschewing the gold sleeve-bars added to the Chief Justice's robes by his predecessor.

[edit]

Jurisprudence

During Judiciary Committee hearings on his nomination to the circuit court, Roberts testified about his views on jurisprudence.[16]

[edit]

The Commerce Clause

[S]tarting with McCulloch v. Maryland, Chief Justice John Marshall gave a very broad and expansive reading to the powers of the Federal Government and explained that — and I don't remember the exact quote — but if the ends be legitimate, then any means chosen to achieve them are within the power of the Federal Government, and cases interpreting that, throughout the years, have come down. Certainly, by the time Lopez was decided, many of us had learned in law school that it was just sort of a formality to say that interstate commerce was affected and that cases weren't going to be thrown out that way. Lopez certainly breathed new life into the Commerce Clause. I think it remains to be seen, in subsequent decisions, how rigorous a showing, and in many cases, it is just a showing. It's not a question of an abstract fact, does this affect interstate commerce or not, but has this body, the Congress, demonstrated the impact on interstate commerce that drove them to legislate? That's a very important factor. It wasn't present in Lopez at all. I think the members of Congress had heard the same thing I had heard in law school, that this is unimportant — and they hadn't gone through the process of establishing a record in that case.[17]

Federalism

[S]imply because you have a problem that needs addressing, it’s not necessarily the case that Federal legislation is the best way to address it...The constitutional limitation doesn’t turn on whether it’s a good idea. There is not a ‘‘good idea’’ clause in the Constitution. It can be a bad idea, but certainly still satisfy the constitutional requirements.[18]

[edit]

Judicial activism and deference to legislatures

[T]he Supreme Court has, throughout its history, on many occasions described the deference that is due to legislative judgments. Justice Holmes described assessing the constitutionality of an act of Congress as the gravest duty that the Supreme Court is called upon to perform …[I]t’s a principle that is easily stated and needs to be observed in practice, as well as in theory. Now, the Court, of course, has the obligation, and has been recognized since Marbury v. Madison, to assess the constitutionality of acts of Congress, and when those acts are challenged, it is the obligation of the Court to say what the law is. The determination of when deference to legislative policy judgments goes too far and becomes abdication of the judicial responsibility, and when scrutiny of those judgments goes too far on the part of the judges and becomes what I think is properly called judicial activism, that is certainly the central dilemma of having an unelected, as you describe it correctly, undemocratic judiciary in a democratic republic.[19]

In referring to Brown v. Board that overturned school segregation: "The Court in that case, of course, overruled a prior decision. I don't think that constitutes judicial activism because obviously if the decision is wrong, it should be overruled. That's not activism. That's applying the law correctly."

Roe v. Wade

In his Senate testimony, Roberts acknowledged that, on the Circuit Court, he would have an obligation to follow precedents established by the Supreme Court, including the controversial decision invalidating many restrictions on the right to an abortion. He stated: "Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land… There is nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent, as well as Casey." [20] (See John Roberts Supreme Court nomination and hearings for speculation about Roberts's current views, concerns about these views raised in the hearings, and the potential impact they might have on his actions in the Supreme Court.)

[edit]

Judicial opinions

Roberts has authored 49 opinions in his two years in the D.C. Circuit but has elicited only two dissents on his decisions, and on the many other cases he has heard in that time, he has authored only three dissenting opinions of his own. Because of this short record, Roberts does not have an extensive case history from which a general approach to the Constitution can be determined, and he appears not to have publicly stated his views on the subject. He has even said that "I do not think beginning with an all-encompassing approach to constitutional interpretation is the best way to faithfully construe the document."[21] Cass Sunstein, a law professor at the University of Chicago argues that in general, Roberts appears to be a judicial minimalist, emphasizing precedent, as opposed to an originalism-oriented or rights-focused jurist. "Judge Roberts's opinions thus far are careful, lawyerly and narrow. They avoid broad pronouncements. They do not try to reorient the law."[22].

His past rulings have included the following issues:

[edit]

Fourth and Fifth Amendments

The D.C. Circuit case Hedgepeth v. Washington Metro Authority, 386 F.3d 1148, involved a twelve-year-old girl who was, according to the Washington Post, asked if she had any drugs in her possession, searched for drugs, taken into custody, handcuffed, driven to police headquarters, booked and fingerprinted because she violated a publicly-advertised zero tolerance "no eating" policy in a Washington D.C. metro station by eating a single french fry. Roberts wrote for a 3-0 panel affirming a district court decision that dismissed the girl's complaint, which was predicated on the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, specifically the claim that an adult would have only received a citation for the same offense, while children must be detained until parents are notified.

Roberts began his opinion by noting, "No one is very happy about the events that led to this litigation," and pointing out that the policies under which the girl was apprehended had since been changed. Because age discrimination is allowed under previous jurisprudence if there is any rational basis for it, only weak state interests were required to justify the policy. "Because parents and guardians play an essential role in that rehabilitative process, it is reasonable for the District to seek to ensure their participation, and the method chosen — detention until the parent is notified and retrieves the child — certainly does that, in a way issuing a citation might not." Roberts concluded that the age discrimination and detention in this case were constitutional, noting that "the question before us... is not whether these policies were a bad idea, but whether they violated the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution.", language reminiscent of Justice Potter Stewart's dissent in Griswold v. Connecticut, in which Justice Stewart wrote, "We are not asked in this case to say whether we think this law is unwise, or even asinine. We are asked to hold that it violates the United States Constitution. And that, I cannot do."

[edit]

Military tribunals

In Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, Roberts was part of a unanimous panel overturning the district court ruling and upholding military tribunals set up by the Bush administration for trying terrorism suspects known as enemy combatants. Circuit Judge A. Raymond Randolph, writing for the court, ruled that Hamdan, a driver for al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden [23], could be tried by a military court because

  1. the military commission had the approval of Congress;
  2. the Third Geneva Convention is a treaty between nations and as such it does not confer individual rights and remedies enforceable in U.S. courts;
  3. even if the Convention could be enforced in U.S. courts, it would not be of assistance to Hamdan at the time because, for a conflict such as the war against al-Qaeda (considered by the court as a separate war from that against Afghanistan itself) that is not between two countries, it guarantees only a certain standard of judicial procedure without speaking to the jurisdiction in which the prisoner must be tried.

The court held open the possibility of judicial review of the results of the military commission after the current proceedings have ended.[24]

[edit]

Environmental regulation

On the U.S. Court of Appeals, Roberts wrote a dissenting opinion regarding Rancho Viejo, LLC v. Norton, 323 F.3d 1062, a case involving the protection of a rare California toad under the Endangered Species Act. When the court denied a rehearing en banc, 334 F.3d 1158 (D.C. Cir. 2003), Roberts dissented, arguing that the original opinion was wrongly decided because he found it inconsistent with United States v. Lopez and United States v. Morrison in that it focused on the effects of the regulation, rather than the taking of the toads themselves, on interstate commerce. In Roberts's view, the Commerce Clause of the Constitution did not permit the government to regulate activity affecting what he called "a hapless toad" that "for reasons of its own, lives its entire life in California." He said that reviewing the case could allow the court "alternative grounds for sustaining application of the Act that may be more consistent with Supreme Court precedent."

[edit]

Bibliography of articles by John G. Roberts, Jr.

The University of Michigan Law Library (External Links, below) has compiled fulltext links to these articles and a number of briefs and arguments.

  • Developments in the Law – Zoning, "The Takings Clause," 91 Harv. L. Rev. 1462 (1978). (Section III of a longer article beginning on p. 1427)
  • Comment, "Contract Clause – Legislative Alteration of Private Pension Agreements: Allied Structural Steel Co. v. Spannaus," 92 Harv. L. Rev. 86 (1978). (Subsection C of a longer article beginning on p. 57)
  • New Rules and Old Pose Stumbling Blocks in High Court Cases, The Legal Times, February 26, 1990, co-authored with E. Barrett Prettyman, Jr.
  • Article III Limits on Statutory Standing, 42 Duke L. J. 1219 (1992-1993).
  • Riding the Coattails of the Solicitor General, The Legal Times, March 29, 1993.
  • The New Solicitor General and the Power of the Amicus, The Wall Street Journal, May 5, 1993.
  • The 1992-1993 Supreme Court, Public Interest Law Review 107 (1994).
  • Forfeitures: Does Innocence Matter?, New Jersey Law Journal, October 9, 1995.
  • Thoughts on Presenting an Effective Oral Argument, School Law in Review (1997). Link
  • The Bush Panel, 2003 BYU L. Rev. 62 (2003). (Part of a tribute to Rex. E. Lee beginning on p. 1. "The Bush Panel" contains a speech by Roberts.)
  • Oral Advocacy and the Re-emergence of a Supreme Court Bar, 30 J. Supr. Ct. Hist. 68 (2005).
[edit]

Sources

News articles

  • "Roberts Listed in Federalist Society '97-98 Directory". Washington Post. July 25, 2005. 14
  • "Appellate judge Roberts is Bush high-court pick." MSNBC. July 19, 2005. [25]
  • Argetsinger, Amy, and Jo Becker. "The nominee as a young pragmatist: under Reagan, Roberts tackled tough issues." Washington Post. July 22, 2005. [26]
  • Barbash, Fred, et al: "Bush to nominate Judge John G. Roberts Jr." Washington Post. July 19, 2005. [27]
  • Becker, Jo, and R. Jeffrey Smith. "Record of accomplishment—and some contradictions." Washington Post. July 20, 2005. [28]
  • Bumuller, Elisabeth, and David Stout: "President chooses conservative judge as nominee to court." New York Times. July 19, 2005. [29]
  • "Bush: Meeting with Roberts during recount wasn't political." Associated Press. July 23, 2005. [30]
  • Entous, Adam. "Bush picks conservative Roberts for Supreme Court." Reuters. July 19, 2005. [31]
  • Kallestad, Brent. "Roberts helped counsel Jeb Bush." Associated Press. July 21, 2005. [32]
  • Lane, Charles. "Federalist affiliation misstated: Roberts does not belong to group." Washington Post. July 21, 2005. [33]
  • Lane, Charles. "Short record as judge is under a microscope." Washington Post. July 21, 2005. [34]
  • Groppe, Maureen, and John Tuohy. "If you ask John where he's from, he says Indiana." Indianapolis Star. July 20, 2005. [35]
  • McFeatters, Ann. "John G. Roberts Jr. is Bush choice for Supreme Court." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. July 19, 2005. [36]
  • Riechmann, Deb. "Federal judge Roberts is Bush's choice." Associated Press. July 20, 2005. [37]
  • "Roberts: A smart, self-effacing 'Eagle Scout.'" Associated Press. July 20, 2005. [38]
  • "Who Is John G. Roberts Jr.?" ABC News. July 19, 2005. [39]
[edit]

Government/official biographies

  • "President announces Judge John Roberts as Supreme Court nominee." Office of the Press Secretary, Executive Office of the President. [40]
  • "Roberts, John G., Jr." Federal Judicial Center. [41]
  • "John G. Roberts biography." Office of Legal Policy, U.S. Department of Justice. [42]
  • "Biographical Sketches of the Judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit." United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. [43]
  • John G. Roberts Questionnaire for Appeals Court Confirmation Hearing (p. 297-339) and responses to Questions from Various Senators (p. 443-461) [44] (large PDF file)
[edit]

Other

  • Coffin, Shannen W. "Meet John Roberts: The President Makes the Best Choice." National Review Online. July 19, 2005. [45]
  • "Former Hogan & Hartson partner nominated for the U.S. Supreme Court." Hogan & Hartson, LLP. July 20, 2005. [46]
  • Goldman, Jerry. "John G. Roberts, Jr." Oyez. [47]
  • "John G. Roberts, Jr. Fact Sheet" La Lumiere School. [48]
  • "John G. Roberts federal campaign contributions." Newsmeat.com. July 19, 2005. [49]
  • "John G. Roberts Jr." DKosopedia. July 19, 2005. [50]
  • "Progress for America: Support for the Confirmation of John G. Roberts" [51]
  • "Report of the Alliance for Justice: Opposition to the Confirmation of John G. Roberts to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit." Alliance for Justice. [52] (PDF file)
[edit]

Notes

  1. ^  "Wexler: Bush's Supreme Court pick insulting to disenfranchised Florida voters." Office of Representative Robert Wexler. July 20, 2004. [53]
    Kallestad, Brent. "Roberts helped counsel Jeb Bush." Associated Press.
    July 21, 2005. [54].
    It is possible this will be a subject of inquiry during the Senate confirmation hearings.
  2. ^  "Roberts: A smart, self-effacing 'Eagle Scout.'" Associated Press. July 20, 2005. [55]
  3. ^  "Bush: Meeting with Roberts during recount wasn't political." Associated Press. July 23, 2005. [56]
  4. ^  Lane, Charles. "Federalist affiliation misstated: Roberts does not belong to group." Washington Post. July 21, 2005. [57]
    Although in the days immediately following his nomination Roberts was widely reported as being a member of the
    Federalist Society—by media outlets including CNN, the Los Angeles Times, the Legal Times, and the Washington Post—and he has spoken at Federalist Society events, Roberts subsequently stated that he never has paid the group's $50 membership fee, and does not recall ever having been a member, although the 1997–1998 directory lists him as a member of the steering committee.
[edit]

External links

Preceded by:
William H. Rehnquist
Chief Justice of the United States
September 29, 2005–present
Succeeded by:
Chief Justices of the United States of America
John Jay | John Rutledge | Oliver Ellsworth | John Marshall | Roger B. Taney | Salmon P. Chase | Morrison Waite | Melville Fuller | Edward Douglass White | William Howard Taft | Charles Evans Hughes | Harlan Fiske Stone | Fred Vinson | Earl Warren | Warren Burger | William Rehnquist | John Roberts
The Roberts Court Seal of the U.S. Supreme Court
John Glover Roberts, Jr. (2005 to present)
2005–present: J.P. Stevens | S.D. O'Connor | A. Scalia | A. Kennedy | D. Souter | C. Thomas | R.B. Ginsburg | S. Breyer
 
JOHN G ROBERTS New Supreme Court Justice.
Undated photo of John G Roberts

John G Roberts, 50, an appeals court judge for the DC circuit, graduated with top honours from Harvard College. He worked as a clerk for Chief Justice William Rehnquist before serving in the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George Bush, the current president's father.

In government and in private practice, he went on to earn a reputation as one of the best lawyers to argue before the Supreme Court.

Conservatives will be pleased by his record on abortion, the environment, and church-state issues.

He has argued that religious ceremonies could be part of high-school graduations, a stance the Supreme Court rejected by a vote of 5-4 in 1992.

He was more successful in arguing that government-funded doctors and clinics could not talk to patients about abortion. He has also taken stances against affirmative action.

George W Bush nominated him for his current position in 2003.

John G. Roberts Jr. (born in Buffalo, New York, 1955) is a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, having been nominated by President George W. Bush on May 9, 2001, and confirmed by the United States Senate on May 8, 2003.

Roberts graduated from Harvard College in 1976. Roberts receivied his Juris Doctorate from the Harvard Law School in 1979.

He was a law clerk for Henry Friendly, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 1979-1980, and for Associate Justice William Rehnquist, Supreme Court of the United States, 1980-1981. He then took a job as special assistant to William French Smith, the attorney general, U.S. Department of Justice, 1981-1982, before being appointed associate counsel to President Ronald Reagan, White House Counsel's Office, 1982-1986.

He entered private practice in 1986 as an associate at the Washington D.C. law firm of Hogan & Hartson, but left to serve from 1989-1993 as Principal Deputy Solicitor General, U.S. Department of Justice. He returned to Hogan and Harston in 1993 as a partner where he remained until he was appointed to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. In private practice and as Principal Deputy Solicitor General he has argued more than 30 cases in front of the United States Supreme Court.

Roberts has been mentioned frequently as being near the top of the list of potential nominees to the Supreme Court of the United States, should one of the current justices leave the Court during George W. Bush's presidency.

Saturday, July 2, 2005; Page A13

John G. Roberts, 50, is considered a GOP heavyweight amid the largely Democratic Washington legal establishment.

Roberts was appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in 2003 by President Bush. (He was also nominated by President George H.W. Bush but never received a Senate vote). He practiced law at Hogan & Hartson in the District from 1986 to 1989 and from 1993 to 2003.

   

From 1989 to 1993, he was the principal deputy solicitor general in the George H.W. Bush administration, helping formulate the administration's position in Supreme Court cases. In the Reagan administration, he was an aide to Attorney General William French Smith from 1981 to 1982 and an aide to White House counsel Fred Fielding from 1982 to 1986.

With his impeccable credentials -- Roberts attended Harvard College and Harvard Law School, clerked for then-Justice William H. Rehnquist Jr. on the Supreme Court and has argued frequently before the court -- the question marks about him have always been ideological. His GOP loyalties are undoubted, earning him the opposition of liberal advocacy groups, but he is not a "movement conservative," and some on the party's right doubt his commitment to their cause. His paper record is thin: As deputy solicitor general in 1990, he argued in favor of a government regulation that banned abortion-related counseling by federally funded family-planning programs. A line in his brief noted the Bush administration's belief that Roe v. Wade should be overruled.

On the D.C. Circuit, Roberts voted with two colleagues to uphold the arrest and detention of a 12-year-old girl for eating french fries on a Metro train, though his opinion noted, "No one is very happy about the events that led to this litigation." In another case, Roberts wrote a dissenting opinion that suggested Congress might lack the constitutional power to regulate the treatment of a certain species of wildlife.

-- Charles Lane

John G. Roberts

John G. Roberts, 50, sits on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. He was nominated in 2003 by President George W. Bush. (He was also nominated by the first President Bush, but never received a Senate vote). He has been a prominent GOP attorney in private practice in Washington and between 1989 and 1993 he was the Principal Deputy Solicitor General in the first Bush administration. During the Reagan administration, he served as an aide to Attorney General William French Smith from 1981-1982 and as a an aide to White House Counsel Fred Fielding from 1982-1986. Roberts attended Harvard College and Harvard Law School, clerked for Justice William H. Rehnquist on the Supreme Court and has argued frequently before the court.

Roberts' nomination to the appellate bench attracted support from both ends of the ideological spectrum. 

Some 146 members of the D.C. Bar signed a letter urging his confirmation, including officials from the Clinton administration. The letter stated: "He is one of the very best and most highly respected appellate lawyers in the nation, with a deserved reputation as a brilliant writer and oral advocate. He is also a wonderful professional colleague both because of his enormous skills and because of his unquestioned integrity and fair-mindedness."

Key Decisions and Writings:

Roberts is seen as a GOP heavyweight, but he's not seen as a "movement conservative" so some right-wing Republicans are skeptical of Roberts.
His paper record is thin: as Deputy Solicitor General in 1990, he argued in favor of a government regulation that banned abortion-related counseling by federally-funded family planning programs. A line in his brief noted the Bush administration's belief that Roe v. Wade should be overruled, and this has naturally concerned liberals.
As a judge on the D.C. Circuit, Roberts wrote a dissenting opinion that suggested Congress might lack the power under the Constitution's Commerce Clause to regulate the treatment of a certain species of wildlife.

Famous Person: SANDRA DAY O'CONNOR

 

Related Topics: Judicial System
Women's rights
Women in government
Work ethics
Grade Level: 4th/5th
Author: Blake Nichols

 

Table of Contents

Background

References

Objectives

Time Allotment

Resources Needed

Procedures

Assessments

 

 

Background:
On July 7, 1981, President Ronald Reagan nominated Sandra Day O'Connor to be the first woman in history for the position of Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. On September 22, 1981, Sandra Day O'Connor was officially confirmed to the Supreme Court with 91 votes of approval. She took the oath of office on September 26.
 

Sandra Day was born on March 26, 1930 in El Paso, Texas. Harry A. and Ada Mae Wilkey Day are her parents. Sandra grew up on her family's 155,000 acre Arizona ranch called the Lazy B. When Sandra was old enough to attend Elementary School, she was sent to live with her grandmother in El Paso. There Sandra received a better education than attending the small school close to her families ranch. Sandra graduated from Austin High School in Texas at the age of sixteen. Shortly after High School she attended Stanford University. In 1950, Miss Day received a degree from Stanford in Economics. Two years later, she received her L.L.B. degree, graduating third in a class of 102 students. One of the two men who scored higher than Sandra is William H. Rehquist who became Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.
Six months after Sandra's graduation, she married a Law student named John Jay O'Connor, whom she met while working on the Stanford Law Review. They had 200 guests attend the wedding at the Lazy B ranch.
 

Mrs. O'Connor promptly began looking for a job, but encountered much sex discrimination in the work force. Even though she was one of the highest qualified for the jobs, the firms were not prepared for a female worker and they did not want to change their policies. Eventually Sandra received a job working for Gibson, Dunn and Cruther in Los Angeles as a legal secretary. Amazingly enough, one of the firm's partners was future United States Attorney General, William French Smith who would one day advise the President of the United States to appoint Sandra Day O'Connor to the Supreme Court.
 

In 1953 John was drafted into the army during the Korean War, and stationed in Frankfurt, West Germany. There Sandra was hired as a civilian lawyer for the Quartermaster Corps. Three years later John's tour of duty was over.
 

In December, 1956 the O'Connors built a new house in Phoenix, Arizona. Phoenix is where Sandra's life changed dramatically. On October 8, 1957, she gave birth to her first child Scott Hampton O'Connor. Within the next five years, she had two more sons, Brian and Jay. During Sandra's child rearing years, she performed different part-time jobs as a lawyer. She would take cases that dealt with landlord-tenant, domestics, and even people who could not afford lawyers. In 1960 she served as a county precinct committee member for the Republican party, and in 1962 to 1965 as legislative district chairman. In 1965, when her youngest son turned three, Sandra reentered the legal profession.
 

Sandra Day O'Connor was appointed State Senator in 1969 and was reelected to two two-year terms in Arizona. She was elected Senate Majority Leader in 1972. In 1979, she was elected judge of the Maricopa County Superior Court, Phoenix, Arizona for four years. She was appointed to the Arizona Court of Appeals by Governor Bruce Babbitt from 1979 to 1981. And next, Sandra Day O'Connor was nominated by President Ronald Reagan as Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court.
 


Click image for larger view

This is the life of the first woman to sit on the Supreme Court. Sandra Day O'Connor found her way through hard times of sexual discrimination and eventually obtained some of her goals. Sandra supports her Republican beliefs which remain moderate to conservative. The most important contribution to women that Sandra offers is the fact that she is a strong, competent, qualified and respected Justice on the Supreme Court. Sandra Day O'Connor has blazed a trail for women of all ages.

You are at: http://www.NelsonIdeas.com/judge-sandra-oconnor/supreme-court-retires.html  1ardnas

  ud on  08/29/2009 04:20 PM -0500

Click image for larger view
Biographical Data
Birth, Residence, and Family
Born March 26, 1930 in El Paso, Texas, daughter of Harry A. Day and Ada Mae Wilkey Day. Married John Jay O'Connor III in 1952. Three sons, Scott, Brian, and Jay.
Education
Stanford University, B.A., 1950, magna cum laude; LL.B., 1952, Order of the Coif, Board of Editors, Stanford Law Review.
Judicial Offices
Nominated by President Reagan as Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court on July 7, 1981; confirmed by the United States Senate on September 22, 1981; and took oath of office on September 25, 1981.
Appointed to the Arizona Court of Appeals by Governor Bruce Babbitt and served from 1979 to 1981.
Elected judge of the Maricopa County Superior Court, Phoenix, Arizona. and served from 1975 to 1979.
Legislative Offices
Appointed State Senator in 1969 and subsequently reelected to two two-year terms, serving in the Arizona State Senate from 1969 to 1975; elected Senate Majority Leader in 1972: served as Chairman of the State, County, and Municipal Affairs Committee in 1972 and 1973; also served on the Legislative Council, on the Probate Code Commission, and on the Arizona Advisory Council on Intergovernmental Relations.
Legal Positions
Deputy County Attorney, San Mateo County, California, 1952 to 1953; Civilian Attorney for Quartermaster Market Center, Frankfurt, Germany, 1954 to 1957; private practice of law in Maryvale, Arizona, 1958 to 1960; Assistant Attorney General, Arizona, 1965 to 1969.
Civic Activities
Member, National Board of the Smithsonian Associates, 1981 to present; President, member, Board of Trustees, The Heard Museum, 1968 to 1974, 1976 to 1981; member, Salvation Army Advisory Board, 1975 to 1981; member, Vice President, Soroptimist Club of Phoenix, 1978 to 1981; member, Board of Visitors, Arizona State University Law School, 1981; member, Liaison Committee on Medical Education, 1981; member, Advisory Board, and Vice President, National Conference of Christians and Jews, Maricopa County, 1977 to 1981; member, Board of Trustees, Stanford University, 1976 to 1981; member, Board of Directors, and Secretary, Arizona Academy, 1969 to 1975; member, Board of Junior Achievement, Arizona, 1975 to 1979; member, Board of Directors, Phoenix Historical Society, 1974 to 1978.
Other Activities
Member, Anglo-American Exchange, 1980; Chairman, Arizona Supreme Court Committee to Reorganize Lower Courts, 1974-75; Chairman, Maricopa County Bar Association Lawyer Referral Service, 1960-62; former member, State Bar of Arizona Committees on Legal Aid, Public Relations, Lower Court Reorganization, Continuing Legal Education; Chairman, Maricopa County Juvenile Detention Home Visiting Board, 1963-64; Chairman, Maricopa County Superior Court Judges' Training and Education Committee, 1977-79; member, National Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services, 1974-76; member, Arizona State Personnel Commission, 1968-69; Vice Chairman, Arizona Select Law Enforcement Review Commission, 1979-80; member, Maricopa County Board of Adjustments and Appeals, 1963-64; member, Arizona Criminal Code Commission, 1974-76.
Memberships in Professional Organizations
American Bar Association, State Bar of Arizona, State Bar of California, Maricopa County Bar Association, Arizona Judges' Association, National Association of Women Judges, Arizona Women Lawyers' Association.

 ASAW 2/3 Sponsored Links



BBB 1/2


Brian Nelson Houston Texas owner Party Tent City .com sells discount awnings, canopies, tarps, wedding tent, storage shelters and portable garage in canopy kits

 NI Version Blue Box for Brian Nelson's Internet Reference Directory
713-467-3025
   31 Gessner Rd. , Houston, TX  7702
4                
Click here to  e-mail me with any questions.
This section is changed daily by a computer program on all affiliated sites. Check here for updated special information about  related partner websites.
Click Informative websites below about our internet network system.

emsevoldog
God Loves Me A christian venture . Party Tent City .com sells discount awnings, canopies, tarps, wedding tent, storage shelters and portable garage in canopy kits
ud 06/16/2005 10:17 PM -0500
Tents, Tarps, Tent Canopies, Awnings Computers Consulting Religious Medical
Click Party Tent City.com Party Tents, Awnings, Fire Retardant Tarps Canopies Camping Canopy, Clear Window Tarpaulins, Wedding & Church Revival Tents, Tent Hardware, Dome Shelters,  Garage Tents, Portable Storage,  Modular Tents for Multiple Applications. Backyard Movie Screens, Golf Driving Range Rain & Shade Shelters, Black Mesh Shade Cloth, White and Silver Tarps, 6x8, 10x10, 10x20,10x20, 20x20, 20x30,20x40, 30x30,30x40,40x40,40x50, 40x60. 50x50. Also Patriotic Red, White & Blue Striped and Clear  Window Tarps. Tent Hardware. Portable Instant Garages  

Click Tarp City .com Fire Retardant, Flame Retardant  White & Silver Heavy Duty Tarps. Red, White and Blue Patriotic tarps. Clear Window Tarps, Black Mesh and Shade Cloth. Overnight Delivery Available. Custom Made Tarps. Grommets Added to your Tarp. This is a division of www.PartyTentCity.com   Misspelled Party Tent Words
 Generic-Text Only  PTC NID

Click Hobby Group. com  Jerry Hobby's  Computer Web Hosting, Computer Repair, Domain Services, Security & Hackers Consulting, Computer Problem Solving. Computer Tune-ups For Slow or Virus infected Computers, Wireless Advice,

Click MDPC Computer Club.com  Memorial Drive Presbyterian Church Computer Club. Houston, TX.   Houston Christians helping each other on Computers.

Click Computer & Laser Printer and Inkjet Repair .com  Laser Printer Repair. Houston , TX  Computer Software Repair. Broker To Help You Solve Your Computer Problems , Computer Budget WebHosting, Domain Name  Purchases, Computer Repair

 Jerry Hobby's  Technical  Tips  

 

Click Brian Nelson Consulting .com Internet Marketing, Help  to"Thinking Outside the Box" to Increase Sales and Profits. Motivational Moderator, Business Think Tank Discussions.

 

Click Internet-Marketing-Sales-Strategies.com  Creative Marketing Ideas to Develop Long Range Plans to Sell Your Products  Worldwide.  Marketing Strategy  "Thinking Outside The Box"  Nelson Provides  New Motivational Inspiration on Solving Business Problems .

Dick Myers Consultant Internet Advertising. 

Click NelsonIdeas.com
Creative problem solving using available resources.

Click Bible Pronunciation .com   Audio Version Pronounce Difficult Words in the Bible. Bookmark it.  Click Written Version

 Click Written Version of Bible Pronunciation

Click God Is The .com  GOD is the Answer and The Solution to any Problem you may have. He is the Best Friend and Mentor You Can  Ever Have. Hundreds of One Liner Bible Quotes You Can Memorize.

Click Pope John Paul II 1920-2005 A Great Man

Click Medical Data Base Future FAQ Information About Medical Costs Significantly More Expensive  Due to Non Use of Technology

Click Constipation Compendium Info/ FAQ

Click Diarrhea Compendium Info/FAQ

Click Burning Tongue Compendium Info FAQ

Click Upset Stomach Compendium, Info / FAQ.


 Click Compendium on Dreams

Click Trigeminal Neuralgia  Brian Nelson's Composition Journal Researching Trigeminal Neuralgia AKA  Tic Douloureux (TN)  Orofacial Pain-  The Most Painful Affliction Known to the Medical Practice. It Hurts! If You Know of Anyone with Face Pain Send Them to this  Super Large Trigeminal Neuralgia Site.
 Click Page 1. Trigeminal Neuralgia   
Click Page 2 Trigeminal Neuralgia   
Click Page 3 Trigeminal Neuralgia
Click Page 4  Trigeminal Neuralgia
  My Story on TN Brian N.

 Click The Trigeminal Neuralgia National  Association Website Click Here 

Click  Life-Excellence.com to improve your living needs. 

Technology Automotive General Sales Entertainment Free Internet Space
Click Radford Video Creations Jim Radford, Producer  Family History, Weddings, Receptions, Job Resume. Editing and Duplicating Your Programs to Disk, Tape or the Web. Click here if you have Cable Speed and Windows Player for a 6 minute Video of His Technology Capability.

Click Cell-Phone-Expert.com Dr. AJ Baltes Page of Cell FAQ and Info.

Click AdSense  and AdWords Marketing Research Reference Information AdSense  

 Click Uof H Internet Marketing on Ebay Lecture in Ebay / Ofoto 

Click JD Auto Collision Houston .com AAA Rated Family Owned Houston Supreme Auto Collision  Body shop Repair with a  Lifetime Warranty on All Repairs. Get High Quality Body Shop.  Personalized Service at  Reasonable Prices. Car Rental Arrangements  Made Easy.   Click Surplus City Sales. com Strategy Consulting on Buying, Selling and Brokering Industrial Salvage and Civilian Surplus Houston

   Brian's eBay Store 336 items  Click Here

Click Toy GuitarPlanet.com - Wooden toy guitars in many styles and colors. Click here to see our great toy guitar selection. 

 

Click Houston
Hope Entertainment
.com
The "Gilbert Show" brings Hope & Happiness Entertainment to
Seniors.  Karaoke  Sing-a-long Entertainment. 
Gilbert Ocanas Sings,  Whistles & Plays
Guitar at Nursing Homes, Retirement & Alzheimers Centers,

 Click www.Percussion
Teacher.com 

Click Wanted to Buy Classifieds .com  Do You Want To Buy? Place A FREE  Wanted To Buy Classified Ad Here
No Contract. No Fees. It is Free If You Want to Buy.

Make a difference in the world while you are here. Publish your articles, chapters and books here free. Speak out on what you believe. Be prepared to defend your position. Click

 Click Josephine Visnovske's  Most Interesting Free Book  The Islam Sector 

Click Jerry Hobby's Blogs  

 Click Brian Nelson's  Blogs 

Foreign Language Sites Discounts  Mortgage Information Public Issues Recreation
Click Spanish/Espanol  Party Tent Info Letter  Click German/Deutsch Party Tent Info Letter   Click French/Français   Party Tent Info Letter  Click Italian/ItalianoParty Tent  Info Letter
Click Portuguese  Party Tent Info Letter.
See Below. Click Mortgage Financing Information Tips  Click Metro Rail Accident Record

Make a difference in the world while you are here. Publish your articles, chapters and books here free. Speak out on what you believe. Be prepared to defend  your position.
Click Houston-Recumbent-Bike-Club.com Join This Club Free  if You  Live in Houston, TX  
  Sponsor                  Health and Wellness Living - Healthy lifestyle information ranging from 
fitness and nutrition to mental and spiritual topics. Products and technologies 
that improve your personal wellness. Natural and holistic therapies. Yoga. 
Women's health. Nutrition. Air purification. Water purification. Magnetic 
therapy.                                                  uoysevoldog
  Click  to get  me to send the E- mail address.  
This is on www.NelsonIdeas.com  Email me if you see this on any web page.
The Latest for Today  6-16-05   

TENT NOTES: Our tents are modular.  After your have finished using the tent for the first time  You can re-cycle the steel connectors very easily into another product. For long term set ups I would highly recommend the use a Dome Tent instead of a Gable Roof Tent.  It is better with high winds, water ponding and clear span space. Remember that our tents do not include the 10 ft. long EMT straight pipe which you purchase in your city from a home convenience center. It will cost about as much as the rest of the party tent kit that you buy from me. I have seen a price  reduction on the west coast for pipe. Make a few phone calls to get the best price. Be sure they have aas  much  as you need. You may have to go to several locations if you are buying a big tent.  Brian 713-467-3025 Click here to  e-mail me with any questions.



Click image for larger view

Sandra Day O'Connor
 Associate Justice
United States Supreme Court
Opinions

  • ADARAND CONSTRUCTORS, INC. v. PENA, SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION, et al. , 515 U.S. 200 (1995), 06/12/95
  • AGOSTINI et al. v. FELTON et al. , 521 U.S. 203 (1997), 06/23/97
  • ARAVE, WARDEN v. CREECH , 507 U.S. 463 (1993), 03/30/93
  • BAILEY v. UNITED STATES , 516 U.S. 137 (1996), 12/06/95
  • BE&K CONSTR. CO. v. NLRB, ET AL. , 536 U.S. 516 (2002), 06/24/02
  • BEECHAM v. UNITED STATES , 511 U.S. 368 (1994), 05/16/94
  • BLESSING, DIRECTOR, ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY v. FREESTONE et al. , 520 U.S. 329 (1997), 04/21/97
  • BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, WABAUNSEE COUNTY, KANSAS v. UMBEHR , 518 U.S. 668 (1996), 06/28/96
  • BOARD OF THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF BRYAN COUNTY, OKLAHOMA v. BROWN, et al. , 520 U.S. 397 (1997), 04/28/97
  • BUSH, GOVERNOR OF TEXAS, et al. v. VERA et al. , 517 U.S. 952 (1996), 06/13/96
  • CA FRANCHISE TAX BOARD v. HYATT, GILBERT, ET AL. , 538 U.S. 488 (2003), 04/23/03
  • CALIFORNIA v. DEEP SEA RESEARCH, INC. , 523 U.S. 491 (1998), 04/22/98
  • CASPARI v. BOHLEN , 510 U.S. 383 (1994), 02/23/94
  • CHANDRIS, INC., et al. v. LATSIS , 515 U.S. 347 (1995), 06/14/95
  • CHICAGO v. INTERNATIONAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS , 522 U.S. 156 (1997), 12/15/97
  • COHEN v. de la CRUZ , 523 U.S. 213 (1998), 03/24/98
  • COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. LUNDY , 516 U.S. 235 (1996), 01/17/96
  • CURTISS WRIGHT CORP. v. SCHOONEJONGEN et al. , 514 U.S. 73 (1995), 03/06/95
  • DANIELS, EARTHY D. v. UNITED STATES , 532 U.S. 374 (2001), 04/25/01
  • DAVIS v. UNITED STATES , 512 U.S. 452 (1994), 06/24/94
  • DAVIS, AURELIA v. MONROE CTY. BD. OF ED. , 526 U.S. 629 (1999), 05/24/99
  • DENTON, DIRECTOR OF CORRECTIONS OF CALIFORNIA, et al. v. HERNANDEZ , 504 U.S. 25 (1992), 05/04/92
  • DEVLIN, ROBERT J. v. SCARDELLETTI, ROBERT, ET AL. , 536 U.S. 1 (2002), 06/10/02
  • DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR v. GREENWICH COLLIERIES et al. , 512 U.S. 267 (1994), 06/20/94
  • DUNCAN, SUPT., GREAT MEADOW v. WALKER, SHERMAN , 533 U.S. 167 (2001), 06/18/01
  • EASTERN ENTERPRISES v. APFEL , 524 U.S. 498 (1998), 06/25/98
  • ERIE, PA, ET AL. v. PAP'S A.M. , 529 U.S. 277 (2000), 03/29/00
  • EWING v. CALIFORNIA , 538 U. S. 11 (2003), 03/05/03
  • FDA, ET AL. v. BROWN & WILLIAMSON TOBACCO , 529 U.S. 120 (2000), 03/21/00
  • FLORENCE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT FOUR et al. v. CARTER, a minor, by and through her father and next friend, CARTER , 510 U.S. 7 (1993), 11/09/93
  • FLORIDA BAR v. WENT FOR IT, INC., et al. , 515 U.S. 618 (1995), 06/21/95
  • FRANKLIN, SECRETARY OF COMMERCE, et al. v. MASSACHUSETTS et al. , 505 U.S. 788 (1992), 06/26/92
  • GADE, DIRECTOR, ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY v. NATIONAL SOLID WASTES MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION , 505 U.S. 88 (1992), 06/18/92
  • GEBSER v. LAGO VISTA INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. , 524 U.S. 274 (1998), 06/22/98
  • HAGEN v. UTAH , 510 U.S. 399 (1994), 02/23/94
  • HARRIS v. ALABAMA , 513 U.S. 504 (1995), 02/22/95
  • HARRIS v. FORKLIFT SYSTEMS, INC. , 510 U.S. 17 (1993), 11/09/93
  • HAZEN PAPER CO. et al. v. BIGGINS , 507 U.S. 604 (1993), 04/20/93
  • INDIANAPOLIS, IN, ET AL. v. EDMOND, JAMES, ET AL. , 531 U.S. 32 (2000), 11/28/00
  • INGALLS SHIPBUILDING, INC., et al. v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENT , 519 U.S. 248 (1997), 02/18/97
  • INTER MODAL RAIL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION et al. v. ATCHISON, TOPEKA & SANTA FE RAILWAY CO. et al. , 520 U.S. 510 (1997), 05/12/97
  • JOHNSON, PERRY, ET AL. v. HADIX, EVERETT, ET AL. , 527 U.S. 343 (1999), 06/21/99
  • KOLSTAD, CAROLE v. AM. DENTAL ASSN. , 527 U.S. 526 (1999), 06/22/99
  • LACKAWANNA CTY. D. A., ET AL v. COSS, EDWARD R. , 532 U.S. 394 (2001), 04/25/01
  • LANE v. PENA, SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION, et al. , 518 U.S. 187 (1996), 06/20/96
  • LEWIS v. UNITED STATES , 516 U.S. 1088 (1996), 06/24/96
  • LEWIS, JAMES F. v. LEWIS & CLARK MARINE, INC. , 531 U.S. 438 (2001), 02/21/01
  • LIBRETTI v. UNITED STATES , 516 U.S. 29 (1995), 11/07/95
  • LOCKYER, ATT'Y GEN. OF CA v. ANDRADE, LEANDRO , 538 U.S. 63 (2003), 03/05/03
  • LOPEZ v. MONTEREY COUNTY , 525 U.S. 266 (1999), 01/20/99
  • LOPEZ et al. v. MONTEREY COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, et al. , 519 U.S. 9 (1996), 11/06/96
  • LOS ANGELES, CA v. ALAMEDA BOOKS, INC., ET AL. , 535 U.S. 425 (2002), 05/13/02
  • LUNDING v. NEW YORK TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL , 522 U.S. 287 (1998), 01/21/98
  • MARQUEZ v. SCREEN ACTORS , 525 U.S. 33 (1998), 11/03/98
  • MEGHRIG et al. v. KFC WESTERN, INC. , 516 U.S. 479 (1996), 03/19/96
  • MINNESOTA, ET AL. v. MILLE LACS BAND, ETC., ET AL , 526 U.S. 172 (1999), 03/24/99
  • MONGE v. CALIFORNIA , 524 U.S. 721 (1998), 06/26/98
  • MURPHY, VAUGHN v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. , 527 U.S. 516 (1999), 06/22/99
  • NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR ARTS v. FINLEY , 524 U.S. 569 (1998), 06/25/98
  • NEBRASKA v. WYOMING et al. , 507 U.S. 584 (1993), 04/20/93
  • NEW YORK v. UNITED STATES et al. , 488 U.S. 1041 (1992), 06/19/92
  • NORFOLK SOUTHERN RWY. CO. v. SHANKLIN, DEDRA, ETC. , 529 U.S. 344 (2000), 04/17/00
  • O'SULLIVAN, WILLIAM v. BOERCKEL, DARREN , 526 U.S. 838 (1999), 06/07/99
  • OKLAHOMA TAX COMMISSION v. SAC AND FOX NATION , 508 U.S. 114 (1993), 05/17/93
  • PARKE, WARDEN v. RALEY , 506 U.S. 20 (1992), 12/01/92
  • PENRY, JOHNNY PAUL v. JOHNSON, DIR. TX DCJ , 532 U.S. 782 (2001), 06/04/01
  • PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA et al. v. CASEY, GOVERNOR OF PENNSYLVANIA, et al. , 505 U.S. 833 (1992), 06/29/92
  • POSTAL SERVICE v. GREGORY, MARIA A. , 534 U.S. 1 (2001), 11/13/01
  • PUD NO. 1 OF JEFFERSON COUNTY et al. v. WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY et al. , 511 U.S. 700 (1994), 05/31/94
  • QUACKENBUSH, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE COMMISSIONER, et al. v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE CO. , 517 U.S. 706 (1996), 06/03/96
  • RAYGOR, LANCE, ET AL. v. REGENTS OF THE UNIV. OF MN , 534 U.S. 533 (2002), 02/27/02
  • REEVES, ROGER v. SANDERSON PLUMBING PRODUCTS , 530 U.S. 133 (2000), 06/12/00
  • REICH v. COLLINS, REVENUE COMMISSIONER OF GEORGIA, et al. , 513 U.S. 106 (1994), 12/06/94
  • RENO, ATTORNEY GENERAL v. BOSSIER PARISH SCHOOL BOARD et al. , 520 U.S. 471 (1997), 05/12/97
  • RICHMOND v. LEWIS, DIRECTOR, ARIZONA , 506 U.S. 56 (1992), 12/01/92
  • RIGGINS v. NEVADA , 504 U.S. 127 (1992), 05/18/92
  • ROE, WARDEN v. ORTEGA, LUCIO FLORES , 528 U.S. 470 (2000), 02/23/00
  • ROGERS, WILBERT K. v. TENNESSEE , 532 U.S. 451 (2001), 05/14/01
  • SCHIRO v. FARLEY, SUPERINTENDENT, INDIANA STATE PRISON, et al. , 510 U.S. 222 (1994), 01/19/94
  • SELING, SUPT., SPECIAL CC v. YOUNG, ANDRE BRIGHAM , 531 U.S. 250 (2001), 01/17/01
  • SHAW et al. v. RENO, ATTORNEY , 509 U.S. 630 (1993), 06/28/93
  • SMITH v. UNITED STATES , 508 U.S. 223 (1993), 06/01/93
  • SOUTH DAKOTA v. YANKTON SIOUX TRIBE , 522 U.S. 329 (1998), 01/26/98
  • STATE OIL CO. v. KHAN , 522 U.S. 3 (1997), 11/04/97
  • SUTTON, KAREN, ET AL. v. UNITED AIR LINES, INC. , 527 U.S. 471 (1999), 06/22/99
  • THOMPSON, SEC. OF H&HS v. WESTERN STATES MEDICAL CENT. , 535 U. S. 357 (2002), 04/29/02
  • TOYOTA MOTOR MFG., KY, INC. v. WILLIAMS, ELLA , 534 U.S. 184 (2002), 01/08/02
  • TROXEL, JENIFER, ET VIR v. GRANVILLE, TOMMIE , 530 U.S. 57 (2000), 06/05/00
  • UNITED STATES v. ALASKA , 474 U.S. 1044 (1986), 06/19/97
  • UNITED STATES v. CRAFT, SANDRA L. , 535 U.S. 274 (2002), 04/17/02
  • UNITED STATES v. HAYS et al. , 515 U.S. 737 (1995), 06/29/95
  • UNITED STATES v. OLANO et al. , 507 U.S. 725 (1993), 04/26/93
  • UNITED STATES v. GONZALES et al. , 520 U.S. 1 (1997), 03/03/97
  • UNITED STATES v. CALIFORNIA et al. , 507 U.S. 746 (1993), 04/26/93
  • UNITED STATES v. SHABANI , 513 U.S. 10 (1994), 11/01/94
  • UNITED STATES DEPT. OF JUSTICE v. LANDANO , 508 U.S. 165 (1993), 05/24/93
  • VICTOR v. NEBRASKA , 511 U.S. 1 (1994), 03/22/94
  • VIRGINIA v. BLACK, BARRY E., ET AL. , 538 U.S. 343 (2003), 04/07/03
  • VOINOVICH, GOVERNOR OF OHIO, et al. v. QUILTER, SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE OF OHIO HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, et al. , 507 U.S. 146 (1993), 03/02/93
  • WATERS et al. v. CHURCHILL et al. , 511 U.S. 661 (1994), 05/31/94
  • WILLIAMSON v. UNITED STATES , 512 U.S. 594 (1994), 06/27/94
  • WILTON et al. v. SEVEN FALLS CO. et al. , 515 U.S. 277 (1995), 06/12/95
  • WITTE v. UNITED STATES , 515 U.S. 389 (1995), 06/14/95
  • YEE et al. v. CITY OF ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA , 503 U.S. 519 (1992), 04/01/92
  • YELLOW FREIGHT SYSTEM, INC. v. MICHIGAN, ET AL. , 537 U.S. 36 (2002), 11/05/02
  • ZAFIRO et al. v. UNITED STATES , 506 U.S. 534 (1993), 01/25/93

    Concurrences

  • Click image for larger view

  • 44 LIQUORMART, INC., et al. v. RHODE ISLAND et al. , 517 U.S. 484 (1996), 05/13/96
  • ALLIED BRUCE TERMINIX COS., INC., et al. v. DOBSON et al. , 513 U.S. 265 (1995), 01/18/95
  • ARIZONA v. EVANS , 514 U.S. 1 (1995), 03/01/95
  • ASHCROFT, ATTY. GEN. v. ACLU, ET AL. , 535 U.S. 564 (2002), 05/13/02
  • ATHERTON v. FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, as receiver for CITY , 519 U.S. 213 (1997), 01/14/97
  • BABBITT, SECRETARY OF INTERIOR, et al. v. SWEET HOME CHAPTER OF COMMUNITIES , 515 U.S. 687 (1995), 06/29/95
  • BUSH, GOVERNOR OF TEXAS, et al. v. VERA et al. , 517 U.S. 952 (1996), 06/13/96
  • CAPITOL SQUARE REVIEW AND ADVISORY BOARD et al. v. PINETTE et al. , 515 U.S. 753 (1995), 06/29/95
  • CHICAGO v. MORALES , 527 U.S. 41 (1999), 06/10/99
  • CITY OF LADUE et al. v. GILLEO , 512 U.S. 43 (1994), 06/13/94
  • COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. ESTATE OF HUBERT, DECEASED, C & S SOVRAN TRUST CO. (GEORGIA) N. A., CO EXECUTOR , 520 U.S. 93 (1997), 03/18/97
  • CONCRETE PIPE & PRODUCTS OF CALIFORNIA, INC. v. CONSTRUCTION LABORERS PENSION TRUST FOR SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA , 508 U.S. 602 (1993), 06/14/93
  • EDELMAN, LEONARD v. LYNCHBURG COLLEGE , 535 U.S. 106 (2002), 03/19/02
  • EVANS v. UNITED STATES , 504 U.S. 255 (1992), 05/26/92
  • FARRAR et al., COADMINISTRATORS OF ESTATE OF FARRAR, DECEASED v. HOBBY , 506 U.S. 103 (1992), 12/14/92
  • FOUCHA v. LOUISIANA , 504 U.S. 71 (1992), 05/18/92
  • GILMORE v. TAYLOR , 508 U.S. 333 (1993), 06/07/93
  • GUTIERREZ de MARTINEZ et al. v. LAMAGNO et al. , 515 U.S. 417 (1995), 06/14/95
  • HARRIS, WILLIAM J. v. UNITED STATES , 536 U.S. 545 (2002), 06/24/02
  • HERRERA v. COLLINS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMNAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION , 506 U.S. 390 (1993), 01/25/93
  • HOLDER, individually and in his official capacity as COUNTY COMMISSIONER FOR BLE v. HALL et al. , 512 U.S. 874 (June 30, 1994), 06/30/94
  • HOLMES v. SECURITIES INVESTOR PROTECTION CORPORATION et al. , 503 U.S. 258 (1992), 03/24/92
  • IDAHO et al. v. COEUR d'ALENE TRIBE OF IDAHO et al. , 521 U.S. 261 (1997), 06/23/97
  • J. E. B. v. ALABAMA ex rel. T. B. , 511 U.S. 127 (1994), 04/19/94
  • JEROME B. GRUBART, INC. v. GREAT LAKES DREDGE & DOCK CO. et al. , 513 U.S. 527 (1995), 02/22/95
  • JOHNSON v. De GRANDY , 512 U.S. 997 (1994), 06/30/94
  • LOCKHART, DIRECTOR, ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION v. FRETWELL , 506 U.S. 364 (1993), 01/25/93
  • McKUNE, WARDEN, ET AL. v. LILE, ROBERT G. , 536 U.S. 24 (2002), 06/10/02
  • MEDINA v. CALIFORNIA , 505 U.S. 437 (1992), 06/22/92
  • MILLER v. ALBRIGHT , 523 U.S. 420 (1998), 04/22/98
  • MILLER et al. v. JOHNSON et al. , 515 U.S. 900 (1995), 06/29/95
  • MISSOURI et al. v. JENKINS et al. , 515 U.S. 70 (1995), 06/12/95
  • MITCHELL, GUY, ET AL. v. HELMS, MARY L., ET AL. , 530 U.S. 793 (2000), 06/28/00
  • NEVADA, ET AL. v. HICKS, FLOYD, ET AL. , 533 U.S. 353 (2001), 06/25/01
  • OHIO ADULT PAROLE AUTHORITY v. WOODARD , 523 U.S. 272 (1998), 03/25/98
  • PALAZZOLO, ANTHONY v. RHODE ISLAND, ET AL. , 533 U.S. 606 (2001), 06/28/01
  • PEGUERO v. UNITED STATES , 526 U.S. 23 (1999), 03/02/99
  • PRINTZ, SHERIFF/CORONER, RAVALLI COUNTY, MONTANA v. UNITED STATES , 521 U.S. 898 (1997), 06/27/97
  • PUBLIC LANDS COUNCIL, ET AL. v. BABBITT, SEC. OF INTERIOR , 529 U.S. 728 (2000), 05/15/00
  • RAMDASS, BOBBY L. v. ANGELONE, DIR., VA DOC , 530 U.S. 156 (2000), 06/12/00
  • RENO, ATTORNEY GENERAL, et al. v. FLORES et al. , 507 U.S. 292 (1993), 03/23/93
  • RENO, ATTORNEY GENERAL, et al. v. CATHOLIC SOCIAL SERVICES, INC., et al. , 509 U.S. 43 (1993), 06/18/93
  • REPUBLICAN PARTY OF MN v. KELLY, VERNA, ET AL. , 536 U.S. 765 (2002), 06/27/02
  • ROGERS v. UNITED STATES , 522 U.S. 252 (1998), 01/14/98
  • ROMANO v. OKLAHOMA , 512 U.S. 1 (1994), 06/13/94
  • ROSENBERGER et al. v. RECTOR AND VISITORS OF UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA et al. , 515 U.S. 819 (1995), 06/29/95
  • SATTAZAHN, DAVID A. v. PENNSYLVANIA , 537 U.S. 101 (2003), 01/14/03
  • SCHLUP v. DELO, SUPERINTENDENT, POTOSI CORRECTIONAL CENTER , 513 U.S. 298 (1995), 01/23/95
  • SHALALA, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES v. WHITECOTTON et al. , 514 U.S. 268 (1995), 04/18/95
  • SIMMONS v. SOUTH CAROLINA , 512 U.S. 154 (1994), 06/17/94
  • SIMS, JUATASSA v. APFEL, COMM'R, SOCIAL SEC. , 530 U.S. 103 (2000), 06/05/00
  • SOCHOR v. FLORIDA , 504 U.S. 527 (1992), 06/08/92
  • SOUTH CENTRAL BELL TELEPHONE CO. v. ALABAMA , 526 U.S. 160 (1999), 03/23/99
  • STEEL CO. v. CITIZENS FOR BETTER ENVIRONMENT , 523 U.S. 83 (1998), 03/04/98
  • STENBERG, NE ATTY. GEN. v. CARHART, LEROY , 530 U.S. 914 (2000), 06/28/00
  • TYLER, MELVIN v. CAIN, WARDEN , 533 U.S. 656 (2001), 06/28/01
  • UNITED STATES v. FORDICE, GOVERNOR OF MISSISSIPPI, et al. , 505 U.S. 717 (1992), 06/26/92
  • UNITED STATES v. CARLTON , 512 U.S. 26 (1994), 06/13/94
  • US AIRWAYS, INC. v. BARNETT, ROBERT , 535 U.S. 391 (2002), 04/29/02
  • VACCO, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW YORK, et al. v. QUILL et al. , 521 U.S. 793 (1997), 06/26/97
  • VIMAR SEGUROS Y REASEGUROS, S. A. v. M/V SKY REEFER et al. , 515 U.S. 528 (1995), 06/19/95
  • WASHINGTON et al. v. GLUCKSBERG et al. , 521 U.S. 702 (1997), 06/26/97
  • WILLIAMS, TERRY v. TAYLOR, WARDEN , 529 U.S. 362 (2000), 04/18/00
  • WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, 505 U.S. 214 (1992), 06/19/92
  • WOODFORD, WARDEN v. GARCEAU, ROBERT F. , 538 U.S. 202 (2003), 03/25/03
  • WRIGHT, WARDEN, et al. v. WEST , 505 U.S. 277 (1992), 06/19/92
  • ZELMAN, SUPT. OF PUB. INSTR. v. SIMMONS-HARRIS, DORIS, ET AL , 536 U.S. 639 (2002), 06/27/02

    Dissents

    Click image for larger view

  • APPRENDI, CHARLES C. v. NEW JERSEY , 530 U.S. 466 (2000), 06/26/00
  • ARIZONA v. CALIFORNIA , 530 U.S. 392 (2000), 00/00/00
  • ATWATER, GAIL, ET AL. v. LAGO VISTA, TX, ET AL. , 532 U.S. 318 (2001), 04/24/01
  • BD. OF ED., POTTAWATOMIE CTY v. EARLS, LINDSAY, ET AL. , 536 U.S. 822 (2002), 06/27/02
  • BRAY et al. v. ALEXANDRIA WOMEN'S HEALTH CLINIC et al. , 506 U.S. 263 (1993), 00/00/00
  • BRECHT v. ABRAHAMSON, SUPERINTENDENT, DODGE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION , 507 U.S. 619 (1993), 04/21/93
  • CALCANO-MARTINEZ, DEBORIS, ET AL. v. INS , 533 U.S. 348 (2001), 06/25/01
  • CHICKASAW NATION v. UNITED STATES , 534 U.S. 84 (2001), 11/27/01
  • CITY OF BOERNE v. FLORES , 521 U.S. 507 (1997), 06/25/97
  • CITY OF BURLINGTON v. DAGUE et al. , 505 U.S. 557 (1992), 06/24/92
  • COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. SCHLEIER et al. , 515 U.S. 323 (1995), 06/14/95
  • DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE OF MONTANA v. KURTH RANCH et al. , 511 U.S. 767 (1994), 06/06/94
  • DOGGETT v. UNITED STATES , 505 U.S. 647 (1992), 00/00/00
  • EDENFIELD et al. v. FANE , 507 U.S. 761 (1993), 04/26/93
  • FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION v. TICOR TITLE INSURANCE CO. et al. , 504 U.S. 621 (1992), 06/12/92
  • GEORGIA v. McCOLLUM et al. , 505 U.S. 42 (1992), 06/18/92
  • HARPER et al. v. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION , 509 U.S. 86 (1993), 06/18/93
  • HESS et al. v. PORT AUTHORITY TRANS HUDSON CORPORATION , 513 U.S. 30 (1994), 11/14/94
  • INS v. ST. CYR, ENRICO , 533 U.S. 289 (2001), 06/25/01
  • INTEREST TO THE BENDIX CORP., 504 U.S. 768 (1992), 00/00/00
  • JACOBSON v. UNITED STATES , 503 U.S. 540 (1992), 04/06/92
  • JOHNSON v. TEXAS , 509 U.S. 350 (1993), 06/24/93
  • KEENEY, SUPERINTENDENT, OREGON STATE PENITENTIARY v. TAMAYO REYES , 504 U.S. 1 (1992), 05/04/92
  • LAMBRIX v. SINGLETARY, SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS , 520 U.S. 518 (1997), 05/12/97
  • LEBRON v. NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION , 513 U.S. 374 (1995), 02/21/95
  • METROPOLITAN STEVEDORE CO. v. RAMBO , 520 U.S. 1101 (1997), 06/19/97
  • MONTANA v. EGELHOFF , 518 U.S. 37 (1996), 06/13/96
  • NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMIN. v. FIRST NAT.BANK & TRUST CO. , 522 U.S. 479 (1998), 02/25/98
  • NGUYEN, TUAN A., ET AL. v. INS , 533 U.S. 53 (2001), 06/11/01
  • NORTHEASTERN FLORIDA CHAPTER OF THE ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS OF AMERICA v. CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, , 508 U.S. 656 (1993), 06/14/93
  • OLD CHIEF v. UNITED STATES , 519 U.S. 172 (1997), 01/07/97
  • PIONEER INVESTMENT SERVICES CO. v. BRUNSWICK ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP et al. , 507 U.S. 380 (1993), 03/24/93
  • RAGSDALE, TRACY v. WOLVERINE WORLDWIDE, INC. , 535 U.S. 81 (2002), 03/19/02
  • RING, TIMOTHY S. v. ARIZONA , 536 U.S. 584 (2002), 06/24/02
  • SARATOGA FISHING CO. v. J. M. MARTINAC & CO. et al. , 519 U.S. 1027 (1996), 06/02/97
  • SHALALA, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES v. GUERNSEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL , 514 U.S. 87 (1995), 03/06/95
  • SWIDLER & BERLIN v. UNITED STATES , 524 U.S. 399 (1998), 06/25/98
  • TICOR TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al., PETITIONERS v. WALTER THOMAS BROWN and JEFFREY L. DZIEWIT , 511 U.S. 117 (1994), 04/04/94
  • TURNER BROADCASTING SYSTEM, INC., et al. v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION et al. , 520 U.S. 180 (1997), 03/31/97
  • TXO PRODUCTION CORP. v. ALLIANCE RESOURCES CORP. et al. , 509 U.S. 443 (1993), 06/25/93
  • UNITED STATES v. R. L. C. , 503 U.S. 291 (1992), 03/24/92
  • UNITED STATES v. BURKE et al. , 504 U.S. 229 (1992), 05/26/92
  • VERNONIA SCHOOL DISTRICT 47J v. ACTON et ux., guardians ad litem for ACTON , 515 U.S. 646 (1995), 06/26/95
  • ZOBREST et al. v. CATALINA FOOTHILLS SCHOOL DISTRICT , 509 U.S. 1 (1993), 06/18/93

    Concur in part, dissent in part

  • AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC. v. WOLENS et al. , 513 U.S. 219 (1995), 01/18/95
  • ARIZONA v. CALIFORNIA , 530 U.S. 392 (2000), 06/11/01
  • ASHCROFT, ATTY. GEN., ET AL. v. FREE SPEECH COALITION , 535 U.S. 234 (2002), 04/16/02
  • BRAGDON v. ABBOTT , 524 U.S. 624 (1998), 06/25/98
  • BUCKLEY, SEC. OF ST. OF CO v. AM. CONST. LAW FNDN., ET AL. , 525 U.S. 182 (1999), 01/12/99
  • CONSCIOUSNESS, INC. et al. v. LEE, SUPERINTENDENT OF PORT AUTHORITY POLICE , 505 U.S. 672 (1992), 06/26/92
  • DENVER AREA EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS CONSORTIUM, INC., et al. v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION et al. , 518 U.S. 727 (1996), 06/28/96
  • HELLER, SECRETARY, KENTUCKY CABINET FOR HUMAN RESOURCES v. DOE, by his mother and next friend, DOE, et al. , 509 U.S. 312 (1993), 06/24/93
  • HOLLY FARMS CORP. et al. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD et al. , 516 U.S. 963 (1995), 04/23/96
  • IBANEZ v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, BOARD OF ACCOUNTANCY , 512 U.S. 136 (1994), 06/13/94
  • McFARLAND v. SCOTT, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION , 512 U.S. 849 (1994), 06/30/94
  • MEDTRONIC, INC. v. LOHR et vir , 518 U.S. 470 (1996), 06/26/96
  • NATL. RR PASSENGER CORP. v. MORGAN, ABNER , 536 U.S. 101 (2002), 06/10/02
  • RENO, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, et al. v. AMERICAN CIVIL , 521 U.S. 844 (1997), 06/26/97
  • TURNER BROADCASTING SYSTEM, INC., et al. v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION et al. , 512 U.S. 622 (1994), 06/27/94
  • UNITED STATES v. JAMES DANIEL GOOD REAL PROPERTY et al. , 510 U.S. 43 (1993), 12/13/93
  • UTAH, ET AL. v. EVANS, SEC. OF COMMERCE , 536 U.S. 452 (2002), 06/20/02
  • WITHROW v. WILLIAMS , 507 U.S. 680 (1993), 04/21/93
  •  

     ASAW 3/3 Sponsored Links



    You are at: http://www.NelsonIdeas.com/judge-sandra-oconnor/supreme-court-retires.html    ud on  08/29/2009 04:20 PM -0500

     

     

     

     

    Hi,
    Hopefully this website will help you.  When you run across  something very interesting on this topic from friends or from what you read on the internet, send it to us. We will insert that article or information on this website.
    Brian
    Brian Nelson
    31 Gessner Rd. ,Houston, TX  77024
    713-467-3025,Fax 713-467-3192

    Click here to  e-mail me with any questions.

     

     



    Sandra Day O'Connor
      Supreme Court justice

    1930-

    The first woman to serve as a Supreme Court justice, O'Connor is also known for her keen mind, conservatism, and strict constructionist views.

    Early Life

    Sandra Day O'Connor was born on March 26, 1930, in El Paso, Texas, to Harry A. and Ada Mae Wilkey Day. The family owned a 155,000-acre ranch in southeastern Arizona, which her grandfather Henry Clay Day established in the 1880's, when Arizona was still a territory. As a youngster, Sandra rode horses, helped with the cattle, and did many things boys did. Because of the ranch's isolation, her parents sent her to El Paso when she was five; there, she lived with her grandmother and attended Radford School, a private school for girls. Because of her love for the ranch, she returned at thirteen to attend school. The nearest school was twenty-two miles away, and commuting meant leaving before daylight and returning in the dark, so the next year she was back at Radford. After a year, she switched to Austin High School and was graduated at age sixteen.

    Sandra laid the foundation for her later success at Stanford University. There she majored in economics, earned a B.A. degree with honors in 1950, and went to law school. She earned the LL.B. degree in two years, ranked third out of the 102 students in her class, and was an editor of the Stanford Law Review. One of her fellow editors and the top-ranking student in the class was future Supreme Court justice William H. Rehnquist. Another student in the class below hers was John Jay O'Connor. The two married soon after Sandra's graduation in 1952.

    During the early years of her marriage, O'Connor accommodated her career to the demands of family life. During her husband's last year of law school, she tried to get a job with a law firm in California but was unsuccessful because of the reluctance of many firms to hire a female attorney. She found government more accepting of women and worked for the first year of her marriage as a deputy attorney for San Mateo County. After John O'Connor graduated, he worked for three years in Frankfurt, West Germany, in the Judge Advocate General's Corps of the United States Army. His wife joined him in Frankfurt as a civilian quartermaster corps attorney, specializing in contracts. The O'Connors then returned to the Maricopa County/Phoenix area, because its size and growth rate offered opportunities to newcomers, and Sandra had the first of their three children in 1957. The children, all born within six years, were all sons. Scott and Jay attended Stanford and Brian went to Colorado College. For several years, O'Connor worked part-time with a partner in their own law office, and she became active in civic affairs. She served on the Maricopa County Board of Adjustments and Appeals, was on the Governor's Committee on Marriage and Family, worked for the Arizona State Hospital as an administrator, and volunteered for the Salvation Army and a school for minorities. Other volunteer activities with professional implications included acting as a court referee in juvenile cases and making recommendations to the judge, establishing a legal referral service for the county bar, and writing and grading bar exams for the state bar. She also became active in the Republican Party, serving as district chair. By 1965, when she decided to resume her career full-time, O'Connor had an established family, excellent legal credentials, and a variety of experiences in public service. Bright, gracious, and attractive, she was also a hard worker.

    Life's Work

    Initially, O'Connor's career centered on state government. From 1965 to 1969, she was Arizona's assistant attorney general. She also chaired the Maricopa County Juvenile Detention Home's board of visitors (1966-1968) and served on the Arizona State Personnel Commission (1967-1969). In 1969, Governor Jack Williams appointed her to a vacant seat in the Arizona Senate. As a Republican, she won election to that seat in 1970 and again, easily, in 1972.

    In the Arizona senate, O'Connor was known for her careful work, her attention to factual accuracy, and her ability to handle her staff well and get things done. When she became majority leader in 1972, she was the first woman in that post in the United States. Her voting record ranged from moderate to conservative. She favored limiting government spending, restoring the death penalty, and some selected feminist issues. Specifically, she voted for the Equal Rights Amendment and supported revisions in women's protective legislation (such as the maximum hours women were allowed to work), and favored enhanced property rights for women who owned property jointly with their husbands.

    She also seemed, on balance, to favor women's right to abortion. For example, she voted, in 1970, to repeal Arizona's laws that essentially made abortion illegal. Later, she opposed a resolution seeking a constitutional ban on abortion, and she opposed an attempt to limit access to abortion. On the other hand, she voted to restrict state funds for poor women's abortions and also supported the right of hospital employees to refuse to perform abortions. This voting record was considered the best indication of her social and political views when the Senate voted to confirm her Supreme Court nomination in 1981.

    Meanwhile, in 1974, O'Connor decided on another career change and ran successfully for election as a judge on the Maricopa County Superior Court. On the bench, she acquired a reputation for being both tough and fair. She did not shirk from imposing the death penalty. She also favored open hearings and indicated concern for prison conditions.

    O'Connor remained politically active. She was an alternate delegate to the 1972 Republican National Convention and cochaired Richard M. Nixon's reelection committee in Arizona. In 1976, she backed Ronald Reagan in his losing attempt to wrest the nomination from President Gerald Ford.

    Her judicial career continued to prosper. In 1979, she won appointment to Arizona's Court of Appeals. Initially, she was regarded as competent but undistinguished. The following summer, however, she attended a judicial conference in England with Chief Justice Warren Burger. She also gained national attention in legal circles when in January, 1981, she participated in a program on federalism and the state courts, in which she expressed her judicial philosophy. She then turned her remarks into an article in the Summer, 1981, issue of William and Mary Law Review. She thought that if state courts had already given a matter full and fair treatment, then federal judges should refuse to intervene or hear appeals: In other words, federal and state judges were equally competent.

    O'Connor was the right woman at the right moment. To offset criticism of his opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment in 1980, Reagan promised to appoint the first woman to the Supreme Court. Justice Potter Stewart gave him the opportunity when he retired in June, 1981. Reagan chose O'Connor, probably because of her conservative credentials, her strict constructionist views of the Constitution, and her ability to elicit widespread support. The nomination was hailed by senators as ideologically diverse as Barry Goldwater and Edward Kennedy. Feminists anticipated a justice who would support legalized abortion and other issues of the women's movement. The American Bar Association was not overwhelmingly impressed but did say that she met the qualifications. The Senate approved her nomination with ninety-one votes, in time for O'Connor to join the other justices in deciding which cases they would hear during the 1981-1982 term.

    During O'Connor's first year on the Court, she made it clear that she was a conservative. She joined conservatives Burger and Rehnquist on sixty-two out of eight-four opinions and opposed those two conservative allies only five times. Her votes paralleled those of fellow Arizonan Rehnquist even more closely. Out of 137 cases, she voted 123 times with Rehnquist. She watched out for and defended states' rights and acted to curb excessive appeals. On five-to-four split decisions, she was with the majority in voiding the death sentence for a sixteen-year-old killer, supporting a procedure making the challenge of public money to parochial schools more difficult, upholding a state law which said that aliens could not work as parole officers, narrowing the double-jeopardy concept to make retrials easier, and supporting affirmative action hiring under Title IX. She was rarely accused of creatively reading into a law what was not explicitly there.

    Her private life fit in with her new position. Husband John moved his law practice to Washington, and the couple became popular with Washington society. An athletic person, she regularly played tennis. As the first woman on the Court, she has received many requests to speak but has not spent much time on the lecture circuit or deliberately sought media attention.

    During her second year on the Supreme Court, feminist enthusiasm for O'Connor cooled. She did split with her conservative allies in eliminating pension plans that failed to offer women equity with men, but she disappointed feminists when she refused to allow her pension-plan decision to become retroactive. She also disappointed pro-choice advocates when she supported the minority opinion to uphold a series of local laws curbing women's access to abortion. Given the fact that abortion is legal in the United States as a result of a Supreme Court decision, not federal legislation, her abortion views caused major concern.

    O'Connor is still very much a part of the conservative faction, but some observers think that they detect a growing self-confidence and independence. Two of her decisions reflect a concern for minority rights. First, she joined the majority in limiting peremptory challenges to exclude minority jurors when the defendant is the same minority. Second, she argued that if a crime is interracial (black defendant, white victim), then prospective jurors could be questioned on racial bias if the death penalty is involved. Although showing some signs of moving toward the center, O'Connor has most often voted with Rehnquist and Burger.

    As the first woman on the Supreme Court, Sandra Day O'Connor has acted much as any conservative male justice might have done. It is difficult to attribute any aspect of her judicial record to her being female. Yet, if she had not been a woman, she probably would not have been appointed to the Court. Her judicial experience simply was not that extensive or outstanding, yet she was undeniably competent, and her appeal was bolstered by political connections and a personal friendship with Justice Rehnquist. Timing was also a factor. The women's movement was prominent enough to make an issue out of the fact that no woman had ever before served on the Court, and Reagan needed a feminist issue in 1980. If her decisions have not always been to the liking of feminists, she has in other ways been an excellent role model for women in general.

     

    Sandra Day O'Connor Quotes

       

    Sandra Day O'Connor (March 26, 1930 - )

    Sandra Day O'Connor became the first woman to serve on the United States Supreme Court when President Ronald Reagan appointed her to the position of Associate Justice in 1981. A lawyer, she served two terms as a state senator in Arizona, and was the first woman in the United States to be elected the majority leader of a state senate body. Sandra Day O'Connor was then elected as a judge, also in Arizona. She tended to be a swing vote on the court. She has been described as both a moderate conservative and moderate feminist.

    Selected Sandra Day O'Connor Quotations

    • Do the best you can in every task, no matter how unimportant it may seem at the time. No one learns more about a problem than the person at the bottom.

    • I don't know that there are any shortcuts to doing a good job.

    • We don't accomplish anything in this world alone...

     

    and whatever happens is the result of the whole tapestry of one's life and all the weavings of individual threads form one to another that creates something.

    • Slaying the dragon of delay is no sport for the short-winded.

    • Young women today often have very little appreciation for the real battles that took place to get women where they are today in this country. I don't know how much history young women today know about those battles. (2003)

    • Society as a whole benefits immeasurably from a climate in which all persons, regardless of race or gender, may have the opportunity to earn respect, responsibility, advancement and remuneration based on ability.

    • Yes, I will bring the understanding of a woman to the Court, but I doubt that alone will affect my decisions. I think the important thing about my appointment is not that I will decide cases as a woman, but that I am a woman who will get to decide cases.

    • The power I exert on the court depends on the power of my arguments, not on my gender.

    • The more education a woman has, the wider the gap between men's and women's earnings for the same work.

    • Despite the encouraging and wonderful gains and the changes for women which have occurred in my lifetime, there is still room to advance and to promote correction of the remaining deficiencies and imbalances.

    • Each of us brings to our job, whatever it is, our lifetime of experience and our values.

    • The family unit plays a critical role in our society and in the training of the generation to come.

    • We pay a price when we deprive children of the exposure to the values, principles, and education they need to make them good citizens.

    • The courts of this country should not be the places where resolution of disputes begins. They should be the places where the disputes end after alternative methods of resolving disputes have been considered and tried.

    (PLANNED PARENTHOOD v. CASEY, June 29, 1992: Opinion written by Justices O’Connor, Kennedy, and Souter; joined in part by Stevens and Blackmun) Liberty finds no refuge in a jurisprudence of doubt. Yet, 19 years after our holding that the Constitution protects a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy in its early stages, Roe v. Wade (1973), that definition of liberty is still questioned.

    We are led to conclude this: the essential holding of Roe v. Wade should be retained and once again reaffirmed, in three parts:
    1. The right of the woman to choose to have an abortion before viability.
    2. The State may restrict abortions after fetal viability if the law contains exceptions for pregnancies which endanger the woman’s health.
    3. The State has legitimate interests from the outset of the pregnancy in protecting the health of the woman and the life of the fetus that may become a child.

     
     

    Sandra Day O'Connor

    Position:
    Associate Justice

    Judicial Offices:
    Sandra Day O'Connor was elected judge of the Maricopa County Superior Court, Phoenix, Arizona and served from 1975 to 1979. Appointed to the Arizona Court of Appeals by Governor Bruce Babbitt, serving from 1979 to 1981. O'Connor was nominated by President Reagan to become Associate Justice on July 7, 1981 and was confirmed by the United States Senate on September 21, 1981. The first woman ever appointed to the United States Supreme Court, she took oath on September 25, 1981.

    Family:
    Sandra Day O'Connor was born on March 26, 1930 in El Paso, Texas, the daughter of Harry A. Day and Ada Mae Wilkey Day, but grew up in southeaster Arizona on a cattle ranch owned by her parents. She married John Jay O'Connor III in 1952 and has three sons, Scott, Brian, and Jay.

    Education:
    Sandra attended the Radford School, from kindergarten until 12th grade in El Paso; she graduated with good marks. Following graduation from the private academy in Texas, she continued her studies at Stanford University, where she earned a B.A. in Economics in 1950, graduating magna cum laude. Subsequently, she attended Stanford Law School earning her LL.B. 1952, graduating third in her class in only two years (as opposed to the customary three years most require). Along the way, she served on Board of Editors for the Stanford Law Review and was a member of the prestigious Order of the Coif Legal society.

    Legislative Offices
    Appointed Arizona State Senator in 1969 and subsequently reelected to two two-year terms, serving in the Arizona State Senate from 1969 to 1974; elected twice as Senate Majority Leader, 1973-1974; served as Chairman of the State, County, and Municipal Affairs Committee in 1972 and 1973; also served on the Legislative Council, on the Probate Code Commission, and on the Arizona Advisory Council on Intergovernmental Relations. O'Connor was elected to the Maricopa County Superior Court in 1975 and appointed to the Arizona Court of Appeals in 1979, serving until 1981 when appointed to the United States Supreme Court.

    Legal Positions :
    O'Connor accepted the position as Deputy County Attorney of San Mateo County, California, 1952 to 1953, and Civilian Attorney for Quartermaster's Market Center, Frankfurt, Germany, 1954 to 1957. When O'Connor returned to the U.S. in 1957, she and her husband decide to settle in Phoenix, where she started her own firm with a single partner from 1958 to 1960. She took five years off to raise her children, and then returned as Assistant Attorney General, Arizona, 1965 to 1969. When Arizona Governor Jack Williams resigned in Washington D.C., O'Connor was appointed the seat and held the senate position for more than two terms, meanwhile becoming the majority leader.

    Civic Activities:
    O'Connor was a member of the Board of Directors of the Phoenix Historical Society, (1974-78), a member of Board of Junior Achievement, Arizona (1975 -79), a member and secretary of the Arizona Academy (1969-75), a member of the Board of Trustees of Stanford University (1976-81), a member of the Advisory Board and Vice President of the National Conference of Christians and Jews, Maricopa County (1977- 81), a member of the Liaison Committee on Medical Education in 1981, a member of the Board of Visitors of Arizona State University Law School in 1981, a member and later Vice President of the Soroptimist Club of Phoenix (1978-81), a member of the Salvation Army Advisory Board (1975-81), a President, and member of the Board of Trustees for The Heard Museum (1968-74, 1976-81), and a member of the National Board of the Smithsonian Associates, 1981 to present.

    Other Activities:
    Sandra was a member of the Maricopa County Board of Adjustments and Appeals, (1963-64), Chairman of the Maricopa County Bar Association Lawyer Referral Service (1960-62), member, State Bar of Arizona Committees on Legal Aid, Public Relations, Lower Court Reorganization, Continuing Legal Education; Chairman, Maricopa County Juvenile Detention Home Visiting Board (1963-64), a member of the Arizona State Personnel Commission (1968-69), a Chairman of the Arizona Supreme Court Committee to Reorganize Lower Courts (1974-75), a member of the Arizona Criminal Code Commission (1974-76), a member of the National Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services (1974-76), Chairman of the Maricopa County Superior Court Judges' Training and Education Committee (1977-79), Vice Chairman of the Arizona Select Law Enforcement Review Commission (1979-80), and a member of the Anglo-American Exchange (1980-).

    Memberships in Professional Organizations:
    O'Connor is a member of the American Bar Association, State Bar of Arizona, State Bar of California, Maricopa County Bar Association, Arizona Judges' Association, National Association of Women Judges, Arizona Women Lawyers' Association.

    Literature:
    The Changing of the Circuit Justice. (1986); "Swinford Lecture" (1985)."

    THE FIRST WOMAN CANDIDATE FOR THE SUPREME COURT -- FLORENCE E. ALLEN

    Beverly B. Cook*

    Copyright 1981 by the Supreme Court Historical Society
    From Yearbook 1981 Supreme Court Historical Society


    Qualifications for a Supreme Court Appointment
    Ideological Standards for Appointment
    Professional Standards for Appointment
    Representational Basis for Appointment
    Campaigning for the Supreme Court--The Backers
    The Candidate
    The Intermediaries
    Opposition to Judge Allen
    The Roosevelt Justices
    Objective Criteria: Age, Sex, and Veteran Status
    Why Florence Allen Did Not Reach the Supreme Court
    Notes

    Florence E. Allen almost became the first woman appointed to the Supreme Court of the United States. After President Roosevelt placed her on the U.S. Court of Appeals in the Sixth Circuit, in 1934, she was highly visible in the federal judicial hierarchy. A campaign for her elevation to the High Court was run primarily by enthusiastic women from a variety of reform and professional groups. Her presence on the Supreme Court was a goal well worthy of the efforts of veterans of the suffrage movement, who expressed great pride in the achievement of each woman who would break the male monopoly over a governmental position.

    Judge Allen's attitude toward the ambitions of her supporter\s was ambivalent. Within weeks of her confirmation for the Sixth Circuit seat, she wrote:

    Do not block in the future too optimistically because there are some things that will never happen in our lifetime. In other words, when my friends delightfully tell me that they hope to see me upon the Supreme Bench of the U.S., I know two things: first, that will never happen to a woman while I am living, and second, that perhaps it is just as well not to mention that possibility at the present time because there is a certain type of lawyer that immediately becomes fighting mad when that possibility is mentioned.1

    Her political instinct was to restrain her supporters from a premature effort, before she gained experience and recognition as a federal appellate judge. She was realistic in her assessment of the limits of opportunity for women in the law in her era. When she retired as chief judge of the Sixth Circuit in 1959 (and when she died as a senior judge in 1966) the Supreme Court still was all male, while the tier of circuit courts reverted (for two years) to a male monopoly.2

    Qualifications for a Supreme Court Appointment

    Many individuals possess the necessary attributes for service on the Supreme Court, but never come to the attention of those who make the selection. Four offices together control the process of selection--the Presidency, the Office of Attorney General, the Senate, and the Supreme Court. While Florence Allen had most of the qualifications for the office, she lacked leverage with the inner circle which drew up the short list of viable candidates. Even intervention by Eleanor Roosevelt and by the Women's Division of the National Democratic Committee was not enough to overcome resistance from the four central offices.

    In the making of a Supreme Court Justice, the President is the central figure. Many Presidents prefer to know personally the qualities of the person placed in a position to interpret the fundamental national law and to affect public policy for a generation. The Attorney General, as the chief legal adviser to the President, with close ties to the overlapping political and legal professional communities, may bring other candidates to the President's attention. Through the facilities of the Department to gather information and make judgments, he may eliminate or improve the chances of candidates.3 Justices sitting on the Court have a sense from their immediate experience of the pertinent abilities and appropriate personality for the position. Some Justices have volunteered names and evaluated (and probably vetoed) candidates whom they felt would not be compatible or contribute to their small and intimate working group.4 As the Senate must confirm Supreme Court appointments, the nominee to the Court must appear suitable to the Senate majority, to the leaders of the President's party in the Senate, and to the Judiciary Committee.5

    The qualifications for candidacy for the highest bench have been described under three categories: ideological, professional, and representational.6 The candidate must first have the "right" values and public policy views to satisfy the administration and the key Senators of the President's party. The recognition of the independence of the "third branch" provides the very incentive to avoid placing a person with a different political philosophy in a position to interpret or veto administrative programs. As a substitute for a candidate with stable and reliable set of political opinions, the President may look for personal loyalty, which will have the same short-run effect. The professional competence of the candidate is a necessary but not sufficient criterion. "Eminence" in public service compensates for less experience as a legal practitioner. Judicial experience has never been considered a requisite to sit on the constitutional court, but such service provides the appointing agents with a jurisprudential record from which to draw conclusions about ideological soundness.

    The search for candidates with the appropriate views and professional qualifications may occur within the boundaries of certain representational requirements. Although the geographical background of the prospective judge is no longer important to the function of circuit-riding, the President takes account of the pride of major regions. The geographical claim, like other representational criteria, may be closely related to areas of party strength and electoral strategies of the President's party.7 Most nominees have the appropriate party identification. In the minority of instances where the President sees some advantage in a cross-party choice, the individual must at least meet the ideological or loyalty standard. The religion, the race, or the ethnicity of the nominee may fit the coalition of interests that the President needs to satisfy. The male sex of any Supreme Court nominee was taken for granted until Florence Allen came to public notice in the 1930's. But her female constituency did not have sufficient organizational strength to demand representation in high public office. Catholics and Jews had attained such strength earlier. Blacks were to achieve it by the mid-1960's. By the 1980's women have probably also reached this stage.

    Florence Allen's failure to reach the Supreme Court was not due to lack of qualifications, but to her inability to penetrate the selection process. Her sex identity was not a complete bar. Even had she been male, there would probably have been only two realistic opportunities for a person with her combination of qualities on a circuit bench in the Midwest--the seats ultimately filled by William O. Douglas and Wiley Rutledge. How Judge Allen fit the three categories of qualification can be appreciated by a brief review of her public life.

    Ideological Standards for Appointment

    The reformist bent of Allen's career fit the dominant themes of the New Deal. She was stirred to action by the plight of those deprived or mistreated by authority, and worked out her own creative solutions for problems ranging from inefficiency to war. After her first year of law school at the University of Chicago, she worked for the New York League of the Protection of Immigrants, living at the Henry Street Settlement House.8 Her law degree came from New York University in 1914. She then returned to Ohio to open a practice. As soon as the nineteenth Amendment was ratified in 1920, she ran for trial judge in Cleveland. As a Judge of the Court of Common Pleas, whenever she identified a problem involving the jailing of witnesses, the bail policy, or the administrative weakness of the court, she would introduce her own experiment, a court rule, or even propose revision of a state statute.9 As a Justice on the Ohio Supreme Court from 1922-1934, she made rulings consonant with New Deal support for the rights of labor. She held, for example, that picketing without violence or any form of coercion was lawful.10 She also interpreted the Ohio workman's compensation law broadly to extend benefits and coverage.11 Her approach to social justice was compatible with that of Franklin D. Roosevelt, perhaps even more so with that of Eleanor Roosevelt.

    Her stance on the rights of racial minorities to equal treatment was generally ahead of the times. However, one of her decisions against the complaint of a black student in the Home Economics Program at Ohio State was questioned during consideration of her confirmation to the Sixth Circuit. Judge Allen attempted to distinguish between academic rights and social prerogatives related to residence on campus.12 After her death the federal courts were still trying to separate the private right to discriminate from the public right to equal treatment.13

    Florence Allen's party credentials were good. Although her father was the first Republican member of Congress from Utah (her childhood home state), she entered politics as a Democrat in a different state, Ohio. She joined the central committee in Cleveland at the time Newton Baker was county chairman. In 1916, she campaigned for President Wilson in the west under Baker's direction. When Baker advocated compulsory military service, she resigned as head of the Democratic Women of Ohio. Because the 19th Amendment was ratified too late for her to apply for Democratic party endorsement for trial judge, she got on the ballot in 1920 by petition upon the urging of the Woman Suffrage Party. Republican women leaders worked on her campaign along with Democratic women, all of whom belonged to nonpartisan women's groups, such as the Business and Professional Women, the League of Women Voters, women lawyers' clubs, church groups, university women, and other local societies. Labor and the press also gave support to her candidacy; and she led the field of candidates.14

    Her campaigns for the Ohio Supreme Court also had bipartisan backing. Although she cleared first with Newton Baker, the Democratic party did not endorse her.15 She created her own organization of Florence Allen clubs from the remnants of the suffrage organization. Again, Republican women who had worked with her in the Ohio campaign for the 19th Amendment from 1910 to 1920 joined the Democratic women.

    Florence Allen had the kind of continuing interest in vital public policies typical of Supreme Court Justices. She considered running for the state legislature before the opportunity for the trial judgeship occurred. She felt that she could work more effectively for certain policy ends, including world peace, from a legislative rather than a judicial body.16 While she was serving on the Ohio Supreme Court, she decided to run as the Democratic candidate for U.S. Senator, based on Newton Baker's advice. However, the incumbent changed his mind about retiring and she released the state party from its endorsement, continuing her campaign through her women's ad hoc organization, but losing. She was the bona fide candidate of her party for the first time in 1932, losing a race for the House of Representatives, but receiving 41% of the vote.17 Her court seat was not endangered by these candidacies. She won a second six-year term as a nonpartisan in 1928.

    Florence Allen faced the same difficulty in establishing her credentials as a successful party candidate and office-holder as women fifty years later. Her membership and active participation were accepted within limits; when she offered to take on leadership roles, particularly candidacies for high public offices, the party showed little interest in giving her real opportunities. The party used her services in unlikely congressional races. Her own victories were independent of the Democratic party and contingent upon her organization of existing women's political clubs into a working state-wide unit. The decline of female activism in the 1930's was one reason she was happy to take the life-tenured federal seat and avoid a third state-wide race for the Ohio Supreme Court in 1934. Allen's credentials for the Supreme Court nomination did not include those "party chips" that many male politicians, even those on the bench, have been able to accumulate during their careers.

    Professional Standards for Appointment

    By the 1930's Judge Allen was the most eminent woman legal professional in the country. She had the scholarly credentials typical of Supreme Court Justices.18 She had been Phi Beta Kappa as an undergraduate, second in her graduating class at New York University Law School, and counsel on the winning side of landmark cases for women's rights in Ohio.19 She was an active member of the American Bar Association and the International Bar Association, and an international law leader in the peace movement. She had worked with national leaders of the woman suffrage movement (Carrie Chapman Catt, Anna Howard Shaw, Harriet Taylor Upton, and Maude Wood Park); with leaders of the social welfare movement (Florence Kelly, Frances Kellor, and Sophonisba Breckenridge); and with leaders of the movement to outlaw war (whose membership largely overlapped the other two). She had developed a constituency outside Ohio and the Sixth Circuit through her speeches to women's clubs, university and law school convocations, and bar associations in major cities.20 The only woman in public office in the New Deal with higher stature was Frances Perkins, Secretary of Labor. But Perkins was not a lawyer.

    Judicial experience is not essential to be considered for the High Court. Indeed, it often interferes with the development of political contacts that assure such consideration. Only one of Roosevelt's appointees had the circuit court preparation that Judge Allen would have brought. The meaning to the President of service on the bench is not just proof of competence, but also a "readily available index of the personal and intellectual qualities of potential candidates."21 More importantly the portfolio of opinion discloses the pattern of the judge's policy preferences.

    Florence Allen showed her colors in her major case, the TVA trial, where she displayed clearly her agreement with a symbolically significant economic recovery program of the New Deal and her ability to reconcile skillfully the legal provision undergirding the program with the Constitution. The Chief Judge of the Sixth Circuit assigned Judge Allen in 1937 to preside over the three-judge court.22 She heard the case in Chattanooga with two Tennessee district judges. One of them, Judge John D. Martin, became a life-long friend and supporter of her elevation to the Supreme Court. After months spent in hearings and opinion drafting she upheld the validity of the TVA statute. The fact that the decision was vitally important to the administration, after other programs had been effectively destroyed by the Supreme Court between 1933 and 1936, does not detract from the professional skill with which she supervised the trial process, handled complicated evidence, and arranged the legal arguments in her opinion.

    Representational Basis for Appointment

    In many respects, Florence Allen fit the model of a typical Supreme Court Justice which has been described by John R. Schmidhauser: white, Protestant, of British ethnic stock, and born into comfortable circumstances in an urban or small town environment.23 She was white, Protestant, descended from British settlers, and raised in Utah towns.24 Justices are also drawn from political-legal families.25 Allen's father was a lawyer who served in the Utah legislature and the U.S. Congress. Her college-educated mother was a leader on the state level of women's policy-oriented clubs. Her geographical base had been fixed in Ohio, a major supplier of Justices, since her undergraduate days at Western Reserve (1900-1904). But Judge Allen did lack one requirement of powerful political status--the right sex.

    Except for her sex, Florence Allen met the basic political, professional, and representational standards for Supreme Court selection. Still, as we know, few of the many potentially acceptable candidates, appear on short lists, and fewer are accepted. Recognition of candidates and their winnowing to the nominee depends upon the particular persons involved in the process and the contemporary political situation within which the events occur.26 The most important elements are the party membership of the President and of the candidates. Florence Allen was a Democrat. During the period of her professional maturity, two Democratic Presidents were in office from 1933 to 1952. President Roosevelt made eight new appointments (excluding his elevation of Justice Stone, a Coolidge appointee, to the center chair). President Truman made four appointments. Thus, Florence Allen was "available" for twelve vacancies. To understand why she finished her career after twenty-five years still on the Sixth Circuit bench, we shall examine the campaign for her elevation to the Supreme Court, and the situation within which each appointment of a male candidate occurred.

    Campaigning for The Supreme Court--The Backers

    The campaign on behalf of Florence Allen for the Supreme Court stretched across two administrations. With each vacancy the hopes of some of her followers were rekindled, but the urgency of the effort was to decline in the 1940's. From beginning to end her efforts to reach the bench were carried by women.

    Her friends began to push her interests openly in 1936 in anticipation of the first available seat. When the Van Devanter vacancy occurred, supporters wrote to President Roosevelt that the women of the country wanted to see Allen on the Supreme Court bench.27 Although her adherents were active at the time of the Black appointment, they were better prepared for the second Supreme Court vacancy in 1938, when her name was mentioned publicly. One supporter wrote from Florida that a host of her friends determined that her final goal should be the highest Court.28 Lawyers who knew her on the federal bench in Cincinnati, and older associates from her days on state benches in Columbus and Cleveland, worked by mail and in person. One lawyer tried "to further her cause" in Washington.29 Another lawyer wrote to Franklin Roosevelt and to Eleanor Roosevelt separately and sent Allen copies. He urged FDR that fitness rather than sex should be the main consideration and reported that male members of the bar considered her an outstanding judge.30 To Mrs. Roosevelt he emphasized that Allen's influence on eight men would be humanizing.31

    The work on her behalf continued for the next vacancy, the Cardozo seat. Judge John D. Martin of Tennessee, her colleague in the TVA case, wrote of his disappointment that the President did not select her. He was keeping score by the geographical criterion and predicted that the next appointment would go west. He also urged a concentrated effort during the Roosevelt administration when her chances were greatest: ". . . now is the time to bring forward all the pressure of strong endorsements . . . for the next vacancy."32 Florence Allen was returning the compliment during the same period by recommending Judge Martin to the Attorney General for appointment to the Sixth Circuit.33

    The participants in the letter-writing campaign in 1939 ranged from the little-known women lawyers in small midwestern towns to New Deal office-holders in Washington with useful contacts. Letters that were written to the President were screened by his staff. Unless a letter bore a special tag, it was unlikely that the President would be aware of the character and variety of support for Allen's candidacy. The head of the Woman's Division wrote to Stephen Early in 1939 asking him to show specific "important letters" to the President--those from Judge Dorothy Kenyon, New York City; Judge Annabel Matthews, D.C.; Dean Harriet Elliott, Woman's College of North Carolina; Professor Grace Abbott, University of Chicago; Mrs. Earlene White, BPW national president; and Dr. Emily Hickman of the YWCA.34 His response that all endorsements were considered at the time of an appointment was hardly satisfactory. Allen was supported by such organizations as the American Association of University Women, the Business and Professional Women, the General Federation of Women's Club, New York Women's Trade Union League, American Legion Auxiliary, Women's Bar Association of D.C., and Women Lawyers of New York City.35

    Within the federal courts, secretaries of the judges corresponded, arranging for the endorsements. One secretary wrote to Judge Allen: "We had some plain and fancy cussing around here about the last Supreme Court appointment. We are all pulling for you on the next go-round. . . ."36 Her judge sent a tribute of Judge Allen to a college dean, who in turn passed the evaluation on to the White House.37 The secretary to a Chicago federal judge wrote to a woman lawyer in that city offering further help and commenting ". . . we feel she is better equipped than most men."38 However, Allen's secretary fell into an embarrassing situation in writing to federal judges for endorsements. Judge Gore died when a letter asking for his help was in the mail and she feared that it might reach the wrong hands. Judge Martin took care of the mishap.

    Women judges also rallied behind the only woman in the federal court system (Article III courts). Judge Sarah Hughes, later appointed to the U.S. District Court by President Kennedy, wrote several times on her Texas state court stationery: "I believe that she is thoroughly qualified and that she would bring honor to the Court."39 Judge Dorothy Kenyon of The New York Municipal Court wrote to the President that "So many distinguished women have urged her elevation to the bench that it is perhaps unnecessary to add my voice to the others." She enclosed a summary of Allen's legal opinions.40 Judge Anna M. Kross, New York City Magistrate, wrote to Mary Anderson at the Women's Bureau in D.C. that she had been conducting a quiet campaign for Allen through a "Committee for the Advancement of Women Lawyers to High Judicial Office of the National Association of Women Lawyers" and was planning to broaden the coalition for the next vacancy.41 Judge Annabel Matthews, the first woman on the Tax Court, and a Republican, wrote that women lawyers took great pride in Allen's record as a great liberal and jurist.42 However, Mabel W. Willerbrandt, the second woman to serve as assistant Attorney General, and the only other woman in the country with credentials for a Supreme Court appointment, from a Republican president, was somewhat less generous. She asked FDR to appoint "a woman."43

    Support from young women in the party which struck a chord in the White House: "I know of nothing that will unify the Democrats more than the act of your appointing the Honorable Florence Allen to the Supreme Court." The writer made a complaint and a plea which were just as valid forty years later:

    Recently in my attendance of conventions of Democratic women I have noticed that many of their discussions have been given over to expressions of disfavor in that women of the Democratic Party do much of the work, including precinct, county, state and national activities--but even women with outstanding ability rarely receive equal responsibilities, honors, privileges or opportunities of service with men.44

    Two maverick Senators, Borah and Norris, were in her corner.45 Her other male supporters included a few judges and lawyers, the husbands of female backers, men in the peace movement, and journalists. Her good friend William Allen White of the Emporia Gazette reminded FDR in 1941 that he had only asked three favors, including the nomination of Florence Allen.46

    A woman columnist in the D.C. Times-Herald wrote a highly complimentary background sketch.47 Several papers carried headlines which brought public attention to her candidacy.48

    Although the Baltimore Sun headlined that "Roosevelt Hints at Court Post Surprise,"49 the nominee for the fourth vacancy as expected by the White House and Justice Department staffs was William Douglas. Judge Allen's supporters tried to repeat their endorsement campaign for the Butler vacancy which Murphy received in 1940. But when Justice McReynolds departed in 1941 her group had second thoughts about contending for the sixth seat. A friend in Washington wrote:

    When the news broke the clan gathered to decide what we should do. Some wanted to fly into print again for you--send messages, etc. to the White House. I took the position that we had to consider you and I insisted that we should find out through Mrs. Roosevelt if the President had an open mind on this appointment. The word came back that he had made up his mind. . . .50

    A few old friends persisted in a disorganized fashion after 1941, but there was no strong effort in 1943, when a circuit judge finally won the prize from FDR

    The Candidate

    Florence Allen took the public position that she had "no political ambition whatever,"51 that "I am not a candidate for any appointment."52 That was the correct stance for a serious candidate. But even if she felt a realistic pessimism, she must have been caught up by the spontaneous and indefatigable enthusiasm of her supporters; she never specifically forbade them from working for her elevation between 1936 and 1949. She recognized that she was serving the interests of all women through the important public roles which she played and was pleased by letters which said, "My best wishes for the U.S. Supreme Court and for you--the trail blazer."53 She knew that it must appear that the position came to her rather than she to the position. This attitude was best expressed to Professor Sophonisba P. Breckinridge of the University of Chicago (the first woman to receive a Ph.D. in political science):

    Of course, my real task is to do my work here with all of the intelligence and energy and uprightness that there is in me, and I am trying to do that without thought of anything else.54

    The timing of the second vacancy was awkward, since Judge Allen was presiding over the critically important TVA case.55 A nomination to the Supreme Court before the decision came down might appear to be the most blatant form of bribe. But she evidently cherished some hope for elevation, nevertheless, which the district judges working on the TVA case with her recognized. On the morning of the announcement of Reed's appointment to the Sutherland seat, Judge John Gore told Judge Allen to smile when she entered the courtroom, so that the watching reporters could not impute to her a disappointment.56

    By early 1939, following the failure to win the second vacancy, the headquarters of the campaign was firmly established out of Florence Allen's own home and office. Judge Allen's cousin, who made her home with the judge, was in charge of communications among the scattered supporters. She agreed with Judge Martin's analysis that the letter campaign must be organized before the next (Brandeis) retirement.57 The cousin reported: "Things seem to be moving in the right direction as far as I know: I can only hope for the best."58

    At the time of the 1939 vacancies, Florence Allen made her claim to intellectual qualification for the court by preparing a book, entitled This Constitution of Ours.59 The book was written at the level of a course in good citizenship, appropriate for the immigrants for whom she showed so much compassion at the settlement house and later at naturalization ceremonies in the federal court. Since her time was absorbed by her speeches and writings, she assigned the task of collation and the integration of other research material to women friends in New York. Upon publication she sent autographed copies to the Justices of state Supreme Courts, to university professors, to Solicitor-General Biddle, to Eleanor Roosevelt, to William Allen White, and to lawyers in large firms. She even persuaded a friend to write a complimentary review for the University of Chicago Law Review. The content of this book revealed her fierce dedication to constitutional principles. Had Roosevelt invited Frankfurter to evaluate the book, she would necessarily have come off poorly as a scholar.

    In 1939 she also began work on an autobiography, with the help of a ghost writer. Putnam's provided an advance and expected a manuscript by the fall of 1940.60 If the story of her life sold widely, as Eleanor Roosevelt's had, she might be able to develop the national constituency which she needed to undergird her Supreme Court ambitions. She also put her hopes on the income from book sales to help pay off heavy debts, incurred during the crash of 1929 from signing notes for friends.61 However, the autobiographical project was lost in the press of other business, and did not appear until a year before her death.

    By the period of the Truman administration Judge Allen had forgotten how seriously she had pursued her Supreme Court ambitions. Carrie Chapman Catt wrote to Judge Allen in 1946 that she had been asked to join a campaign to put her on the Supreme Court and replied that she was proud of her "holding the highest court position of any woman in the world." Mrs. Catt warned that the politics of the Truman era "doesn't include giving more places to women" and asked forgiveness for her unresponsiveness.62 Judge Allen answered that "I have many times told my friends things very similar to what you say in your letter; and I have not lifted my finger to stimulate or even to encourage any campaign in my behalf."63 There was little prospect of lightning striking at this late stage of her career, although she continued to work as a judge for twenty more years. The 1948 dinner, which she proudly described to her family members in California in terms of the famous federal and state judges who honored her, was a valedictory to her ambition.64

    The Intermediaries

    Eleanor Roosevelt and Molly Dewson, the director of the Woman's Division at the Democratic National Committee, were the insiders who acted as intermediaries for those women who wanted a voice or a place in the Roosevelt administration, but had no direct access to the President, Cabinet, or presidential staff. These two invited effective women to campaign for the New Deal. They then demanded patronage awards for these workers on the same basis as for men who helped politically.

    Joseph Lash has claimed that Eleanor Roosevelt was "at the center of this growing New Deal political sisterhood,"65 but Molly Dewson spent full time on the interests of the party and women in the party. One year after the first inauguration, Eleanor Roosevelt persuaded Jim Farley to provide funds and status to the Women's Division. In January, 1934, Molly Dewson arrived to accept the director's position with a list of sixty women qualified by their participation in the 1932 campaign and by their abilities to take high public office. Whenever Dewson was unable to move the males who had the appointing powers she appealed to Eleanor Roosevelt to take the matter up with the President or with the appropriate Cabinet members.66

    Molly Dewson and Eleanor Roosevelt were key factors in Allen's nomination to the Sixth Circuit. Judge Allen wrote to Dewson in 1934: "I never can tell you how I feel about your coming to the front for me as you did . . . you helped me over the biggest hurdle."67 When Allen's Supreme Court ambitions were in flower, Molly Dewson had retired, but she sent a brief personal note with her usual light touch to FDR: "Of course if you did appoint Florence Allen it would be STUPENDOUS for us girls, My love to you."68

    There is no doubt that Florence Allen made an effort to develop a friendship with Mrs. Roosevelt, but her court work often interfered with her opportunities. The judge believed that Mrs. Roosevelt had known about her for a long time through mutual friends connected with the Henry Street Settlement.69 Right after the 1933 inauguration, Florence Allen got in touch with Mrs. Roosevelt to report on the "excellent reaction . . . to the appointments that the President has made of outstanding women."70 Mrs. Roosevelt responded with an invitation to see her in Washington.71 In the fall Judge Allen let Mrs. Roosevelt know of a court holiday when she planned to be in D.C. but Mrs. Roosevelt was out of town and their closer acquaintance was further delayed.72

    Allen described her later relationship with the presidential couple thus:

    While the president appointed me to this really distinguished position, he never set eyes on me until long after the appointment. I have met Mrs. Roosevelt casually a number of times, but I do not feel that I have anything like the connection with her that I do have with other women who have worked in the woman movement just as she did.73

    After 1934, Mrs. Roosevelt found many occasions to notice Judge Allen's position and accomplishments in her published articles. Allen appreciated that Mrs. Roosevelt was able to give her some of the national attention which she would need to become a viable candidate for the Supreme Court.74 She was quick to tell Mrs. Roosevelt of her embarrassment when a women's group announced support for Allen as a presidential candidate in 1936.75 Although she could not participate as openly as she had in 1932, Allen wanted no doubts raised about her loyalty to FDR. Immediately after his landslide victory in 1936, Allen wrote on her circuit letterhead of her joy at the outcome: "My only regret is that I could not have lifted my voice here and there."76

    Judge Allen always gave priority to her court business, although it interfered with her development of a close relationship with Mrs. Roosevelt, which could have been instrumental in her further ambitions. In 1936 she refused an invitation from a Cleveland women's group to introduce Mrs. Roosevelt because she could not leave the court in Cincinnati without a quorum. She explained to Mrs. Roosevelt: "I am torn greatly between my desire to hear you speak and to be able to say in public what admiration I have for your courage . . . But after all my first obligation is here. . . ."77 The Judge politely refused Mrs. Roosevelt's somewhat indiscrete invitation to sup at the White House, while she was sitting on the TVA case in Chattanooga.78

    Judge Allen kept up a careful friendly correspondence with Eleanor Roosevelt, noting the setbacks and successes of the Roosevelt family.79 She was also very anxious to defend her integrity to Mrs. Roosevelt. When a Detroit columnist made accusations about her payment of federal income taxes she wrote to Mrs. Roosevelt that the statements were entirely untrue: "I have paid income tax ever since my appointment to this bench, have never questioned the tax, and in fact have repeatedly stated that judges ought to be taxed like any one else." Mrs. Roosevelt noted on the letter that she showed it to the President and "he understands."80

    Mrs. Roosevelt herself had a deep commitment to the participation of women in politics, particularly in pursuit of peace and social welfare goals, but no specific dedication to Florence Allen's advancement above the circuit court. Her view, expressed in the negative, was that there was "no reason why a woman should not be appointed to the Supreme Court."81 But Mrs. Roosevelt did use her "My Day" column for a trial balloon for the Allen Supreme Court candidacy.82 Allen reported that Mrs. Roosevelt told her at the White House that she regretted that Allen had not been appointed to the Supreme Court,83 (and no doubt she did). Yet, there is no evidence that she put her full efforts into the elevation. At the 1948 New York University Law School dinner in honor of Judge Allen, Mrs. Roosevelt sent a powerful message, a compliment with little practical political force because of the judge's age:

    . . . if a President of the United States should decide to nominate a woman for the Supreme Court, it should be Judge Allen. She will be a nominee with backing, on a completely non-partisan basis, of American women who knew her career and accomplishments.84

    Opposition to Judge Allen

    While Judge Allen generally enjoyed good relations with the press,85 two papers made direct assaults upon her character and her ability when she was under consideration for the Supreme Court in 1939. In a gossip column about Washington events, a Detroit Free Press reporter wrote, crediting the Treasury Department for the information, that Judge Allen was "egging" on Eighth Circuit Judge Joseph Woodrough in his suit questioning the constitutionality of federal taxation of federal judicial salaries.86 Following the advice of two jurist-friends, Harold Stephens of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and Judge Martin in Tennessee, she sent a private explanation to Mrs. Roosevelt.

    In early 1939 Drew Pearson reported that FDR had considered "the Ohio jurist" but dropped her from consideration because the Attorney General showed him a record of reversals worse than that of any other prominent federal judge.87 To repair the damage, Judge Allen phoned the Reporter of the Ohio Supreme Court and asked him to follow up on the cases she decided in Columbus,88 while the Clerk of the Sixth Circuit checked the fate of her federal opinions since 1934. In eleven years on the Ohio Court she was reversed twice by the U.S. Supreme Court. In five years on the Sixth Circuit she had been reversed once.89 While some women friends in Chicago wrote to Attorney General Murphy asking for an explanation, others passed on the correct information to influential women in Washington.90 The Attorney General responded directly to Judge Allen that "I have frequently had occasion to express the highest regard for your ability and qualifications for judicial service and accordingly it distresses me greatly that a statement should be published that does so great an injustice to you."91 Such calumnies indicate that some persons involved in the selection process took Florence Allen's candidacy in 1939 very seriously. Her own reaction also reveals the deep ambition below her public disclaimers: "They meant to kill me off forever."92

    The Roosevelt Justices

    First Appointment (Hugo Black)--The defeat of the President's bill to pack the Court in 1937 was to influence Roosevelt's selection of the nominees for the Court. He was to reward those who supported him during the bitter fight. Those who openly rejected the plan forfeited any future claims to a seat.

    Senator Joseph T. Robinson of Arkansas, who had managed the court-packing bill, had been promised the first available seat. When Robinson died of a heart attack during the battle, the President realized that the bitterness that had been engendered in the Senate almost required another Senator be chosen to fill the seat being vacated by Justice Van Devanter. In Hugo Black, FDR found a Senator who met his own requirements on loyalty or court packing, New Deal ideology, reasonable youth, and geography (from the South or West).93 Professional competence was subordinate to political confidence as a criterion for selection at the time of Black's appointment, although a brilliant tenure was to result.94 While Judge Allen was the right age and had the right New Deal views, she was not really in a position to compete, because she came from the wrong region and was not a Senator.

    Second Appointment (Stanley Reed)--When George Sutherland left the Court, FDR's concern about under-representation from the West (Sutherland was from Utah) was secondary to his personal knowledge of the character and loyalty of his Solicitor-General, who had defended New Deal programs against heavy odds, and had kept out of the court-packing controversy. Florence Allen's decision in the TVA case had rescued only one important New Deal program, and she lacked personal acquaintance with the President.

    1939 Appointments (Felix Frankfurter and William O. Douglas--There were two vacancies to fill in 1939--the seats of Cardozo and Brandeis. Protestant Judge Allen was eliminated for consideration for one of the seats by ethnic considerations. FDR was to decide upon his long-time policy adviser, Felix Frankfurter, for the Cardozo seat. Roosevelt and Frankfurter were intimate friends, who had known each other for over thirty years. However, before he selected Frankfurter, Roosevelt, aware of Western claims to a Supreme Court seat, had Frankfurter "check out" University of Iowa Law School Dean Wiley Rutledge, and read the opinions of several sitting judges. It is quite possible that Florence Allen was among that list of judges. However, no judge on an inferior court could match Frankfurter's long and close association with FDR.

    The second vacancy in 1939 went to another academic, who had firm credentials as an office-holding member of the New Deal, William O. Douglas. Like Frankfurter, Douglas thought that Justice Brandeis suggested him to FDR as his own successor.95 Although Douglas was a registered voter in Connecticut, his supporters, including Senator Robert LaFollette and Attorney General Frank Murphy, worked to convince FDR that his childhood in the state of Washington made him acceptable to Western Senators. Douglas had firm backers inside the White House in Thomas Corcoran, Ben Cohen, and Jerome Frank.96 Douglas' closest competitor was Senator Lewis B. Schwellenback of Washington state, a close friend of Justice Black, and a vigorous campaigner on behalf of court-packing,97 who received as consolation prize a district judgeship.

    There were, however, others on the Attorney General's list of candidates, including another academic lawyer, Lloyd Garrison, Dean of the University of Wisconsin law school; western circuit judges--Joseph C. Hutcheson (Texas), Sam A. Bratton (New Mexico) and Judge Harold M. Stephens (Utah).98 Florence Allen did not appear on this list circulated in the White House, although the newspapers reported that she and Wiley Rutledge--who had been considered for the Cardozo seat--were contenders.99

    Fifth Appointment (Frank Murphy)--In 1940 the President filled the seat vacated by Pierce Butler of Minnesota with Attorney General Frank Murphy of Michigan, satisfying the representational requirements of religion and geography. Murphy had a range of executive experiences as Mayor of Detroit, High Commissioner of the Philippines, and Governor of Michigan. His appointment also permitted FDR to reshuffle his cabinet prior to his third term campaign.

    In his role as Attorney General, Murphy had provided the President with a list of fourteen eligible males,100 including the three circuit judges who had been considered for the Brandeis seat, and a number of Cabinet members. Roosevelt ignored the list. Despite Murphy's protestations of lack of technical competence, FDR moved him up and out of the Department of Justice. Judge Allen did not appear on the list. She did not fit the religious criterion, nor the President's inclination to place members of his administration team on the bench.

    Third Term Choices (James Byrnes and Robert Jackson)--In the first year of his third term, as U.S. entry to the war approached, the President filled the seats vacated by McReynolds and Stone (elevated to the Chief Justice chair upon Hughes' retirement). FDR again made his choices from the Congress and the Executive branch. He had asked Justice Frankfurter to check out Judge John J. Parker of the Fourth Circuit. Years before Parker had been nominated by Herbert Hoover, but had failed of confirmation. Frankfurter gave a lukewarm evaluation of "clear and painstaking," but not "fresh and creative" opinions.101 James Byrnes, Senator from South Carolina, was appointed in his stead, rewarded with the seat left by another southerner, for being an "effective agent" of administration policies in the Senate since 1933. Quick and unanimous confirmation saved presidential energies for the more critical foreign issues.102 Robert Jackson had known Roosevelt in his Albany days. He had worked in the FDR campaign in 1932, and came to Washington as General Counsel of the Internal Revenue Service. He had made a superb reputation as Solicitor General. Jackson had taken a whole-hearted part in the court reorganization fight. His book, The Struggle for Judicial Supremacy, expressed his views on the proper role of the Court.103

    Thus, the selections again came from inside the political family. Although Florence Allen was an ardent New Dealer, she had not shared in the New Deal's Washington battles, nor was there a need to "get her out of politics."

    The Last Chance: Eight New Nominee (Wiley Rutledge)--When Justice Byrnes left the bench, Roosevelt finally chose a circuit judge, who represented the West (Iowa) and was not close to the New Deal. Wiley Rutledge had been waiting in the wings, the candidate of many, since 1939. He had been appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, the day after he had lost the Brandeis vacancy to Douglas. He met the ideological requirements, as he had been sympathetic to the President over the court-packing struggle, and possessed liberal economic and nationalistic beliefs. During wartime, Roosevelt's attention was elsewhere and a fierce competition developed among the backers of a number of other viable candidates, among them Judge Learned Hand of the Second Circuit (supported by Chief Justice Stone and Justice Frankfurter), Senator Alben Barkley, Solicitor General Charles Fahy, Judge Parker, and Dean Acheson. The Attorney General invited three Justices--Black, Douglas and Murphy--to react to the published opinions of Rutledge. Their reactions were favorable. Rutledge's followers arranged for letters and endorsements to flow from bar associations, law faculty, and newspaper editors to the White House and the Justice Department to offset his lack of political clout.104

    Indeed, Rutledge was the only Roosevelt nominee without strong political credentials. His claim was based on his intellectual and legal skills. Allen's background was appropriate for this appointment. The other Roosevelt appointees had combined an academic background with executive public offices, or trial court experience with elected office. Florence Allen lacked academic connections, extensive executive responsibilities, and a legislative background, although by the time of FDR's first appointment in 1937, she had had seventeen years of bench experience (fifteen on important appellate courts). She was well prepared for the judicial role, but, without the opportunities afforded by positions in the other two branches, she was unable to demonstrate her mettle as a partisan and policymaker. FDR wanted persons on the Court who would be representative and who would be sensitive to political demands and needs. Allen was a professional judge.

    The Truman Justices--President Truman made four appointments to the Supreme Court. He used the first vacancy to solidify an "era of good feeling" with the Republican opposition by choosing his crony, Senator Harold Burton, to take the place of Owen Roberts, replacing one Republican with another. According to the newspapers, the others on the short list were also Republicans--Under Secretary of War, Robert Patterson, who was also a former federal judge; and Senator Warren Austin of Vermont.105

    Florence Allen clearly was well located geographically for this appointment, as an Ohio man was selected. She lacked the personal relationship with the President and membership in the Republican Party. In addition, the influence of women on the appointing President was weak.

    The women in the party who pushed women candidates for appointment did not develop close relations to the President until his second term. During the Roosevelt administration Molly Dewson, director of the Woman's Division, could and did go directly to the White House with her demands. She continued her pressures from retirement upon FDR's successor, writing in 1946:

    Dear Mr. President: If there ever should be an opening on the U.S. Supreme Court bench and you thought it a psychological moment to make a grand dramatic gesture toward women--who claim they are pretty sad about their lack of recognition by you--why do you not appoint Florence Allen of Ohio now on the U.S. Circuit Court of Ohio, Michigan and Kentucky to the Supreme Court?106

    India Edwards had to work through the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, until she showed Truman what the women could do in the 1948 campaign.107 Edwards did think that Truman had a high general evaluation of women's brains and ability and that he came close to naming Florence Allen.108 Lucy Howorth agreed that Truman had no personal opposition to women in office or politics. However, women had no direct access to the President. His White House coterie was all male.109 Nor did Bess Truman play the role of facilitating ambitious women that Eleanor Roosevelt had played with her husband. Thus while Truman may have had generous attitudes towards women, he did not translate them into judicial appointments. Of twenty-seven nominations to the circuit level, all were male. Of ninety-three appointments to the district court, only one was female. As a result, his record was the same as FDR's--one woman appointed to the federal courts.

    In 1946, in an attempt to reduce internal dissension. President Truman selected a new Chief Justice from outside the Court. Fred Vinson was another close associate of the President, but he did bring an unusual combination of public experiences. Florence Allen was not in competition to be Chief Justice. No politician in the middle 1940s would have made a woman Chief Justice.

    A group consisting of Donald Dawson, of the President's staff, Peyton Ford for the Attorney General, and Senator J. Howard McGrath for the Democratic National Committee, discussed a list of six names for the vacancy caused by Frank Murphy's death. There were four sitting judges, the Secretary of War (a former federal judge) and McGrath himself.110 Truman selected someone not on the list, his Attorney General Tom Clark, a personal friend whom he knew as chief of war frauds during his investigation committee period. Clark was a Texas protege of the powerful Senator Tom Connally. It was reported at the time that Chief Justice Vinson approved of the choice.111

    Personal friendship was also the basic factor in Truman's last appointment to the Court: Sherman Minton. They entered the Senate together as freshmen and sat at adjoining desks.

    Florence Allen did not have the New Deal congressional experience, nor the wartime cabinet experience, which made the four male Justices viable candidates to Truman. She had a longer preparation on the circuit level than Vinson or Minton. Their judicial background gave them credibility, but did not significantly improve their entitlement to the place. It is clear that the odds were against Florence Allen, regardless of her sex, for at least ten or eleven of the twelve appointments during these two Democratic administrations.

    Objective Criteria: Age, Sex, and Veteran Status

    Most of the qualifications for a position of authority are subjective. It is difficult to measure and to compare the attributes of candidates. A few qualifications are objective: once the appointer decides whether he wants to apply an age, or a sex, or a race, or a religious criterion, the candidates can be appropriately included or excluded on that basis. From the examination of the twelve appointments, it is clear that Allen was excluded from several competitions on the basis of religion, never on the basis of race. The extent to which her age and her sex and related veteran status had an impact upon her candidacy will be discussed.

    Age: the Flexible Criterion--Following the court-packing struggle, the Democratic Presidents took care to select persons at an age which would ensure ten or fifteen years of service prior to a reasonable retirement age. The average age of the Roosevelt nominees was 54 and of Truman's nominees 55.112

    Florence Allen met the age requirement during the FDR period. At the time of the Black selection in 1937 she was fifty-three. When the Byrnes seat was relatively open to competition in 1943, she was fifty-nine. But during the Truman period she was over sixty. When India Edwards felt that she came close to persuading Truman to make the appointment she was sixty-five, a matter which would certainly have been raised at confirmation hearings.

    Sex/Veteran Status--Florence Allen lacked a qualification closely associated with sex identity which has been throughout U.S. history an important credential for public office -- veteran status. Nine of the twelve new appointees during the Democratic administrations had some military status during and after World War I. President Truman, whose 1918 overseas experience was a significant event in his personal life, only chose veterans.113 Florence Allen was not eligible for combat service. Indeed, she opposed the draft. Her most significant personal ideal was world peace. She was closer to Eleanor than to Franklin in her foreign policy views; more alien to Truman's perspective than to FDR's. Both her age and her sex/veteran status disqualified her for the four Truman seats; but not for the eight FDR places.

    Why Florence Allen Did Not Reach the Supreme Court

    Attaining high judicial office is a chancy matter. The pool of candidates with the necessary political and professional qualifications is small in comparison with the general population, but large in proportion to the number of places at the top. In the pool of candidates, Florence Allen was the first and the only woman in the 1930s and 1940s. As one of her woman backers who was also a judge pointed out: "Judge Allen is at the present time the only woman lawyer in the United States, whose ability, training, experience, and personality qualify her for the position. . . ."114

    If the President's political intuition had told him that the country was ready for a woman on the Court and that such an appointment would benefit his administration, he would have had no choice among representatives of the female sex. She was the only available woman. The first woman is likely to go on the Court when the President has more room for selection. The female pool of legal professionals in important judgeships and other political offices did not expand until the 1970s.

    President Roosevelt would have been moving ahead of public opinion in choosing a woman justice in the 1930's. The Gallup polls, responsive to the news reports of Allen's candidacy, posed the issue to the public in 1938: "Would you favor the appointment of a woman lawyer to be a judge on the U.S. Supreme Court?" A very large minority, 39%, were favorable.115 But the public was expressing a theoretical support for females in government, because the Gallup poll reported a different level of response to a more concrete question: "Would you like to see the next appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court go to a man or a woman?" Only 18% wanted a woman who would necessarily have been Florence Allen.116 News reporters sensed that the political elite as well as the public rejected the notion of a woman on the Court in the 1930's. The Baltimore Sun claimed that: "A lot of people have recoiled from the prospect of a woman on the Supreme Court. To them the thing is almost unthinkable."117 President Roosevelt knew that his nomination of Allen would suit only a small minority of his constituents. Although he did not hesitate to disappoint particular persons or groups, he was sensitive to the larger forces of public approval.

    To what extent did the wishes of the sitting Justices to keep their sanctum all-male influence the appointing authorities? As long as the appointer is concerned about the productivity of the work group, the feelings of the incumbents will necessarily be taken into account. But the ability of sitting Justices to influence the choice of a colleague depends upon a variety of conditions. Roosevelt was certainly not concerned to cater to the prejudices of the "nine old men." A President who was willing to throw a "tiger" into the Court in 1937 would not have hesitated to send in a lioness. After he had placed a number of close associates on the Court, particularly Frankfurter, he consulted their preferences on prospective colleagues. However, the biases of the incumbents are never the most salient considerations for a President.

    President Truman apparently bowed to the wishes of his Court, but as we have seen in the brief review of the appointment process, there were other candidates whom he had good reason to prefer. India Edwards, director of the Women's Division of the Democratic National Committee in 1949-1950, reports that Truman was responsive to her recommendation of Florence Allen for the Supreme Court. In her oral history, she reports his reaction: "Well, I'm willing. I'd be glad to. I think we ought to have a woman. But I'll have to talk to the Chief Justice about it and see what he thinks." When she returned to the White House to hear the decision, the verdict was: "No, the Justices don't want a woman. They say they couldn't sit around with their robes off and their feet up and discuss the problems." India Edwards said: "They could if they wanted to."118

    The fates were not kind to Judge Allen. If Truman had been in confrontation with the Court, he would not have hesitated to ignore their preferences based upon this flimsy ground. But he did have a male's understanding of their resistance, and during this period such reasons were still socially acceptable.

    Justices clearly do have some input into the evaluation of candidates. Sometimes they have a veto, although their critical evaluation of a candidate's experience and ability may simply cloak their prejudices. Sometimes Justices may provide the approval which tips the scales among contenders. There is no indication that Florence Allen had a champion from within the Court. During her campaign for the circuit bench, former Justice John H. Clarke, an old friend of her father, had played an important part.119 But he was not involved in her Supreme Court effort. In any event, in retirement in California, he would not have had the influence of a sitting Justice.

    Why was President Roosevelt willing to nominate Florence Allen to the Court of Appeals but not to the Supreme Court? Her supporters assumed that a seat on the Supreme Court could be achieved with the same kind of campaign and for the same reasons as the intermediate appellate position. Florence Allen was less naive than her dedicated supporters. She understood the difference in the two selection processes. In retrospect she wrote that from the first mention of her name for the Supreme Court "I did not then nor ever expect such an appointment."120 She knew that selection was a political lottery. For that reason she did not discourage the efforts of friends, but she also realized that she was not personally close enough to the President or to the Washington inner circle.

    When she was appointed to the circuit bench, the Ohio Senator had been the key figure. President Roosevelt invested little of his own political capital in sustaining the Senator's choice through his party, Justice Department, and White House apparatus. In contrast, his appointments to the Supreme Court could become his own political liabilities. He had not been close to the reactions of the judges on the Sixth Circuit, who were opposed to her joining them,121 nor would the unhappiness of the party in Ohio affect him as much as it would the Senator. On the other hand, he was immediately cognizant of the feelings of the Supreme Court Justices in Washington, of the Supreme Court Bar, of his Solicitor General, and national party leaders in Congress and the Democratic National Committee. The political costs might escalate. As the public opinion polls showed, the political rewards would be small. The letter-writing campaign which worked so well in 1934 to win an office largely controlled by state political figures was simply not effective in winning a nomination which involved the complex political calculations of a President.

    The theory behind the efforts of her supporters was the selection of a Supreme Court Justice hinged upon personal qualities. They were offering a marvelously qualified candidate, and they did not appreciate the multitude of other considerations involved in the President's choice of a Justice. From the President's perspective, Florence Allen was satisfactorily placed where she was, exemplifying his concern for women's status. Nor did FDR need to free her position to someone else, as the size of her circuit bench doubled, giving him three more appointments. Nor did he need her in Washington as a personal advisor. He did not view her as a potential rival for the Presidency, who needed to be sidetracked. Nor was he indebted to her or her friends for an important contribution to his administration's legislative or executive policies or to the party's coffers. While trial judges have found themselves on the circuit bench for their management of cases important to some administration, a single case, even the TVA decision, was not the kind of continuing service which created a reason for a High Court appointment. Finally, Allen's nomination would have created problems to which Roosevelt did not want to divert administration energies. Confirmation hearings would probably have been long and vexing.

    Thus from the presidential perspective there were few reasons to make such a choice. Apart from personal qualities, Allen's claim to a seat was representational. The forces behind her campaign sprang from the energies of the woman suffrage and reform movements. But women were a dwindling force in politics after 1920. Florence Allen did not have a large enough constituency to demand the recognition of a Supreme Court seat. Women were not able to build that constituency for many more years.122

    THE FIRST WOMAN CANDIDATE FOR THE SUPREME COURT -- FLORENCE E. ALLEN

    Beverly B. Cook*

    Copyright 1981 by the Supreme Court Historical Society
    From Yearbook 1981 Supreme Court Historical Society


    Qualifications for a Supreme Court Appointment
    Ideological Standards for Appointment
    Professional Standards for Appointment
    Representational Basis for Appointment
    Campaigning for the Supreme Court--The Backers
    The Candidate
    The Intermediaries
    Opposition to Judge Allen
    The Roosevelt Justices
    Objective Criteria: Age, Sex, and Veteran Status
    Why Florence Allen Did Not Reach the Supreme Court
    Notes

    Florence E. Allen almost became the first woman appointed to the Supreme Court of the United States. After President Roosevelt placed her on the U.S. Court of Appeals in the Sixth Circuit, in 1934, she was highly visible in the federal judicial hierarchy. A campaign for her elevation to the High Court was run primarily by enthusiastic women from a variety of reform and professional groups. Her presence on the Supreme Court was a goal well worthy of the efforts of veterans of the suffrage movement, who expressed great pride in the achievement of each woman who would break the male monopoly over a governmental position.

    Judge Allen's attitude toward the ambitions of her supporter\s was ambivalent. Within weeks of her confirmation for the Sixth Circuit seat, she wrote:

    Do not block in the future too optimistically because there are some things that will never happen in our lifetime. In other words, when my friends delightfully tell me that they hope to see me upon the Supreme Bench of the U.S., I know two things: first, that will never happen to a woman while I am living, and second, that perhaps it is just as well not to mention that possibility at the present time because there is a certain type of lawyer that immediately becomes fighting mad when that possibility is mentioned.1

    Her political instinct was to restrain her supporters from a premature effort, before she gained experience and recognition as a federal appellate judge. She was realistic in her assessment of the limits of opportunity for women in the law in her era. When she retired as chief judge of the Sixth Circuit in 1959 (and when she died as a senior judge in 1966) the Supreme Court still was all male, while the tier of circuit courts reverted (for two years) to a male monopoly.2

    Qualifications for a Supreme Court Appointment

    Many individuals possess the necessary attributes for service on the Supreme Court, but never come to the attention of those who make the selection. Four offices together control the process of selection--the Presidency, the Office of Attorney General, the Senate, and the Supreme Court. While Florence Allen had most of the qualifications for the office, she lacked leverage with the inner circle which drew up the short list of viable candidates. Even intervention by Eleanor Roosevelt and by the Women's Division of the National Democratic Committee was not enough to overcome resistance from the four central offices.

    In the making of a Supreme Court Justice, the President is the central figure. Many Presidents prefer to know personally the qualities of the person placed in a position to interpret the fundamental national law and to affect public policy for a generation. The Attorney General, as the chief legal adviser to the President, with close ties to the overlapping political and legal professional communities, may bring other candidates to the President's attention. Through the facilities of the Department to gather information and make judgments, he may eliminate or improve the chances of candidates.3 Justices sitting on the Court have a sense from their immediate experience of the pertinent abilities and appropriate personality for the position. Some Justices have volunteered names and evaluated (and probably vetoed) candidates whom they felt would not be compatible or contribute to their small and intimate working group.4 As the Senate must confirm Supreme Court appointments, the nominee to the Court must appear suitable to the Senate majority, to the leaders of the President's party in the Senate, and to the Judiciary Committee.5

    The qualifications for candidacy for the highest bench have been described under three categories: ideological, professional, and representational.6 The candidate must first have the "right" values and public policy views to satisfy the administration and the key Senators of the President's party. The recognition of the independence of the "third branch" provides the very incentive to avoid placing a person with a different political philosophy in a position to interpret or veto administrative programs. As a substitute for a candidate with stable and reliable set of political opinions, the President may look for personal loyalty, which will have the same short-run effect. The professional competence of the candidate is a necessary but not sufficient criterion. "Eminence" in public service compensates for less experience as a legal practitioner. Judicial experience has never been considered a requisite to sit on the constitutional court, but such service provides the appointing agents with a jurisprudential record from which to draw conclusions about ideological soundness.

    The search for candidates with the appropriate views and professional qualifications may occur within the boundaries of certain representational requirements. Although the geographical background of the prospective judge is no longer important to the function of circuit-riding, the President takes account of the pride of major regions. The geographical claim, like other representational criteria, may be closely related to areas of party strength and electoral strategies of the President's party.7 Most nominees have the appropriate party identification. In the minority of instances where the President sees some advantage in a cross-party choice, the individual must at least meet the ideological or loyalty standard. The religion, the race, or the ethnicity of the nominee may fit the coalition of interests that the President needs to satisfy. The male sex of any Supreme Court nominee was taken for granted until Florence Allen came to public notice in the 1930's. But her female constituency did not have sufficient organizational strength to demand representation in high public office. Catholics and Jews had attained such strength earlier. Blacks were to achieve it by the mid-1960's. By the 1980's women have probably also reached this stage.

    Florence Allen's failure to reach the Supreme Court was not due to lack of qualifications, but to her inability to penetrate the selection process. Her sex identity was not a complete bar. Even had she been male, there would probably have been only two realistic opportunities for a person with her combination of qualities on a circuit bench in the Midwest--the seats ultimately filled by William O. Douglas and Wiley Rutledge. How Judge Allen fit the three categories of qualification can be appreciated by a brief review of her public life.

    Ideological Standards for Appointment

    The reformist bent of Allen's career fit the dominant themes of the New Deal. She was stirred to action by the plight of those deprived or mistreated by authority, and worked out her own creative solutions for problems ranging from inefficiency to war. After her first year of law school at the University of Chicago, she worked for the New York League of the Protection of Immigrants, living at the Henry Street Settlement House.8 Her law degree came from New York University in 1914. She then returned to Ohio to open a practice. As soon as the nineteenth Amendment was ratified in 1920, she ran for trial judge in Cleveland. As a Judge of the Court of Common Pleas, whenever she identified a problem involving the jailing of witnesses, the bail policy, or the administrative weakness of the court, she would introduce her own experiment, a court rule, or even propose revision of a state statute.9 As a Justice on the Ohio Supreme Court from 1922-1934, she made rulings consonant with New Deal support for the rights of labor. She held, for example, that picketing without violence or any form of coercion was lawful.10 She also interpreted the Ohio workman's compensation law broadly to extend benefits and coverage.11 Her approach to social justice was compatible with that of Franklin D. Roosevelt, perhaps even more so with that of Eleanor Roosevelt.

    Her stance on the rights of racial minorities to equal treatment was generally ahead of the times. However, one of her decisions against the complaint of a black student in the Home Economics Program at Ohio State was questioned during consideration of her confirmation to the Sixth Circuit. Judge Allen attempted to distinguish between academic rights and social prerogatives related to residence on campus.12 After her death the federal courts were still trying to separate the private right to discriminate from the public right to equal treatment.13

    Florence Allen's party credentials were good. Although her father was the first Republican member of Congress from Utah (her childhood home state), she entered politics as a Democrat in a different state, Ohio. She joined the central committee in Cleveland at the time Newton Baker was county chairman. In 1916, she campaigned for President Wilson in the west under Baker's direction. When Baker advocated compulsory military service, she resigned as head of the Democratic Women of Ohio. Because the 19th Amendment was ratified too late for her to apply for Democratic party endorsement for trial judge, she got on the ballot in 1920 by petition upon the urging of the Woman Suffrage Party. Republican women leaders worked on her campaign along with Democratic women, all of whom belonged to nonpartisan women's groups, such as the Business and Professional Women, the League of Women Voters, women lawyers' clubs, church groups, university women, and other local societies. Labor and the press also gave support to her candidacy; and she led the field of candidates.14

    Her campaigns for the Ohio Supreme Court also had bipartisan backing. Although she cleared first with Newton Baker, the Democratic party did not endorse her.15 She created her own organization of Florence Allen clubs from the remnants of the suffrage organization. Again, Republican women who had worked with her in the Ohio campaign for the 19th Amendment from 1910 to 1920 joined the Democratic women.

    Florence Allen had the kind of continuing interest in vital public policies typical of Supreme Court Justices. She considered running for the state legislature before the opportunity for the trial judgeship occurred. She felt that she could work more effectively for certain policy ends, including world peace, from a legislative rather than a judicial body.16 While she was serving on the Ohio Supreme Court, she decided to run as the Democratic candidate for U.S. Senator, based on Newton Baker's advice. However, the incumbent changed his mind about retiring and she released the state party from its endorsement, continuing her campaign through her women's ad hoc organization, but losing. She was the bona fide candidate of her party for the first time in 1932, losing a race for the House of Representatives, but receiving 41% of the vote.17 Her court seat was not endangered by these candidacies. She won a second six-year term as a nonpartisan in 1928.

    Florence Allen faced the same difficulty in establishing her credentials as a successful party candidate and office-holder as women fifty years later. Her membership and active participation were accepted within limits; when she offered to take on leadership roles, particularly candidacies for high public offices, the party showed little interest in giving her real opportunities. The party used her services in unlikely congressional races. Her own victories were independent of the Democratic party and contingent upon her organization of existing women's political clubs into a working state-wide unit. The decline of female activism in the 1930's was one reason she was happy to take the life-tenured federal seat and avoid a third state-wide race for the Ohio Supreme Court in 1934. Allen's credentials for the Supreme Court nomination did not include those "party chips" that many male politicians, even those on the bench, have been able to accumulate during their careers.

    Professional Standards for Appointment

    By the 1930's Judge Allen was the most eminent woman legal professional in the country. She had the scholarly credentials typical of Supreme Court Justices.18 She had been Phi Beta Kappa as an undergraduate, second in her graduating class at New York University Law School, and counsel on the winning side of landmark cases for women's rights in Ohio.19 She was an active member of the American Bar Association and the International Bar Association, and an international law leader in the peace movement. She had worked with national leaders of the woman suffrage movement (Carrie Chapman Catt, Anna Howard Shaw, Harriet Taylor Upton, and Maude Wood Park); with leaders of the social welfare movement (Florence Kelly, Frances Kellor, and Sophonisba Breckenridge); and with leaders of the movement to outlaw war (whose membership largely overlapped the other two). She had developed a constituency outside Ohio and the Sixth Circuit through her speeches to women's clubs, university and law school convocations, and bar associations in major cities.20 The only woman in public office in the New Deal with higher stature was Frances Perkins, Secretary of Labor. But Perkins was not a lawyer.

    Judicial experience is not essential to be considered for the High Court. Indeed, it often interferes with the development of political contacts that assure such consideration. Only one of Roosevelt's appointees had the circuit court preparation that Judge Allen would have brought. The meaning to the President of service on the bench is not just proof of competence, but also a "readily available index of the personal and intellectual qualities of potential candidates."21 More importantly the portfolio of opinion discloses the pattern of the judge's policy preferences.

    Florence Allen showed her colors in her major case, the TVA trial, where she displayed clearly her agreement with a symbolically significant economic recovery program of the New Deal and her ability to reconcile skillfully the legal provision undergirding the program with the Constitution. The Chief Judge of the Sixth Circuit assigned Judge Allen in 1937 to preside over the three-judge court.22 She heard the case in Chattanooga with two Tennessee district judges. One of them, Judge John D. Martin, became a life-long friend and supporter of her elevation to the Supreme Court. After months spent in hearings and opinion drafting she upheld the validity of the TVA statute. The fact that the decision was vitally important to the administration, after other programs had been effectively destroyed by the Supreme Court between 1933 and 1936, does not detract from the professional skill with which she supervised the trial process, handled complicated evidence, and arranged the legal arguments in her opinion.

    Representational Basis for Appointment

    In many respects, Florence Allen fit the model of a typical Supreme Court Justice which has been described by John R. Schmidhauser: white, Protestant, of British ethnic stock, and born into comfortable circumstances in an urban or small town environment.23 She was white, Protestant, descended from British settlers, and raised in Utah towns.24 Justices are also drawn from political-legal families.25 Allen's father was a lawyer who served in the Utah legislature and the U.S. Congress. Her college-educated mother was a leader on the state level of women's policy-oriented clubs. Her geographical base had been fixed in Ohio, a major supplier of Justices, since her undergraduate days at Western Reserve (1900-1904). But Judge Allen did lack one requirement of powerful political status--the right sex.

    Except for her sex, Florence Allen met the basic political, professional, and representational standards for Supreme Court selection. Still, as we know, few of the many potentially acceptable candidates, appear on short lists, and fewer are accepted. Recognition of candidates and their winnowing to the nominee depends upon the particular persons involved in the process and the contemporary political situation within which the events occur.26 The most important elements are the party membership of the President and of the candidates. Florence Allen was a Democrat. During the period of her professional maturity, two Democratic Presidents were in office from 1933 to 1952. President Roosevelt made eight new appointments (excluding his elevation of Justice Stone, a Coolidge appointee, to the center chair). President Truman made four appointments. Thus, Florence Allen was "available" for twelve vacancies. To understand why she finished her career after twenty-five years still on the Sixth Circuit bench, we shall examine the campaign for her elevation to the Supreme Court, and the situation within which each appointment of a male candidate occurred.

    Campaigning for The Supreme Court--The Backers

    The campaign on behalf of Florence Allen for the Supreme Court stretched across two administrations. With each vacancy the hopes of some of her followers were rekindled, but the urgency of the effort was to decline in the 1940's. From beginning to end her efforts to reach the bench were carried by women.

    Her friends began to push her interests openly in 1936 in anticipation of the first available seat. When the Van Devanter vacancy occurred, supporters wrote to President Roosevelt that the women of the country wanted to see Allen on the Supreme Court bench.27 Although her adherents were active at the time of the Black appointment, they were better prepared for the second Supreme Court vacancy in 1938, when her name was mentioned publicly. One supporter wrote from Florida that a host of her friends determined that her final goal should be the highest Court.28 Lawyers who knew her on the federal bench in Cincinnati, and older associates from her days on state benches in Columbus and Cleveland, worked by mail and in person. One lawyer tried "to further her cause" in Washington.29 Another lawyer wrote to Franklin Roosevelt and to Eleanor Roosevelt separately and sent Allen copies. He urged FDR that fitness rather than sex should be the main consideration and reported that male members of the bar considered her an outstanding judge.30 To Mrs. Roosevelt he emphasized that Allen's influence on eight men would be humanizing.31

    The work on her behalf continued for the next vacancy, the Cardozo seat. Judge John D. Martin of Tennessee, her colleague in the TVA case, wrote of his disappointment that the President did not select her. He was keeping score by the geographical criterion and predicted that the next appointment would go west. He also urged a concentrated effort during the Roosevelt administration when her chances were greatest: ". . . now is the time to bring forward all the pressure of strong endorsements . . . for the next vacancy."32 Florence Allen was returning the compliment during the same period by recommending Judge Martin to the Attorney General for appointment to the Sixth Circuit.33

    The participants in the letter-writing campaign in 1939 ranged from the little-known women lawyers in small midwestern towns to New Deal office-holders in Washington with useful contacts. Letters that were written to the President were screened by his staff. Unless a letter bore a special tag, it was unlikely that the President would be aware of the character and variety of support for Allen's candidacy. The head of the Woman's Division wrote to Stephen Early in 1939 asking him to show specific "important letters" to the President--those from Judge Dorothy Kenyon, New York City; Judge Annabel Matthews, D.C.; Dean Harriet Elliott, Woman's College of North Carolina; Professor Grace Abbott, University of Chicago; Mrs. Earlene White, BPW national president; and Dr. Emily Hickman of the YWCA.34 His response that all endorsements were considered at the time of an appointment was hardly satisfactory. Allen was supported by such organizations as the American Association of University Women, the Business and Professional Women, the General Federation of Women's Club, New York Women's Trade Union League, American Legion Auxiliary, Women's Bar Association of D.C., and Women Lawyers of New York City.35

    Within the federal courts, secretaries of the judges corresponded, arranging for the endorsements. One secretary wrote to Judge Allen: "We had some plain and fancy cussing around here about the last Supreme Court appointment. We are all pulling for you on the next go-round. . . ."36 Her judge sent a tribute of Judge Allen to a college dean, who in turn passed the evaluation on to the White House.37 The secretary to a Chicago federal judge wrote to a woman lawyer in that city offering further help and commenting ". . . we feel she is better equipped than most men."38 However, Allen's secretary fell into an embarrassing situation in writing to federal judges for endorsements. Judge Gore died when a letter asking for his help was in the mail and she feared that it might reach the wrong hands. Judge Martin took care of the mishap.

    Women judges also rallied behind the only woman in the federal court system (Article III courts). Judge Sarah Hughes, later appointed to the U.S. District Court by President Kennedy, wrote several times on her Texas state court stationery: "I believe that she is thoroughly qualified and that she would bring honor to the Court."39 Judge Dorothy Kenyon of The New York Municipal Court wrote to the President that "So many distinguished women have urged her elevation to the bench that it is perhaps unnecessary to add my voice to the others." She enclosed a summary of Allen's legal opinions.40 Judge Anna M. Kross, New York City Magistrate, wrote to Mary Anderson at the Women's Bureau in D.C. that she had been conducting a quiet campaign for Allen through a "Committee for the Advancement of Women Lawyers to High Judicial Office of the National Association of Women Lawyers" and was planning to broaden the coalition for the next vacancy.41 Judge Annabel Matthews, the first woman on the Tax Court, and a Republican, wrote that women lawyers took great pride in Allen's record as a great liberal and jurist.42 However, Mabel W. Willerbrandt, the second woman to serve as assistant Attorney General, and the only other woman in the country with credentials for a Supreme Court appointment, from a Republican president, was somewhat less generous. She asked FDR to appoint "a woman."43

    Support from young women in the party which struck a chord in the White House: "I know of nothing that will unify the Democrats more than the act of your appointing the Honorable Florence Allen to the Supreme Court." The writer made a complaint and a plea which were just as valid forty years later:

    Recently in my attendance of conventions of Democratic women I have noticed that many of their discussions have been given over to expressions of disfavor in that women of the Democratic Party do much of the work, including precinct, county, state and national activities--but even women with outstanding ability rarely receive equal responsibilities, honors, privileges or opportunities of service with men.44

    Two maverick Senators, Borah and Norris, were in her corner.45 Her other male supporters included a few judges and lawyers, the husbands of female backers, men in the peace movement, and journalists. Her good friend William Allen White of the Emporia Gazette reminded FDR in 1941 that he had only asked three favors, including the nomination of Florence Allen.46

    A woman columnist in the D.C. Times-Herald wrote a highly complimentary background sketch.47 Several papers carried headlines which brought public attention to her candidacy.48

    Although the Baltimore Sun headlined that "Roosevelt Hints at Court Post Surprise,"49 the nominee for the fourth vacancy as expected by the White House and Justice Department staffs was William Douglas. Judge Allen's supporters tried to repeat their endorsement campaign for the Butler vacancy which Murphy received in 1940. But when Justice McReynolds departed in 1941 her group had second thoughts about contending for the sixth seat. A friend in Washington wrote:

    When the news broke the clan gathered to decide what we should do. Some wanted to fly into print again for you--send messages, etc. to the White House. I took the position that we had to consider you and I insisted that we should find out through Mrs. Roosevelt if the President had an open mind on this appointment. The word came back that he had made up his mind. . . .50

    A few old friends persisted in a disorganized fashion after 1941, but there was no strong effort in 1943, when a circuit judge finally won the prize from FDR

    The Candidate

    Florence Allen took the public position that she had "no political ambition whatever,"51 that "I am not a candidate for any appointment."52 That was the correct stance for a serious candidate. But even if she felt a realistic pessimism, she must have been caught up by the spontaneous and indefatigable enthusiasm of her supporters; she never specifically forbade them from working for her elevation between 1936 and 1949. She recognized that she was serving the interests of all women through the important public roles which she played and was pleased by letters which said, "My best wishes for the U.S. Supreme Court and for you--the trail blazer."53 She knew that it must appear that the position came to her rather than she to the position. This attitude was best expressed to Professor Sophonisba P. Breckinridge of the University of Chicago (the first woman to receive a Ph.D. in political science):

    Of course, my real task is to do my work here with all of the intelligence and energy and uprightness that there is in me, and I am trying to do that without thought of anything else.54

    The timing of the second vacancy was awkward, since Judge Allen was presiding over the critically important TVA case.55 A nomination to the Supreme Court before the decision came down might appear to be the most blatant form of bribe. But she evidently cherished some hope for elevation, nevertheless, which the district judges working on the TVA case with her recognized. On the morning of the announcement of Reed's appointment to the Sutherland seat, Judge John Gore told Judge Allen to smile when she entered the courtroom, so that the watching reporters could not impute to her a disappointment.56

    By early 1939, following the failure to win the second vacancy, the headquarters of the campaign was firmly established out of Florence Allen's own home and office. Judge Allen's cousin, who made her home with the judge, was in charge of communications among the scattered supporters. She agreed with Judge Martin's analysis that the letter campaign must be organized before the next (Brandeis) retirement.57 The cousin reported: "Things seem to be moving in the right direction as far as I know: I can only hope for the best."58

    At the time of the 1939 vacancies, Florence Allen made her claim to intellectual qualification for the court by preparing a book, entitled This Constitution of Ours.59 The book was written at the level of a course in good citizenship, appropriate for the immigrants for whom she showed so much compassion at the settlement house and later at naturalization ceremonies in the federal court. Since her time was absorbed by her speeches and writings, she assigned the task of collation and the integration of other research material to women friends in New York. Upon publication she sent autographed copies to the Justices of state Supreme Courts, to university professors, to Solicitor-General Biddle, to Eleanor Roosevelt, to William Allen White, and to lawyers in large firms. She even persuaded a friend to write a complimentary review for the University of Chicago Law Review. The content of this book revealed her fierce dedication to constitutional principles. Had Roosevelt invited Frankfurter to evaluate the book, she would necessarily have come off poorly as a scholar.

    In 1939 she also began work on an autobiography, with the help of a ghost writer. Putnam's provided an advance and expected a manuscript by the fall of 1940.60 If the story of her life sold widely, as Eleanor Roosevelt's had, she might be able to develop the national constituency which she needed to undergird her Supreme Court ambitions. She also put her hopes on the income from book sales to help pay off heavy debts, incurred during the crash of 1929 from signing notes for friends.61 However, the autobiographical project was lost in the press of other business, and did not appear until a year before her death.

    By the period of the Truman administration Judge Allen had forgotten how seriously she had pursued her Supreme Court ambitions. Carrie Chapman Catt wrote to Judge Allen in 1946 that she had been asked to join a campaign to put her on the Supreme Court and replied that she was proud of her "holding the highest court position of any woman in the world." Mrs. Catt warned that the politics of the Truman era "doesn't include giving more places to women" and asked forgiveness for her unresponsiveness.62 Judge Allen answered that "I have many times told my friends things very similar to what you say in your letter; and I have not lifted my finger to stimulate or even to encourage any campaign in my behalf."63 There was little prospect of lightning striking at this late stage of her career, although she continued to work as a judge for twenty more years. The 1948 dinner, which she proudly described to her family members in California in terms of the famous federal and state judges who honored her, was a valedictory to her ambition.64

    The Intermediaries

    Eleanor Roosevelt and Molly Dewson, the director of the Woman's Division at the Democratic National Committee, were the insiders who acted as intermediaries for those women who wanted a voice or a place in the Roosevelt administration, but had no direct access to the President, Cabinet, or presidential staff. These two invited effective women to campaign for the New Deal. They then demanded patronage awards for these workers on the same basis as for men who helped politically.

    Joseph Lash has claimed that Eleanor Roosevelt was "at the center of this growing New Deal political sisterhood,"65 but Molly Dewson spent full time on the interests of the party and women in the party. One year after the first inauguration, Eleanor Roosevelt persuaded Jim Farley to provide funds and status to the Women's Division. In January, 1934, Molly Dewson arrived to accept the director's position with a list of sixty women qualified by their participation in the 1932 campaign and by their abilities to take high public office. Whenever Dewson was unable to move the males who had the appointing powers she appealed to Eleanor Roosevelt to take the matter up with the President or with the appropriate Cabinet members.66

    Molly Dewson and Eleanor Roosevelt were key factors in Allen's nomination to the Sixth Circuit. Judge Allen wrote to Dewson in 1934: "I never can tell you how I feel about your coming to the front for me as you did . . . you helped me over the biggest hurdle."67 When Allen's Supreme Court ambitions were in flower, Molly Dewson had retired, but she sent a brief personal note with her usual light touch to FDR: "Of course if you did appoint Florence Allen it would be STUPENDOUS for us girls, My love to you."68

    There is no doubt that Florence Allen made an effort to develop a friendship with Mrs. Roosevelt, but her court work often interfered with her opportunities. The judge believed that Mrs. Roosevelt had known about her for a long time through mutual friends connected with the Henry Street Settlement.69 Right after the 1933 inauguration, Florence Allen got in touch with Mrs. Roosevelt to report on the "excellent reaction . . . to the appointments that the President has made of outstanding women."70 Mrs. Roosevelt responded with an invitation to see her in Washington.71 In the fall Judge Allen let Mrs. Roosevelt know of a court holiday when she planned to be in D.C. but Mrs. Roosevelt was out of town and their closer acquaintance was further delayed.72

    Allen described her later relationship with the presidential couple thus:

    While the president appointed me to this really distinguished position, he never set eyes on me until long after the appointment. I have met Mrs. Roosevelt casually a number of times, but I do not feel that I have anything like the connection with her that I do have with other women who have worked in the woman movement just as she did.73

    After 1934, Mrs. Roosevelt found many occasions to notice Judge Allen's position and accomplishments in her published articles. Allen appreciated that Mrs. Roosevelt was able to give her some of the national attention which she would need to become a viable candidate for the Supreme Court.74 She was quick to tell Mrs. Roosevelt of her embarrassment when a women's group announced support for Allen as a presidential candidate in 1936.75 Although she could not participate as openly as she had in 1932, Allen wanted no doubts raised about her loyalty to FDR. Immediately after his landslide victory in 1936, Allen wrote on her circuit letterhead of her joy at the outcome: "My only regret is that I could not have lifted my voice here and there."76

    Judge Allen always gave priority to her court business, although it interfered with her development of a close relationship with Mrs. Roosevelt, which could have been instrumental in her further ambitions. In 1936 she refused an invitation from a Cleveland women's group to introduce Mrs. Roosevelt because she could not leave the court in Cincinnati without a quorum. She explained to Mrs. Roosevelt: "I am torn greatly between my desire to hear you speak and to be able to say in public what admiration I have for your courage . . . But after all my first obligation is here. . . ."77 The Judge politely refused Mrs. Roosevelt's somewhat indiscrete invitation to sup at the White House, while she was sitting on the TVA case in Chattanooga.78

    Judge Allen kept up a careful friendly correspondence with Eleanor Roosevelt, noting the setbacks and successes of the Roosevelt family.79 She was also very anxious to defend her integrity to Mrs. Roosevelt. When a Detroit columnist made accusations about her payment of federal income taxes she wrote to Mrs. Roosevelt that the statements were entirely untrue: "I have paid income tax ever since my appointment to this bench, have never questioned the tax, and in fact have repeatedly stated that judges ought to be taxed like any one else." Mrs. Roosevelt noted on the letter that she showed it to the President and "he understands."80

    Mrs. Roosevelt herself had a deep commitment to the participation of women in politics, particularly in pursuit of peace and social welfare goals, but no specific dedication to Florence Allen's advancement above the circuit court. Her view, expressed in the negative, was that there was "no reason why a woman should not be appointed to the Supreme Court."81 But Mrs. Roosevelt did use her "My Day" column for a trial balloon for the Allen Supreme Court candidacy.82 Allen reported that Mrs. Roosevelt told her at the White House that she regretted that Allen had not been appointed to the Supreme Court,83 (and no doubt she did). Yet, there is no evidence that she put her full efforts into the elevation. At the 1948 New York University Law School dinner in honor of Judge Allen, Mrs. Roosevelt sent a powerful message, a compliment with little practical political force because of the judge's age:

    . . . if a President of the United States should decide to nominate a woman for the Supreme Court, it should be Judge Allen. She will be a nominee with backing, on a completely non-partisan basis, of American women who knew her career and accomplishments.84

    Opposition to Judge Allen

    While Judge Allen generally enjoyed good relations with the press,85 two papers made direct assaults upon her character and her ability when she was under consideration for the Supreme Court in 1939. In a gossip column about Washington events, a Detroit Free Press reporter wrote, crediting the Treasury Department for the information, that Judge Allen was "egging" on Eighth Circuit Judge Joseph Woodrough in his suit questioning the constitutionality of federal taxation of federal judicial salaries.86 Following the advice of two jurist-friends, Harold Stephens of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and Judge Martin in Tennessee, she sent a private explanation to Mrs. Roosevelt.

    In early 1939 Drew Pearson reported that FDR had considered "the Ohio jurist" but dropped her from consideration because the Attorney General showed him a record of reversals worse than that of any other prominent federal judge.87 To repair the damage, Judge Allen phoned the Reporter of the Ohio Supreme Court and asked him to follow up on the cases she decided in Columbus,88 while the Clerk of the Sixth Circuit checked the fate of her federal opinions since 1934. In eleven years on the Ohio Court she was reversed twice by the U.S. Supreme Court. In five years on the Sixth Circuit she had been reversed once.89 While some women friends in Chicago wrote to Attorney General Murphy asking for an explanation, others passed on the correct information to influential women in Washington.90 The Attorney General responded directly to Judge Allen that "I have frequently had occasion to express the highest regard for your ability and qualifications for judicial service and accordingly it distresses me greatly that a statement should be published that does so great an injustice to you."91 Such calumnies indicate that some persons involved in the selection process took Florence Allen's candidacy in 1939 very seriously. Her own reaction also reveals the deep ambition below her public disclaimers: "They meant to kill me off forever."92

    The Roosevelt Justices

    First Appointment (Hugo Black)--The defeat of the President's bill to pack the Court in 1937 was to influence Roosevelt's selection of the nominees for the Court. He was to reward those who supported him during the bitter fight. Those who openly rejected the plan forfeited any future claims to a seat.

    Senator Joseph T. Robinson of Arkansas, who had managed the court-packing bill, had been promised the first available seat. When Robinson died of a heart attack during the battle, the President realized that the bitterness that had been engendered in the Senate almost required another Senator be chosen to fill the seat being vacated by Justice Van Devanter. In Hugo Black, FDR found a Senator who met his own requirements on loyalty or court packing, New Deal ideology, reasonable youth, and geography (from the South or West).93 Professional competence was subordinate to political confidence as a criterion for selection at the time of Black's appointment, although a brilliant tenure was to result.94 While Judge Allen was the right age and had the right New Deal views, she was not really in a position to compete, because she came from the wrong region and was not a Senator.

    Second Appointment (Stanley Reed)--When George Sutherland left the Court, FDR's concern about under-representation from the West (Sutherland was from Utah) was secondary to his personal knowledge of the character and loyalty of his Solicitor-General, who had defended New Deal programs against heavy odds, and had kept out of the court-packing controversy. Florence Allen's decision in the TVA case had rescued only one important New Deal program, and she lacked personal acquaintance with the President.

    1939 Appointments (Felix Frankfurter and William O. Douglas--There were two vacancies to fill in 1939--the seats of Cardozo and Brandeis. Protestant Judge Allen was eliminated for consideration for one of the seats by ethnic considerations. FDR was to decide upon his long-time policy adviser, Felix Frankfurter, for the Cardozo seat. Roosevelt and Frankfurter were intimate friends, who had known each other for over thirty years. However, before he selected Frankfurter, Roosevelt, aware of Western claims to a Supreme Court seat, had Frankfurter "check out" University of Iowa Law School Dean Wiley Rutledge, and read the opinions of several sitting judges. It is quite possible that Florence Allen was among that list of judges. However, no judge on an inferior court could match Frankfurter's long and close association with FDR.

    The second vacancy in 1939 went to another academic, who had firm credentials as an office-holding member of the New Deal, William O. Douglas. Like Frankfurter, Douglas thought that Justice Brandeis suggested him to FDR as his own successor.95 Although Douglas was a registered voter in Connecticut, his supporters, including Senator Robert LaFollette and Attorney General Frank Murphy, worked to convince FDR that his childhood in the state of Washington made him acceptable to Western Senators. Douglas had firm backers inside the White House in Thomas Corcoran, Ben Cohen, and Jerome Frank.96 Douglas' closest competitor was Senator Lewis B. Schwellenback of Washington state, a close friend of Justice Black, and a vigorous campaigner on behalf of court-packing,97 who received as consolation prize a district judgeship.

    There were, however, others on the Attorney General's list of candidates, including another academic lawyer, Lloyd Garrison, Dean of the University of Wisconsin law school; western circuit judges--Joseph C. Hutcheson (Texas), Sam A. Bratton (New Mexico) and Judge Harold M. Stephens (Utah).98 Florence Allen did not appear on this list circulated in the White House, although the newspapers reported that she and Wiley Rutledge--who had been considered for the Cardozo seat--were contenders.99

    Fifth Appointment (Frank Murphy)--In 1940 the President filled the seat vacated by Pierce Butler of Minnesota with Attorney General Frank Murphy of Michigan, satisfying the representational requirements of religion and geography. Murphy had a range of executive experiences as Mayor of Detroit, High Commissioner of the Philippines, and Governor of Michigan. His appointment also permitted FDR to reshuffle his cabinet prior to his third term campaign.

    In his role as Attorney General, Murphy had provided the President with a list of fourteen eligible males,100 including the three circuit judges who had been considered for the Brandeis seat, and a number of Cabinet members. Roosevelt ignored the list. Despite Murphy's protestations of lack of technical competence, FDR moved him up and out of the Department of Justice. Judge Allen did not appear on the list. She did not fit the religious criterion, nor the President's inclination to place members of his administration team on the bench.

    Third Term Choices (James Byrnes and Robert Jackson)--In the first year of his third term, as U.S. entry to the war approached, the President filled the seats vacated by McReynolds and Stone (elevated to the Chief Justice chair upon Hughes' retirement). FDR again made his choices from the Congress and the Executive branch. He had asked Justice Frankfurter to check out Judge John J. Parker of the Fourth Circuit. Years before Parker had been nominated by Herbert Hoover, but had failed of confirmation. Frankfurter gave a lukewarm evaluation of "clear and painstaking," but not "fresh and creative" opinions.101 James Byrnes, Senator from South Carolina, was appointed in his stead, rewarded with the seat left by another southerner, for being an "effective agent" of administration policies in the Senate since 1933. Quick and unanimous confirmation saved presidential energies for the more critical foreign issues.102 Robert Jackson had known Roosevelt in his Albany days. He had worked in the FDR campaign in 1932, and came to Washington as General Counsel of the Internal Revenue Service. He had made a superb reputation as Solicitor General. Jackson had taken a whole-hearted part in the court reorganization fight. His book, The Struggle for Judicial Supremacy, expressed his views on the proper role of the Court.103

    Thus, the selections again came from inside the political family. Although Florence Allen was an ardent New Dealer, she had not shared in the New Deal's Washington battles, nor was there a need to "get her out of politics."

    The Last Chance: Eight New Nominee (Wiley Rutledge)--When Justice Byrnes left the bench, Roosevelt finally chose a circuit judge, who represented the West (Iowa) and was not close to the New Deal. Wiley Rutledge had been waiting in the wings, the candidate of many, since 1939. He had been appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, the day after he had lost the Brandeis vacancy to Douglas. He met the ideological requirements, as he had been sympathetic to the President over the court-packing struggle, and possessed liberal economic and nationalistic beliefs. During wartime, Roosevelt's attention was elsewhere and a fierce competition developed among the backers of a number of other viable candidates, among them Judge Learned Hand of the Second Circuit (supported by Chief Justice Stone and Justice Frankfurter), Senator Alben Barkley, Solicitor General Charles Fahy, Judge Parker, and Dean Acheson. The Attorney General invited three Justices--Black, Douglas and Murphy--to react to the published opinions of Rutledge. Their reactions were favorable. Rutledge's followers arranged for letters and endorsements to flow from bar associations, law faculty, and newspaper editors to the White House and the Justice Department to offset his lack of political clout.104

    Indeed, Rutledge was the only Roosevelt nominee without strong political credentials. His claim was based on his intellectual and legal skills. Allen's background was appropriate for this appointment. The other Roosevelt appointees had combined an academic background with executive public offices, or trial court experience with elected office. Florence Allen lacked academic connections, extensive executive responsibilities, and a legislative background, although by the time of FDR's first appointment in 1937, she had had seventeen years of bench experience (fifteen on important appellate courts). She was well prepared for the judicial role, but, without the opportunities afforded by positions in the other two branches, she was unable to demonstrate her mettle as a partisan and policymaker. FDR wanted persons on the Court who would be representative and who would be sensitive to political demands and needs. Allen was a professional judge.

    The Truman Justices--President Truman made four appointments to the Supreme Court. He used the first vacancy to solidify an "era of good feeling" with the Republican opposition by choosing his crony, Senator Harold Burton, to take the place of Owen Roberts, replacing one Republican with another. According to the newspapers, the others on the short list were also Republicans--Under Secretary of War, Robert Patterson, who was also a former federal judge; and Senator Warren Austin of Vermont.105

    Florence Allen clearly was well located geographically for this appointment, as an Ohio man was selected. She lacked the personal relationship with the President and membership in the Republican Party. In addition, the influence of women on the appointing President was weak.

    The women in the party who pushed women candidates for appointment did not develop close relations to the President until his second term. During the Roosevelt administration Molly Dewson, director of the Woman's Division, could and did go directly to the White House with her demands. She continued her pressures from retirement upon FDR's successor, writing in 1946:

    Dear Mr. President: If there ever should be an opening on the U.S. Supreme Court bench and you thought it a psychological moment to make a grand dramatic gesture toward women--who claim they are pretty sad about their lack of recognition by you--why do you not appoint Florence Allen of Ohio now on the U.S. Circuit Court of Ohio, Michigan and Kentucky to the Supreme Court?106

    India Edwards had to work through the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, until she showed Truman what the women could do in the 1948 campaign.107 Edwards did think that Truman had a high general evaluation of women's brains and ability and that he came close to naming Florence Allen.108 Lucy Howorth agreed that Truman had no personal opposition to women in office or politics. However, women had no direct access to the President. His White House coterie was all male.109 Nor did Bess Truman play the role of facilitating ambitious women that Eleanor Roosevelt had played with her husband. Thus while Truman may have had generous attitudes towards women, he did not translate them into judicial appointments. Of twenty-seven nominations to the circuit level, all were male. Of ninety-three appointments to the district court, only one was female. As a result, his record was the same as FDR's--one woman appointed to the federal courts.

    In 1946, in an attempt to reduce internal dissension. President Truman selected a new Chief Justice from outside the Court. Fred Vinson was another close associate of the President, but he did bring an unusual combination of public experiences. Florence Allen was not in competition to be Chief Justice. No politician in the middle 1940s would have made a woman Chief Justice.

    A group consisting of Donald Dawson, of the President's staff, Peyton Ford for the Attorney General, and Senator J. Howard McGrath for the Democratic National Committee, discussed a list of six names for the vacancy caused by Frank Murphy's death. There were four sitting judges, the Secretary of War (a former federal judge) and McGrath himself.110 Truman selected someone not on the list, his Attorney General Tom Clark, a personal friend whom he knew as chief of war frauds during his investigation committee period. Clark was a Texas protege of the powerful Senator Tom Connally. It was reported at the time that Chief Justice Vinson approved of the choice.111

    Personal friendship was also the basic factor in Truman's last appointment to the Court: Sherman Minton. They entered the Senate together as freshmen and sat at adjoining desks.

    Florence Allen did not have the New Deal congressional experience, nor the wartime cabinet experience, which made the four male Justices viable candidates to Truman. She had a longer preparation on the circuit level than Vinson or Minton. Their judicial background gave them credibility, but did not significantly improve their entitlement to the place. It is clear that the odds were against Florence Allen, regardless of her sex, for at least ten or eleven of the twelve appointments during these two Democratic administrations.

    Objective Criteria: Age, Sex, and Veteran Status

    Most of the qualifications for a position of authority are subjective. It is difficult to measure and to compare the attributes of candidates. A few qualifications are objective: once the appointer decides whether he wants to apply an age, or a sex, or a race, or a religious criterion, the candidates can be appropriately included or excluded on that basis. From the examination of the twelve appointments, it is clear that Allen was excluded from several competitions on the basis of religion, never on the basis of race. The extent to which her age and her sex and related veteran status had an impact upon her candidacy will be discussed.

    Age: the Flexible Criterion--Following the court-packing struggle, the Democratic Presidents took care to select persons at an age which would ensure ten or fifteen years of service prior to a reasonable retirement age. The average age of the Roosevelt nominees was 54 and of Truman's nominees 55.112

    Florence Allen met the age requirement during the FDR period. At the time of the Black selection in 1937 she was fifty-three. When the Byrnes seat was relatively open to competition in 1943, she was fifty-nine. But during the Truman period she was over sixty. When India Edwards felt that she came close to persuading Truman to make the appointment she was sixty-five, a matter which would certainly have been raised at confirmation hearings.

    Sex/Veteran Status--Florence Allen lacked a qualification closely associated with sex identity which has been throughout U.S. history an important credential for public office -- veteran status. Nine of the twelve new appointees during the Democratic administrations had some military status during and after World War I. President Truman, whose 1918 overseas experience was a significant event in his personal life, only chose veterans.113 Florence Allen was not eligible for combat service. Indeed, she opposed the draft. Her most significant personal ideal was world peace. She was closer to Eleanor than to Franklin in her foreign policy views; more alien to Truman's perspective than to FDR's. Both her age and her sex/veteran status disqualified her for the four Truman seats; but not for the eight FDR places.

    Why Florence Allen Did Not Reach the Supreme Court

    Attaining high judicial office is a chancy matter. The pool of candidates with the necessary political and professional qualifications is small in comparison with the general population, but large in proportion to the number of places at the top. In the pool of candidates, Florence Allen was the first and the only woman in the 1930s and 1940s. As one of her woman backers who was also a judge pointed out: "Judge Allen is at the present time the only woman lawyer in the United States, whose ability, training, experience, and personality qualify her for the position. . . ."114

    If the President's political intuition had told him that the country was ready for a woman on the Court and that such an appointment would benefit his administration, he would have had no choice among representatives of the female sex. She was the only available woman. The first woman is likely to go on the Court when the President has more room for selection. The female pool of legal professionals in important judgeships and other political offices did not expand until the 1970s.

    President Roosevelt would have been moving ahead of public opinion in choosing a woman justice in the 1930's. The Gallup polls, responsive to the news reports of Allen's candidacy, posed the issue to the public in 1938: "Would you favor the appointment of a woman lawyer to be a judge on the U.S. Supreme Court?" A very large minority, 39%, were favorable.115 But the public was expressing a theoretical support for females in government, because the Gallup poll reported a different level of response to a more concrete question: "Would you like to see the next appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court go to a man or a woman?" Only 18% wanted a woman who would necessarily have been Florence Allen.116 News reporters sensed that the political elite as well as the public rejected the notion of a woman on the Court in the 1930's. The Baltimore Sun claimed that: "A lot of people have recoiled from the prospect of a woman on the Supreme Court. To them the thing is almost unthinkable."117 President Roosevelt knew that his nomination of Allen would suit only a small minority of his constituents. Although he did not hesitate to disappoint particular persons or groups, he was sensitive to the larger forces of public approval.

    To what extent did the wishes of the sitting Justices to keep their sanctum all-male influence the appointing authorities? As long as the appointer is concerned about the productivity of the work group, the feelings of the incumbents will necessarily be taken into account. But the ability of sitting Justices to influence the choice of a colleague depends upon a variety of conditions. Roosevelt was certainly not concerned to cater to the prejudices of the "nine old men." A President who was willing to throw a "tiger" into the Court in 1937 would not have hesitated to send in a lioness. After he had placed a number of close associates on the Court, particularly Frankfurter, he consulted their preferences on prospective colleagues. However, the biases of the incumbents are never the most salient considerations for a President.

    President Truman apparently bowed to the wishes of his Court, but as we have seen in the brief review of the appointment process, there were other candidates whom he had good reason to prefer. India Edwards, director of the Women's Division of the Democratic National Committee in 1949-1950, reports that Truman was responsive to her recommendation of Florence Allen for the Supreme Court. In her oral history, she reports his reaction: "Well, I'm willing. I'd be glad to. I think we ought to have a woman. But I'll have to talk to the Chief Justice about it and see what he thinks." When she returned to the White House to hear the decision, the verdict was: "No, the Justices don't want a woman. They say they couldn't sit around with their robes off and their feet up and discuss the problems." India Edwards said: "They could if they wanted to."118

    The fates were not kind to Judge Allen. If Truman had been in confrontation with the Court, he would not have hesitated to ignore their preferences based upon this flimsy ground. But he did have a male's understanding of their resistance, and during this period such reasons were still socially acceptable.

    Justices clearly do have some input into the evaluation of candidates. Sometimes they have a veto, although their critical evaluation of a candidate's experience and ability may simply cloak their prejudices. Sometimes Justices may provide the approval which tips the scales among contenders. There is no indication that Florence Allen had a champion from within the Court. During her campaign for the circuit bench, former Justice John H. Clarke, an old friend of her father, had played an important part.119 But he was not involved in her Supreme Court effort. In any event, in retirement in California, he would not have had the influence of a sitting Justice.

    Why was President Roosevelt willing to nominate Florence Allen to the Court of Appeals but not to the Supreme Court? Her supporters assumed that a seat on the Supreme Court could be achieved with the same kind of campaign and for the same reasons as the intermediate appellate position. Florence Allen was less naive than her dedicated supporters. She understood the difference in the two selection processes. In retrospect she wrote that from the first mention of her name for the Supreme Court "I did not then nor ever expect such an appointment."120 She knew that selection was a political lottery. For that reason she did not discourage the efforts of friends, but she also realized that she was not personally close enough to the President or to the Washington inner circle.

    When she was appointed to the circuit bench, the Ohio Senator had been the key figure. President Roosevelt invested little of his own political capital in sustaining the Senator's choice through his party, Justice Department, and White House apparatus. In contrast, his appointments to the Supreme Court could become his own political liabilities. He had not been close to the reactions of the judges on the Sixth Circuit, who were opposed to her joining them,121 nor would the unhappiness of the party in Ohio affect him as much as it would the Senator. On the other hand, he was immediately cognizant of the feelings of the Supreme Court Justices in Washington, of the Supreme Court Bar, of his Solicitor General, and national party leaders in Congress and the Democratic National Committee. The political costs might escalate. As the public opinion polls showed, the political rewards would be small. The letter-writing campaign which worked so well in 1934 to win an office largely controlled by state political figures was simply not effective in winning a nomination which involved the complex political calculations of a President.

    The theory behind the efforts of her supporters was the selection of a Supreme Court Justice hinged upon personal qualities. They were offering a marvelously qualified candidate, and they did not appreciate the multitude of other considerations involved in the President's choice of a Justice. From the President's perspective, Florence Allen was satisfactorily placed where she was, exemplifying his concern for women's status. Nor did FDR need to free her position to someone else, as the size of her circuit bench doubled, giving him three more appointments. Nor did he need her in Washington as a personal advisor. He did not view her as a potential rival for the Presidency, who needed to be sidetracked. Nor was he indebted to her or her friends for an important contribution to his administration's legislative or executive policies or to the party's coffers. While trial judges have found themselves on the circuit bench for their management of cases important to some administration, a single case, even the TVA decision, was not the kind of continuing service which created a reason for a High Court appointment. Finally, Allen's nomination would have created problems to which Roosevelt did not want to divert administration energies. Confirmation hearings would probably have been long and vexing.

    Thus from the presidential perspective there were few reasons to make such a choice. Apart from personal qualities, Allen's claim to a seat was representational. The forces behind her campaign sprang from the energies of the woman suffrage and reform movements. But women were a dwindling force in politics after 1920. Florence Allen did not have a large enough constituency to demand the recognition of a Supreme Court seat. Women were not able to build that constituency for many more years.122

    Bush Says He'll Pick Replacement Quickly

    By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent Fri Jul 1, 9:09 PM ET
     

    WASHINGTON -

    President Bush, facing a momentous battle over a Supreme Court vacancy, said Friday he would pick a candidate in a timely manner and urged the Senate to give his nominee "fair treatment, a fair hearing and a fair vote."

     

    The White House said it would be at least a week before he decides. More than a half dozen candidates are under consideration, an administration official said, and Bush will review names during a trip to Europe beginning Tuesday.

    After waiting more than four years for a chance to strengthen conservatives' influence on the court, Bush was presented with the surprise decision of Justice Sandra Day O'Conner to step down after 24 years. White House officials had anticipated that if anyone retired, it would have been Chief Justice

    William Rehnquist, 80 years old and ailing with thyroid cancer.

     

    The departure of O'Connor, the first woman on the high court, could increase pressure on Bush to name another woman. It also could bring demands from the right for a more reliable conservative to replace O'Connor, who had been a swing vote and was on the winning side when the court upheld the right of women to have abortions if their health was in danger.

    O'Connor's resignation was a closely held secret — even from Bush — until Friday morning.

    The Supreme Court's head marshal, Pamela Talkin, had called White House Counsel Harriet Miers on Thursday to inquire about how to deliver a sealed envelope the next day. When she called back on Friday before 9 a.m., Talkin said the letter was from O'Connor.

    The news was relayed to Bush and he alerted Vice President

    Dick Cheney, deputy chief of staff Karl Rove and counselor Dan Bartlett. When the letter arrived around 10:15 a.m., it was in a letter-size manila envelope. Miers took it to Bush, and the president talked by telephone with O'Connor.

     

    "For an old ranching girl, you turned out pretty good," the president told O'Connor, who grew up on an Arizona ranch. It was an emotional, five-minute call, White House press secretary Scott McClellan said.

    He quoted Bush as telling O'Connor, "You're one of the great Americans" and "I wish I were there to hug you."

    The vacancy adds another major issue to an already bulging agenda Bush has presented to Congress. Administration officials expressed confidence about getting energy, highway and Central American trade measures passed and are crossing their fingers in hopes that lawmakers will have enough time and energy to deal with a complicated overhaul of

    Social Security.

     

    Bush, in a late-morning appearance in the Rose Garden, promised to consult with Senate members on his high court selection.

    "The nation deserves, and I will select, a Supreme Court justice that Americans can be proud of," Bush said. "The nation also deserves a dignified process of confirmation in the United States Senate, characterized by fair treatment, a fair hearing and a fair vote."

    He said he would choose his candidate in time for the confirmation hearings and vote to be completed before the new Supreme Court term begins the first Monday in October.

    Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said he, too, hoped the confirmation process would be a smooth one — despite the heated battles between the White House and Democrats over judicial nominations.

    "There is no reason for this to be a knockdown, drag-out fight in the Senate," he said at a brief news conference at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. "How easy this is, is up to the president."

    Bush has said in the past that he favors the judicial philosophy of Justices

    Antonin Scalia and

    Clarence Thomas, two of the court's most conservative members. The president has said repeatedly that judges should not "legislate from the bench," meaning that their opinions should not be swayed by social or cultural trends.

     

    Bush held a strategy session at midmorning to talk about the selection process. McClellan said, "A lot of the preparation has been done by staff over the last few years," he said.

    One senior administration official said a list of potential candidates circulated in the White House last week did not include any women. But another official disputed that. Both spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the selection process.

    Bush said he had directed his staff to work with the Justice Department to compile dossiers and recommend nominees. Spending the weekend at the presidential retreat at Camp David, Bush was expected to talk by telephone with his advisers about the process.

    After O'Connor's resignation, Bush spoke on the telephone with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist; Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and the panel's ranking Democrat, Patrick Leahy of Vermont. No names were discussed, McClellan said.

    The president plans to review briefing material on potential nominees on his flight to Denmark next Tuesday and during his stay Wednesday through Friday at a meeting of leading industrialized nations in Scotland. McClellan said Bush would make no decisions before his return.

     

    Bush to announce Court nominee
    By DEB RIECHMANN
    Associated Press
     from http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showfast.html?article=57947  7-19-05

     

    WASHINGTON — President Bush has decided whom to nominate to succeed Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court and was poised to announce his pick in a prime-time Tuesday night address.

    White House press secretary Scott McClellan said the Bush administration was asking television outlets to broadcast the speech live. Bush’s spokesman would not identify the President’s choice. But there was intense speculation that it would be Judge Edith Clement of the U.S. Court of Appeals in New Orleans.

    The televised speech was scheduled for 9 p.m. EDT.

    The tension was palpable in the West Wing of the White House; after a day of intense speculation, McClellan walked into the press briefing room and said bluntly: “The President has made a decision and will be announcing his nominee to the Supreme Court at 9 o’clock.” McClellan said the American people expected that the Senate confirmation process would be a dignified one.

    At a news conference near midday Tuesday, Bush had said that he considered candidates from all walks of life but he refused to tip his hand on whom he would name or when he would do it.

    He had said ever since O’Connor’s July 1 announcement that he wanted to move with some speed and that he wanted the new justice to be seated before the court begins its fall term in October.

    The dynamic might have changed a bit when Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist last week put out word that he had no intention of stepping down and that he would continue on the court despite his battle with thyroid cancer.

    Bush, at a news conference Tuesday, would not even say if he had finished interviewing candidates. Though Washington was abuzz with speculation about Clement, the President ignored a question about what he thought of her.

    “I guess the best way to say it is, I’ll let you know when I’m ready to tell you who it is,” the President said. He jokingly acknowledged that he was trying to dodge the question.

    “I’m comfortable with where we are in the process,” the President said. He said he has considered a variety of people from different walks of life, some of whom he knew before and some he had never met.

    “I do have an obligation to think about people from different backgrounds that have shared the same philosophy, people who will not legislate from the bench,” Bush said. He spoke at a press conference with visiting Australian Prime Minister John Howard.

    At Clement’s office in New Orleans, a man who identified himself as a law clerk said the judge was not available. “That’s what I’ve been instructed to say,” he told a caller who asked if she were in Washington.

    Interest groups say another female candidate thought to be under consideration was Edith Hollan Jones, who also serves on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.

    In anticipation of a selection, officials said the White House had contacted selected Republican senators they hoped would serve as advocates for the nominee in media interviews in the initial time following an announcement. Democrats scoured the rulings and writings of leading contenders, including Clement, a 57-year-old jurist who was confirmed on a 99-0 vote by the Senate when she was elevated to the appeals court in 2001.

    White House officials have refused to discuss the names of top prospects being considered as a replacement for the departing O’Connor, who was the first woman appointed to the court.

    Other possible candidates are conservative federal appellate court judges Samuel Alito, J. Michael Luttig, Michael McConnell, John Roberts Jr., Emilio Garza and J. Harvie Wilkinson III; and former deputy attorney general Larry Thompson.

    Other names thought to be under consideration were: Maura Corrigan, a judge on the Michigan Supreme Court; Cecilia M. Altonaga, a U.S. District Court judge for the Southern District of Florida; Mary Ann Glendon, a Harvard Law School professor; Karen Williams from the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va.; Janice Rogers Brown, recently confirmed by the Senate for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit; and Priscilla Owen, who was just confirmed for a seat on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

    Saturday, July 16, 2005  http://www.detnews.com/2005/politics/0507/16/polit-249663.htm

    Advisers focusing on female, minority candidates for O'Connor's replacement

     

    WASHINGTON -- President Bush's advisers are focusing the search for a successor to Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on a variety of female and minority legal figures to determine if there is an acceptable candidate to replace the first woman to serve on the Supreme Court, according to Republican strategists familiar with the selection process.

    The White House has been moving in that direction for several days, the strategists said, even before Chief Justice William Rehnquist's dramatic nighttime statement Thursday dispelling speculation that he may retire soon. Rehnquist's decision to remain on the court despite his fragile health means Bush will have only O'Connor's seat to fill in the near future.

    "With the chief off the table, obviously the question of whether the administration chooses a woman becomes far more important," said one GOP strategist with insight into the thinking of Bush aides, who insisted on anonymity because the White House has tried to keep the selection process confidential. "They are now trying to screen women to see if there are any who are acceptable to the president. That doesn't mean he has to pick any of them, but it's perfectly reasonable for them to look at the field of candidates."

    Jay Sekulow, chief counsel at the American Center for Law and Justice and an adviser to the White House on court issues, said Bush could easily find a female nominee who would meet his standards for a justice who adheres to the strict meaning of the Constitution. "There's a lot of women who are very well qualified for the position," he said. "I wouldn't be surprised if it's a woman."

    If not a woman, several Republicans close to the White House said, Bush may pick an African American or Hispanic nominee. While much public attention focused initially on Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, strategists said it appears less likely that he will be selected. But other candidates have emerged or re-emerged, including former deputy attorney general Larry Thompson, who is African American and a Bush favorite.

    It remains difficult to assess how serious the current attention on women and minorities actually is, particularly since the White House has kept its deliberations close to the vest. Sometimes during a high-profile selection process such as this names are floated to flatter certain individuals and their powerful patrons or to massage important political constituencies.

    But the White House has sent signals that have raised expectations in recent days, leading some outside advisers to conclude that Bush wants to name a woman or a minority. On Tuesday, Laura Bush's said in a television interview that "I would really like for him to name another woman."

    The next day, the first lady tried to soften the sentiment so as not to box in her husband. "I let everyone know yesterday that I thought it should be a woman ... but actually, you know, whether it's a man or a woman, I know that whoever he picks will be a person of great distinction," she told reporters traveling with her in Africa. Yet the impact of her opinion was felt strongly in GOP circles in Washington, seen either as an indication of the president's intent or an extraordinary high-profile nudge in that direction.

    White House aides have suggested in the past that the president would take such factors into account, instructing journalists interested in understanding Bush's approach to examine his record as governor of Texas, where he was credited with appointing a number of women and minorities to the state bench.

    "Diversity always plays a role in the president's thinking," Karl Rove, the White House deputy chief of staff and one of a small circle of aides involved in the vetting, told Washington Post editors and reporters last week, pointing to diversity in Bush's cabinet and judicial nominations. "I wouldn't expect that this would be very different."

    With only one other woman left on the court, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the appointment of another could be popular with the public. A USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll released this week found that 78 percent of those interviewed considered it essential or at least a good idea to replace O'Connor with a woman and 67 percent deemed it a good idea to name a Hispanic. Bush aides have delighted in the past in taunting Democrats who opposed the president's minority nominees for lower courts.

    Yet many liberal women's rights groups have not tried to apply much public pressure on Bush to nominate another woman on the theory that ideology was more important for their issues than gender; a male justice supportive of abortion rights, in this view, would be preferable to a woman who votes to overturn Roe v. Wade.

    The man many allies thought was Bush's first choice, Gonzales, may no longer be in contention, according to several strategists with White House ties. Suspicious of his views on abortion and affirmative action, conservatives aggressively assailed a Gonzales nomination, but several other factors have complicated the prospect, including questions about whether he would have to recuse himself from cases involving administration policies.

    Some close to the White House now doubt that the president will pick Judge Emilio Garza of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, once interviewed by Bush's father for the Supreme Court seat that went to Clarence Thomas in 1991. But Thompson, a friend of Thomas and now general counsel at Pepsico, appears to be a stronger possibility, according to strategists. Some also mentioned Michigan Supreme Court Judge Robert Young Jr., who is African American. The list of women being mentioned in GOP circles has grown in recent days. Bush could pick either of two judges he just pushed through the Senate for appeals court seats, Priscilla Owen, an old friend from Texas, or Janice Rogers Brown, from California, though either would be an incendiary choice among Democrats who only reluctantly permitted floor votes on them.

    Judges Edith Hollan Jones and Edith Brown Clement of the 5th Circuit are widely discussed as well; Jones was a candidate considered by Bush's father, the runner-up to David Souter in 1990, but some Republicans say she may be too controversial because of her strongly expressed views against Roe.

    Other names emerging in recent days include Judge Alice Batchelder of the 6th Circuit, Chief Judge Deanell Reece Tacha of the 10th Circuit; Judge Karen Williams of the 4th Circuit; Judge Maura Corrigan of the Michigan Supreme Court; and Professor Mary Ann Glendon of Harvard Law School.

    BBB 2/2


    Brian Nelson Houston Texas owner Party Tent City .com sells discount awnings, canopies, tarps, wedding tent, storage shelters and portable garage in canopy kits

     NI Version Blue Box for Brian Nelson's Internet Reference Directory
    713-467-3025
       31 Gessner Rd. , Houston, TX  7702
    4                
    Click here to  e-mail me with any questions.
    This section is changed daily by a computer program on all affiliated sites. Check here for updated special information about  related partner websites.
    Click Informative websites below about our internet network system.

    emsevoldog
    God Loves Me A christian venture . Party Tent City .com sells discount awnings, canopies, tarps, wedding tent, storage shelters and portable garage in canopy kits
    ud 06/16/2005 10:17 PM -0500
    Tents, Tarps, Tent Canopies, Awnings Computers Consulting Religious Medical
    Click Party Tent City.com Party Tents, Awnings, Fire Retardant Tarps Canopies Camping Canopy, Clear Window Tarpaulins, Wedding & Church Revival Tents, Tent Hardware, Dome Shelters,  Garage Tents, Portable Storage,  Modular Tents for Multiple Applications. Backyard Movie Screens, Golf Driving Range Rain & Shade Shelters, Black Mesh Shade Cloth, White and Silver Tarps, 6x8, 10x10, 10x20,10x20, 20x20, 20x30,20x40, 30x30,30x40,40x40,40x50, 40x60. 50x50. Also Patriotic Red, White & Blue Striped and Clear  Window Tarps. Tent Hardware. Portable Instant Garages  

    Click Tarp City .com Fire Retardant, Flame Retardant  White & Silver Heavy Duty Tarps. Red, White and Blue Patriotic tarps. Clear Window Tarps, Black Mesh and Shade Cloth. Overnight Delivery Available. Custom Made Tarps. Grommets Added to your Tarp. This is a division of www.PartyTentCity.com   Misspelled Party Tent Words
     Generic-Text Only  PTC NID

    Click Hobby Group. com  Jerry Hobby's  Computer Web Hosting, Computer Repair, Domain Services, Security & Hackers Consulting, Computer Problem Solving. Computer Tune-ups For Slow or Virus infected Computers, Wireless Advice,

    Click MDPC Computer Club.com  Memorial Drive Presbyterian Church Computer Club. Houston, TX.   Houston Christians helping each other on Computers.

    Click Computer & Laser Printer and Inkjet Repair .com  Laser Printer Repair. Houston , TX  Computer Software Repair. Broker To Help You Solve Your Computer Problems , Computer Budget WebHosting, Domain Name  Purchases, Computer Repair

     Jerry Hobby's  Technical  Tips  

     

    Click Brian Nelson Consulting .com Internet Marketing, Help  to"Thinking Outside the Box" to Increase Sales and Profits. Motivational Moderator, Business Think Tank Discussions.

     

    Click Internet-Marketing-Sales-Strategies.com  Creative Marketing Ideas to Develop Long Range Plans to Sell Your Products  Worldwide.  Marketing Strategy  "Thinking Outside The Box"  Nelson Provides  New Motivational Inspiration on Solving Business Problems .

    Dick Myers Consultant Internet Advertising. 

    Click NelsonIdeas.com
    Creative problem solving using available resources.

    Click Bible Pronunciation .com   Audio Version Pronounce Difficult Words in the Bible. Bookmark it.  Click Written Version

     Click Written Version of Bible Pronunciation

    Click God Is The .com  GOD is the Answer and The Solution to any Problem you may have. He is the Best Friend and Mentor You Can  Ever Have. Hundreds of One Liner Bible Quotes You Can Memorize.

    Click Pope John Paul II 1920-2005 A Great Man

    Click Medical Data Base Future FAQ Information About Medical Costs Significantly More Expensive  Due to Non Use of Technology

    Click Constipation Compendium Info/ FAQ

    Click Diarrhea Compendium Info/FAQ

    Click Burning Tongue Compendium Info FAQ

    Click Upset Stomach Compendium, Info / FAQ.


     Click Compendium on Dreams

    Click Trigeminal Neuralgia  Brian Nelson's Composition Journal Researching Trigeminal Neuralgia AKA  Tic Douloureux (TN)  Orofacial Pain-  The Most Painful Affliction Known to the Medical Practice. It Hurts! If You Know of Anyone with Face Pain Send Them to this  Super Large Trigeminal Neuralgia Site.
     Click Page 1. Trigeminal Neuralgia   
    Click Page 2 Trigeminal Neuralgia   
    Click Page 3 Trigeminal Neuralgia
    Click Page 4  Trigeminal Neuralgia
      My Story on TN Brian N.

     Click The Trigeminal Neuralgia National  Association Website Click Here 

    Click  Life-Excellence.com to improve your living needs. 

    Technology Automotive General Sales Entertainment Free Internet Space
    Click Radford Video Creations Jim Radford, Producer  Family History, Weddings, Receptions, Job Resume. Editing and Duplicating Your Programs to Disk, Tape or the Web. Click here if you have Cable Speed and Windows Player for a 6 minute Video of His Technology Capability.

    Click Cell-Phone-Expert.com Dr. AJ Baltes Page of Cell FAQ and Info.

    Click AdSense  and AdWords Marketing Research Reference Information AdSense  

     Click Uof H Internet Marketing on Ebay Lecture in Ebay / Ofoto 

    Click JD Auto Collision Houston .com AAA Rated Family Owned Houston Supreme Auto Collision  Body shop Repair with a  Lifetime Warranty on All Repairs. Get High Quality Body Shop.  Personalized Service at  Reasonable Prices. Car Rental Arrangements  Made Easy.   Click Surplus City Sales. com Strategy Consulting on Buying, Selling and Brokering Industrial Salvage and Civilian Surplus Houston

       Brian's eBay Store 336 items  Click Here

    Click Toy GuitarPlanet.com - Wooden toy guitars in many styles and colors. Click here to see our great toy guitar selection. 

     

    Click Houston
    Hope Entertainment
    .com
    The "Gilbert Show" brings Hope & Happiness Entertainment to
    Seniors.  Karaoke  Sing-a-long Entertainment. 
    Gilbert Ocanas Sings,  Whistles & Plays
    Guitar at Nursing Homes, Retirement & Alzheimers Centers,

     Click www.Percussion
    Teacher.com 

    Click Wanted to Buy Classifieds .com  Do You Want To Buy? Place A FREE  Wanted To Buy Classified Ad Here
    No Contract. No Fees. It is Free If You Want to Buy.

    Make a difference in the world while you are here. Publish your articles, chapters and books here free. Speak out on what you believe. Be prepared to defend your position. Click

     Click Josephine Visnovske's  Most Interesting Free Book  The Islam Sector 

    Click Jerry Hobby's Blogs  

     Click Brian Nelson's  Blogs 

    Foreign Language Sites Discounts  Mortgage Information Public Issues Recreation
    Click Spanish/Espanol  Party Tent Info Letter  Click German/Deutsch Party Tent Info Letter   Click French/Français   Party Tent Info Letter  Click Italian/ItalianoParty Tent  Info Letter
    Click Portuguese  Party Tent Info Letter.
    See Below. Click Mortgage Financing Information Tips  Click Metro Rail Accident Record

    Make a difference in the world while you are here. Publish your articles, chapters and books here free. Speak out on what you believe. Be prepared to defend  your position.
    Click Houston-Recumbent-Bike-Club.com Join This Club Free  if You  Live in Houston, TX  
      Sponsor                  Health and Wellness Living - Healthy lifestyle information ranging from 
fitness and nutrition to mental and spiritual topics. Products and technologies 
that improve your personal wellness. Natural and holistic therapies. Yoga. 
Women's health. Nutrition. Air purification. Water purification. Magnetic 
therapy.                                                  uoysevoldog
      Click  to get  me to send the E- mail address.  
    This is on www.NelsonIdeas.com  Email me if you see this on any web page.
    The Latest for Today  6-16-05   

    TENT NOTES: Our tents are modular.  After your have finished using the tent for the first time  You can re-cycle the steel connectors very easily into another product. For long term set ups I would highly recommend the use a Dome Tent instead of a Gable Roof Tent.  It is better with high winds, water ponding and clear span space. Remember that our tents do not include the 10 ft. long EMT straight pipe which you purchase in your city from a home convenience center. It will cost about as much as the rest of the party tent kit that you buy from me. I have seen a price  reduction on the west coast for pipe. Make a few phone calls to get the best price. Be sure they have aas  much  as you need. You may have to go to several locations if you are buying a big tent.  Brian 713-467-3025 Click here to  e-mail me with any questions.


    You are at: http://www.NelsonIdeas.com/judge-sandra-oconnor/supreme-court-retires.html 

      ud on  08/29/2009 04:20 PM -0500