| Author |
Message |
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
 Sat Sep 03, 2005 10:53 pm Supreme Court Chief Justice Rehnquist Dead |
|
| Quote: |
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist Dead
Saturday, September 03, 2005
WASHINGTON � Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist (search) died Saturday evening at his home in suburban Virginia, said Supreme Court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg.
A statement from the spokeswoman said he was surrounded by his three children when he died in Arlington (search).
"The Chief Justice battled thyroid cancer since being diagnosed last October and continued to perform his dues on the court until a precipitous decline in his health the last couple of days," she said.
Rehnquist was appointed to the Supreme Court as an associate justice in 1971 by President Nixon and took his seat on Jan. 7, 1982. He was elevated to chief justice by President Reagan in 1986.
His death ends a remarkable 33-year Supreme Court career during which Rehnquist oversaw the court's conservative shift, presided over an impeachment trial and helped decide a presidential election.
The death leaves President Bush (search) his second court opening within four months and sets up what's expected to be an even more bruising Senate confirmation battle than that of John Roberts.
It was not immediately clear what impact Rehnquist's death would have on confirmation hearings for Roberts, scheduled to begin Tuesday.
Rehnquist, 80 and ill with cancer, presided over President Clinton's impeachment trial in 1999, helped settle the 2000 presidential election in Bush's favor, and fashioned decisions over the years that diluted the powers of the federal government while strengthening those of the states.
The chief justice passed up a chance to step down over the summer, which would have given the Senate a chance to confirm his successor while the court was out of session, and instead Justice Sandra Day O'Connor announced her retirement to spend time with her ill husband. Bush chose Roberts, a former Rehnquist clerk and friend, to replace O'Connor.
Rehnquist said in July that he wanted to stay on the bench as long as his health would allow.
The president could elevate to chief justice one of the court's conservatives, such as Antonin Scalia or Clarence Thomas, but it's more likely he will choose someone from outside the court.
Possible replacements include Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales (search) and federal courts of appeals judges J. Michael Luttig, Edith Clement, Samuel A. Alito Jr., Michael McConnell, Emilio Garza, and James Harvie Wilkinson III. Others mentioned are former Solicitor General Theodore Olson, lawyer Miguel Estrada and former deputy attorney general Larry Thompson.
Rehnquist announced last October that he had thyroid cancer. He had a trachea tube inserted to help him breathe and underwent radiation and chemotherapy treatments. Details of the chief justice's illness and his plans had been tightly guarded. He looked frail at Bush's inauguration in January and missed five months of court sessions before returning to the bench in March.
On the court's final meeting day of the last term, June 27, Rehnquist appeared gaunt and had difficulty as he announced the last decision of the term � an opinion he wrote upholding a Ten Commandments display in Texas. His breathing was labored, and he kept the explanation short.
He had no public appearances over the summer, although he was filmed by television crews in July as he left the hospital following two nights for treatment of a fever.
Rehnquist had an extraordinary career, with many historic milestones.
In 1999, he presided over Bill Clinton's impeachment trial from the presiding officer's chair seat in the Senate, something only one other chief justice had done. A year later he was one of five Republican-nominated justices who voted to stop presidential ballot recounts in Florida, effectively deciding the election for Bush over Democrat Al Gore.
"The Supreme Court of Florida ordered recounts of tens of thousands of so-called `undervotes' spread through 64 of the state's 67 counties. This was done in a search for elusive � perhaps delusive � certainty as to the exact count of 6 million votes," he wrote.
Rehnquist, who championed states' rights and helped speed up executions, is the only member still on the court who voted on Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision legalizing abortion. He opposed that decision, writing: "Even today, when society's views on abortion are changing, the very existence of the debate is evidence that the `right' to an abortion is not so universally accepted as (Roe) would have us believe."
He believed there was a place for some religion in government. He wrote the 5-4 decision in 2002 that said parents may use public tax money to send their children to religious schools. Two years later, he was distressed when the court passed up a chance to declare that the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools is constitutional.
"The phrase 'under God' in the pledge seems, as a historical matter, to sum up the attitude of the nation's leaders, and to manifest itself in many of our public observances," he wrote.
SEARCH
Click here for FOX News RSS Feeds
Advertise on FOX News Channel, FOXNews.com and FOX News Radio
Jobs at FOX News Channel.
Internships at FOX News Channel (Accepting Fall Applications Now).
Terms of use. Privacy Statement. For FOXNews.com comments write to
[email protected]; For FOX News Channel comments write to
[email protected]
� Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Copyright � 2005 ComStock, Inc.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Copyright 2005 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.
All market data delayed 20 minutes.
|
Last edited by Puck on Tue Sep 13, 2005 6:46 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Sat Sep 03, 2005 10:57 pm |
|
Is sad, but I hope it doesn't distract politicians from the crisis in Mississippi and Louisiana.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Sat Sep 03, 2005 11:00 pm |
|
^I hope so also, but this is big and sad news. Amazing news. First time I found out about this was here. Wow, I'm shocked. But this will be big news, because they're going to be working on getting 2 justices now. I wonder who Bush'll pick.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Sat Sep 03, 2005 11:03 pm |
|
Plus, the position for chief justice is open. Now, I think Bush will wait until Roberts is seated until he nominates a new person.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Sun Sep 04, 2005 1:37 pm |
|
We've lost a true statesman. Rest in Peace Justice Rehnquist. 
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Sun Sep 04, 2005 6:52 pm |
|
Pretty sad.
Hmm, the liberals aren't going like two new (possibly) conservatives. I think a more moderate approach would be good this time around to keep everyone happy.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Mon Sep 05, 2005 3:14 pm |
|
Was Clinton trying to "make everyone happy" when he nominated Ginsburg?
It's Bush's turn. He shouldn't have to appease anyone, nobody has before him.
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Mon Sep 05, 2005 3:23 pm |
|
Roberts for Chief Justice? Huh...
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
Starbuck
faster...
Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 8715
Location: between chaos and melody
|
| Mon Sep 05, 2005 3:29 pm |
|
His death is sad, but I'd hate to see it overshaddowed by Bush picking an unexceptable new justice nominee.
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Mon Sep 05, 2005 3:31 pm |
|
What's unacceptable about Roberts? I think it's the fact that he was picked by Bush.
In reality, Roberts is a tame choice. I really wish I would've put a stronger social conservative, like Miguel Estrada, on there. Robert's isn't unacceptable by any means, he'll be no more conservative than lets say Souter.
Last edited by LightningBoy on Mon Sep 05, 2005 3:34 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
Starbuck
faster...
Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 8715
Location: between chaos and melody
|
| Mon Sep 05, 2005 3:33 pm |
|
I find nothing wrong with Roberts, he seems fine. God help Bush if he picks and far right winger, or an far left winger for that matter, I may be far left, but I don't think people like me belong in our government.
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Mon Sep 05, 2005 9:21 pm |
|
| LightningBoy wrote: | Was Clinton trying to "make everyone happy" when he nominated Ginsburg?
It's Bush's turn. He shouldn't have to appease anyone, nobody has before him. |
I agree, I'm not arguing with Bush's choice on Roberts. I support it. However, there are arguments that he's too conservative. If Bush was to put in someone else who'd be argued against, I'd think it would kill his ratings.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Mon Sep 05, 2005 9:30 pm |
|
| IntrepidIsMe wrote: | | LightningBoy wrote: | Was Clinton trying to "make everyone happy" when he nominated Ginsburg?
It's Bush's turn. He shouldn't have to appease anyone, nobody has before him. |
I agree, I'm not arguing with Bush's choice on Roberts. I support it. However, there are arguments that he's too conservative. If Bush was to put in someone else who'd be argued against, I'd think it would kill his ratings. |
He really doesn't need to care too much about ratings. 
And Roberts is not really that conservative.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Mon Sep 05, 2005 9:33 pm |
|
You're right, he doesn't need to care. However, his ratings are slipping, and that really doesn't do anything to improve his image, and thats something he should be working on, no matter if hes highly rated, or not.
And I agree, he isn't. But, feel free to tell that to Senator Boxer and the liberals that agree with her. There are an awful lot of them. If someone was put in the system who everybody could agree on (I know it isn't likely), I'd think it would be best.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Mon Sep 05, 2005 9:49 pm |
|
| IntrepidIsMe wrote: | You're right, he doesn't need to care. However, his ratings are slipping, and that really doesn't do anything to improve his image, and thats something he should be working on, no matter if hes highly rated, or not.
And I agree, he isn't. But, feel free to tell that to Senator Boxer and the liberals that agree with her. There are an awful lot of them. If someone was put in the system who everybody could agree on (I know it isn't likely), I'd think it would be best. |
Well, they would think that ANY nominee appointed by Bush is bad and too conservative and oppose him. 
|
|
|
Starbuck
faster...
Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 8715
Location: between chaos and melody
|
| Tue Sep 06, 2005 6:51 am |
|
wow......
Yeah, really, I don't mind conservative judges, as long as they aren't too conservative. Since he picked a conservative, now that we need another.... *ghasp* why not pick a .... dare I say it.... liberal?! That way everyone's happy instead of just his side of the equasion.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue Sep 06, 2005 8:31 am |
|
| Starbuck wrote: | wow......
Yeah, really, I don't mind conservative judges, as long as they aren't too conservative. Since he picked a conservative, now that we need another.... *ghasp* why not pick a .... dare I say it.... liberal?! That way everyone's happy instead of just his side of the equasion. |
Uh, the court's already been liberally-biased and activist. It's time that we need a change. Besides, Roberts is hardly conservative, and Rehnquist was very conservative. Therefore, we should nominate another conservative to replace him. But mind you, he doesn't have to be THAT conservative. Just originalist, and conservatives tend to me more originalist than liberals, who are more activist, and activist justices are not what we need.
I don't care HOW conservative the person is, just how fairly they'll interpret the constitution, and how originally. Now, I'm not saying that the person should interpret the constitution like me, because I am not a scholar of the constitution and know as much as them (although I do have my opinions) but I think that a conservative is necessary, but not necessarily that conservative, and a person that will properly interpret the constitution in an originalist manner, not an activist manner. That's why a liberal shouldn't be put up--as it will maintain an activist court.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
