News-Record.com

One more thought:

President Bush should ask Sandra Day O'Connor to stay on one more year -- as chief justice.

He should tell her, "Justice O'Connor, we've got a timing problem here.

"The Supreme Court starts a new term Oct. 1, and there's no way we can fill another vacancy by then.

"The last thing I need to do right now is think about nominating a new chief justice. And the country shouldn't have to deal with the distraction of the biggest confirmation battle ever.

"Roberts' confirmation hearings are just getting started. I'm confident he's going to pull through easily, but now isn't the time for me to press my luck.

"Sure, you would have to be confirmed by the Senate as chief justice, but that would be a breeze. After all the plaudits you're received lately from Democrats and Republicans alike, even Leahy, Kennedy and Schumer would have to vote for you.

"And think of the historic dimensions: the first woman chief justice. I'd be honored to be the president making the appointment.

"It will be a good move for me, for you and for the country. Do it for a year. Or, if you like the job, keep it longer. That will be entirely up to you.

"So, how about it? Can I call you chief?"

Justice O'Connor is leaving so she can take care of her husband, who is suffering from Alzheimers. I'm sure she didn't make this decision lightly, nor would she have made it if there was any way for her to continue her work at the Court.
I think it would be uncaring to ask her to stay and take on even more responsibility.
President Bush should not cave in to the political pressure of those who seek to destroy him and make him a slave of their liberal demands.
Justice O'Connor has served well, let her be.

Bush nominates Roberts for chief justice. So much for my plan.

While I am very impressed with Roberts' credentials and his writings -- he appears to be as good a writer as Scalia -- his judicial experience is limited. I think it would have been better for him to serve as an associate justice first. Nevertheless, he's the nominee, and I expect him to be confirmed, despite opposition from the usual naysayers.

It was almost as if he was left with no choice. The prospect of having three confirmation hearings was unappealing. Scalia and Thomas would have drawn too much opposition. (An interesting dimension is the vote of no-confidence in Stevens, Souter and Kennedy, previous Republican nominees). Also, it is not worth expending a lot of political capital, for either party, on the Chief Justice slot because the powers are somewhat limited, and the person filling the position still only has one vote.

It will be interesting to see who the next nominee will be for associate justice.

I believe I heard that, since Justice O'Conner has tendered her resignation, her vote on any cases she hears will be invalidated once her replacement is confirmed.

jwg,

I believe you are correct. Unless Bush delays naming her replacement for the entire term, it seems there's little reason for her to stay on at all.