In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Why, Sandra, why???

Jill

I have been away from the internet for a few days, and when I opened my gmail today I was shocked to find a semi-frantic email from my friend Julie about Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s resignation. Why is this important? MoveOn breaks it down:

Below are just a few examples of landmark cases where Scalia or Thomas voted against O’Connor to try to strike down core rights and freedoms. In many cases if they had one more vote they would have succeeded.

Worker’s Rights: Nevada Dep’t of Human Resources v. Hibbs, which protected the right of workers to care for newborn children or gravely ill family members.

Women’s Rights: United States v. Virginia, which allowed women to attend all publicly funded schools. (C’Connor was not on the Court at the time of Roe v. Wade, but has opposed Scalia and Thomas on reproductive freedom issues in such landmark cases as Planned Parenthood v. Casey)

Church and State: Locke v. Davey, which ensured that states could not be required to fund religious training.

Envrionmental Rights: Friends of the Earth , Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc., which protected citizens’ rights under the Clean Water Act to sue against the illegal dumping of mercury and other toxins.

Civil Rights: * Dickerson v. U.S., which upheld the “Miranda” guarantee that people accused of crimes are read their rights. * United States v. Fordice, which protected the rights of those still suffering from the effects of state-enforced racial segregation. * Grutter v Bollinger, affirmed the right of state colleges and universities to use affirmative action in their admissions policies.

Civil Liberties:Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, which blocked the government from indefinitely detaining American citizens without charges, an attorney, or any basic rights.

Sign the MoveOn letter. Write to your senator. Mobilize, mobilize, mobilize. If the wrong justice is nominated, Roe v. Wade is #1 on the chopping block.

4 thoughts on Why, Sandra, why???

  2. Joseph is right, Jill. There are only three justices on record as opposing Roe: Scalia, Thomas, and Rehnquist- and Rehnquist may be leaving soon as well. For Roe to seriously be in jeopardy, O’Connor would have to be replaced with an anti-Roe justice, Rehnquist would either have to not retire or retire and be replaced with a similarly-minded justice, and another member of the six-member pro-Roe majority would have to retire and be replaced with a Roe opponent.

    Of the other cases you mention, Nevada Dept. of HR v. Hibbs was decided 6-3 with Stevens concurring in the judgment, US v. Virginia was 7-1 with Rehnquist concurring in the judgment, Locke v. Davey was 7-2, Friends of the Earth was 7-2, Dickerson was 7-2, and US v. Fordice was unanimous (Scalia concurred in the judgment but dissented in part). So even if O’Connor’s replacement disagrees with how she voted in all of those cases, none of them will be overturned.

    That’s not to say that O’Connor hasn’t been an important swing vote on certain issues (affirmative action, for instance), but you’re clearly overestimating the significance of her retirement, particularly with respect to abortion jurisprudence.

Comments are currently closed.