Sandra Day

McJustice
November 05, 2008

During every presidential campaign for the last two decades, liberals have predicted an apocalypse in the Supreme Court. In their dire visions, as many as four justices are always about to retire, meaning that a Republican victory would turn the court radically to the right and lead to the certain overturning of Roe v. Wade. In each of the past three elections, of course, these hyperbolic predictions have turned out to be wrong.

Supreme Leader: The Arrogance of Anthony Kennedy
June 16, 2007

Jeffrey Rosen on Anthony Kennedy's moralistic tendencies.

Nice Disguise
November 14, 2005

In this 2005 piece, Andrew Siegel argues that Samuel Alito's personality makes him a more dangerous Supreme Court nominee.

Stare Decisis
September 19, 2005

Jeffrey Rosen expresses his support for the confirmation of John Roberts and suggests he will be willing to maintain federal power.

Bottoms Up
August 01, 2005

Moments after President Bush announced the nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court, liberal interest groups were attacking Roberts as a conservative ideologue. "In reality John Roberts may be a hard-nosed extremist with a soft conservative facade," wrote the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights.

Ossification
July 25, 2005

We’ve all heard many times how Republicans are beholden to their base on social issues. But aren’t Democrats just as beholden—maybe even more beholden—to their base on social issues? Consider the way that Democrats have approached the fight over the Supreme Court vacancy. In the wake of Sandra Day O’Connor’s retirement, Democrats almost immediately settled upon a strategy of lionizing the departing justice and holding her up as a model for future appointees. This is true of elected Democratic officials.

Social Selection
July 25, 2005

We’ve all heard many times how Republicans are beholden to their base on social issues. But aren’t Democrats just as beholden—maybe even more beholden—to their base on social issues? Consider the way that Democrats have approached the fight over the Supreme Court vacancy. In the wake of Sandra Day O’Connor’s retirement, Democrats almost immediately settled upon a strategy of lionizing the departing justice and holding her up as a model for future appointees. This is true of elected Democratic officials.

The Fever
July 25, 2005

Whatever else is at stake in President Bush’s nomination of the successor to Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, the character of American conservatism certainly is. The sober truth is that, barring a scandal or an act of Intelligent Design, the president will get the judge he wishes: He owns the executive and legislative branches of government, and the Democrats have only the under-inflamed leadership of Harry Reid and the over-inflamed advertisements of MoveOn upon which to rely.

Light Footprint
July 07, 2003

In the months leading up to the Supreme Court decision on affirmative action, it was hard not to feel a sense of dread. At other great moments of constitutional drama—the decision to reaffirm Roe in 1992 and to settle the presidential election of 2000—the justices had allowed an inflated sense of their own importance to distort their judgment and compromise their reasoning.

Without Merit
May 14, 2001

In my criminal procedure class this year, we tried to decide whether a driver who has been pulled over by the police because of his race has suffered a constitutional injury. "The problem isn't being pulled over," said one African American student. "It's what happens after. You have to do this step-'n'-fetch-it routine, showing that you're subordinate to the officer, to make sure he won't arrest you. Even if the officer is black, it's incredibly degrading." The comment changed the way the class and I thought about the constitutionality of racial profiling.

Pages