A New Day on the Horizon

Last week, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor announced her retirement from the U.S. Supreme Court. More so than for any particular judicial opinion that she wrote, O'Connor will forever be remembered as the first woman to ever sit on the bench for the highest court in the land. While her accomplishment in doing so certainly served as an inspiration to ambitious female law students everywhere, she did little during her tenure on the Court to combat the stereotype that women are fickle.

Commonly known for her role as the swing vote, O'Connor was as likely to side with the Court's liberal judicial activists as she was with its so-called conservative contingent. Her votes to uphold the legality of affirmative action and abortion were hardly the stuff you'd expect from a Reagan appointee, yet she sided with Dubya in 2000's famous Bush v. Gore case regarding the recount in Florida. The reason for her unpredictable inconsistencies? Simply a lack of any kind of consistent method of interpreting the Constitution. As described by my 3rd year Con Law professor, O'Connor, unlike the other justices, followed no particular judicial philosophy, favoring instead to apply arbitrary standards to issues on a case-by-case basis.

Though all signs currently point to the "moderate" Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, it certainly would be nice if Bush managed to place a strict constructionist on the Court who could help to finally reverse the last half-century's improper liberal abuse of judicial power. After all, judicial nominations are the main reason I vote for Republican presidents. If nothing else, however, we can at least hope for a justice who follows unified principles and a logical philosophy in deciphering the nation's law.