July 20, 2005


O'Connor: Roberts 'good in every way, except he's not a woman' (Rich Landers, July 20, 2005, Spokesman Review)

Sandra Day O'Connor heard about President Bush's nomination for her replacement on the Supreme Court while she was returning from a day of fly-fishing in Idaho.

Her first words were unequivocal: "That's fabulous!" she said. She immediately described John G. Roberts as a "brilliant legal mind, a straight shooter, articulate, and he should not have trouble being confirmed by October. He's good in every way, except he's not a woman."

She said she was almost sure President Bush would not appoint a woman as a replacement for William H. Rehnquist because she didn't think he would want a woman as chief justice. "So that almost assures there won't be a woman appointed to the court at this time."

In fact, this makes it more likely that the new Chief will be a woman--more bang for the buck in that "first."

Posted by Orrin Judd at July 20, 2005 12:38 PM

Civil War is coming.

Posted by: Patriot at July 20, 2005 1:03 PM

Sandy Baby should be tied behind a horse and dragged back to Arizona as quickly as possible.

It will be delicious when Bush does choose to nominate a woman to be the Chief Justice.

Posted by: bart at July 20, 2005 1:52 PM

I am rooting for Thomas as Chief, Mike Luttig as justice.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at July 20, 2005 2:06 PM

Bush kept his word. Except for CFR, he has a pretty good record on that.

Ironic that Dem obstructionism accounts for Robert's small paper-trail.

Posted by: Noel at July 20, 2005 2:10 PM

Chief Justice Janice Rogers Brown, I presume?

Schumer and Leahy better not fence with her - they might not get out of the room alive.

Posted by: jim hamlen at July 20, 2005 2:13 PM

With the Roberts nomination, Bush has actually whetted a bipartisan appetite for a female and/or minority Chief. Nominating, say, Janice Rogers Brown during a Congressional election year could be verrry interesting.

Posted by: ghostcat at July 20, 2005 2:19 PM

He said he'd sign CFR if they got a bill to his desk.

Posted by: oj at July 20, 2005 2:35 PM


I think if Bush had won by 4% in 2000, he would have vetoed McCain-Feingold.

Maybe not, but this is one issue where it is almost impossible to get the 'voters' on your side. With the rise of the Internet, perhaps the public will back full, immediate disclosure - if the GOP would start trumpeting it.

Posted by: jim hamlen at July 20, 2005 3:13 PM

A Latina would be better than Brown. Any conservative Latina appeals court judges?

Posted by: Bob at July 20, 2005 3:36 PM


The public would back a complete ban on political speech.

Posted by: oj at July 20, 2005 4:00 PM

Sadly, you might be correct. We know the MSM and all incumbents would.

Posted by: jim hamlen at July 20, 2005 4:33 PM

Maura Corrigan, the next CJ!

Posted by: Dave W. at July 20, 2005 5:29 PM

He said the speech restrictions were unacceptable. He accepted. True, the law was essentially neutered by 527s, but the principle was wrong. Not to mention the restrictions on association, assembly & petition, weakening the parties.

But this was a good pick. So good that Roberts might even stike down CFR.

Posted by: Noel at July 21, 2005 10:44 AM

He said he'd sign it if they got it to his desk & he did.

Posted by: oj at July 21, 2005 12:16 PM
« THEM IS US (via Kevin Whited): | Main | THE NEW NEW LEFT VS. WAL-MART »