Unbound 2005: The New Supreme Court

Until recently, many Americans couldn't remember a time when there were any changes made to the Supreme Court. Over the past decade, the court has remained static under Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Until this year, the most recent judicial appointment was made in 1994 when President Bill Clinton nominated Stephen Breyer. However, due to Rehnquist's sudden passing and Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement, some sweeping changes are about to be made.

As you may already know, the Supreme Court is comprised of eight associate justices and one chief justice. When appointed, a justice can serve for life, but they may resign or retire of their own will. Congress also has the power to remove justices through an impeachment process, although this has never happened. Perhaps the most important power the Supreme Court holds is judicial review. Judicial review gives the Court the ability to declare federal and state laws unconstitutional. Perhaps the most well-known example of judicial review is the landmark case of Brown vs. Board of Education in 1954. In this landmark case, the Supreme Court overturned Plessy vs. Ferguson, and declared segregation unconstitutional.

A few decades later in 1973, the Supreme Court decided the case of Roe vs. Wade. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that any laws made banning abortion were unconstitutional because they violated a woman's right to privacy. Since the decision was made, there has been endless debate about abortion's morality and legality. There was even disagreement among the Court regarding the decision of Roe vs. Wade; Chief Justice William Rehnquist famously dissented in his opinion letter.

Now that two positions are vacant, there has been speculation as to how the Court will change. Some people feel that the Court will become more conservative and cases like Roe vs. Wade will be overturned. How the Supreme Court will lean is dependent on President Bush's recent nominees, John Roberts and Harriet Miers.

President Bush declared his nomination for Associate Justice on July 19, 2005, following Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement announcement. He chose John Roberts, a former judge for the U.S Court of Appeals in the Washington D.C. circuit. Previously, Roberts worked in a private practice for the firm of Hogan & Hartson for several years. In 1980, Roberts even clerked for Rehnquist.

When Rehnquist passed away last September, Roberts was named as the nominee for the position of Chief Justice. The Senate hearings were expedited by President Bush in anticipation of the start of the Supreme Court's sessions in October. Roberts was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee on September 22. He was later confirmed by the full Senate on September 29, passing with a vote of 78 to 22.

From his judicial record, it is clear that Roberts has conservative ideals. However, Roberts never decided any cases involving hot topics like abortion or gay rights during his tenure on the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. This inconclusiveness has left Democrats in the Senate wary of Roberts' future decisions while on the Court. Republicans have also expressed their concern. They have placed their faith in President Bush, hoping that his pick will be conservative enough on hot-button issues.

Once Roberts was elevated to the position of Chief Justice, rumors began to fly about who President Bush would nominate to replace Sandra Day O'Connor. Many speculated that the President would choose a woman. Others thought that perhaps he would choose a minority to reflect diversity on the Court. Ultimately, President Bush chose Harriet Miers.

Miers is a controversial choice. she is currently serving as White House Counsel and was formerly the President's personal lawyer. She has never served as a judge. President Bush's critics argue that Miers doesn't possess the judicial experience necessary to be on the Supreme Court. While John Roberts has extensive legal and judicial qualifications, Miers has only worked in private law for the majority of her career. Her detractors also accuse the President of nepotism by hiring his former personal attorney. Many say that since Roberts was confirmed, President Bush is confident that any nominee he presents to the Senate will be confirmed as well.

In the eyes of her critics, Miers' biggest weakness is her lack of experience. Since she has never served as a judge, there is little to no way of knowing how she will vote on the Supreme Court once her nomination is confirmed. This poses a problem for Republicans and Democrats alike. Will Miers be too conservative? Will she be too liberal? How will she vote on issues like abortion or gay marriage if those cases were to come before the Supreme Court? For those in the Senate, the biggest problem with Miers' nomination is the unknown factor.

By replacing Sandra Day O'Connor, Miers has many expectations to live up to. O'Connor was nominated by former President Ronald Reagan in 1981. Since that time, O'Connor has often acted as the crucial swing vote in many significant cases. O'Connor was appointed by a Republican president, but in the past, has voted more moderately. John Roberts is a conservative in a seat vacated by a fellow conservative. Roberts' appointment has little to no effect on the Court's future voting record. By losing O'Connor's swing vote, the Court has the possibility of becoming more conservative with Miers' appointment. However, since little is known about Miers, it is too early to speculate on her political principles.

With Roberts' recent confirmation and Miers' nomination, the Supreme Court stands to evolve in ways that America hasn't seen for over a decade. Some may mourn the loss of the legal experience that Rehnquist and O'Connor possessed. On the other hand, some say change is important and Roberts and Miers may bring a fresh, new perspective. Whatever your stance is, these new additions to the Supreme Court will make for fascinating legal developments in the future.

Callan Wright is a junior International Business major at the College of New Jersey. She plans on attending law school to pursue a career in corporate law after graduation.