A Serious Campaign Issue

[Guest MikeSC]

Just to remind people how vital the election is, we have this story:

Rehnquist Hospitalized With Cancer in Md.

 

Oct 25, 12:53 PM (ET)

 

By GINA HOLLAND

 

WASHINGTON (AP) - Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the second-oldest man to preside over the nation's highest court and its premier conservative figure, is undergoing treatment for thyroid cancer.

 

Rehnquist, 80, underwent a tracheotomy at Bethesda Naval Hospital in suburban Maryland on Saturday, the Supreme Court announced Monday. It said he expects to be back at work next week when the court will next be in session.

 

Even so, Rehnquist's hospitalization little more than a week before the election gave new prominence to a campaign issue that has been overshadowed by the war on terrorism. The next president is likely to name several justices to a court that has been deeply divided in recent years on issues as varied as abortion and the 2000 election itself.

 

Rehnquist, a conservative named to the court in 1972 by President Richard Nixon and elevated to chief justice by President Ronald Reagan in 1986, has had a series of health problems.

 

In 2002 he missed several court sessions after hurting his knee in a fall at his home. He had surgery to repair a torn tendon. Rehnquist also has struggled with chronic back pain over the years and has spent time in physical therapy.

 

The thyroid gland, located in the neck, produces hormones that help regulate the body's use of energy. There are several types of thyroid cancer and it was not immediately known which type affected the justice.

 

About 23,600 people develop various types of thyroid cancer each year in the United States.

 

Rehnquist turned 80 earlier this month, a milestone reached by only one other chief justice of the United States. The only older chief justice was Roger Taney, who presided over the high court in the mid-1800s until his death at 87.

 

Word of the cancer came in a two paragraph release from the court. It said Rehnquist was recently diagnosed with cancer and that he was admitted to the hospital on Friday. There were no other details about his condition.

 

Rehnquist has frequently been mentioned as a possible retirement prospect, although he has hired law clerks through June 2006. He turned 80 on Oct. 1, and at a birthday celebration he made no mention of stepping down.

 

No matter who is elected president next week, a vacancy on the high court is likely during the next presidential term. Both President Bush and John Kerry have avoided describing a litmus test for a Supreme Court nomination, although their differences on abortion are cut along partisan lines. The future of the Roe vs. Wade decision legalizing abortion is the most visible symbol of the court's ideological split.

 

Neither Bush nor Kerry has suggested any names for possible nomination if a Supreme Court seat becomes vacant during the next four years, but they have spoken about judges' approaches to specific issues.

 

On the subject of gay marriage, Bush said at the Republican convention: "I support the protection of marriage against activist judges, and I will continue to appoint federal judges who know the difference between personal opinion and the strict interpretation of the law."

 

Kerry has said he would nominate only Supreme Court justices who support abortion rights, and his campaign Web site says he would name "judges with a record of enforcing the nation's civil rights and anti-discrimination laws."

 

On Dec. 13, 2000, Rehnquist joined four other Supreme Court justices in reversing Florida's court-ordered recount of presidential election ballots. The majority of the high court determined there was no time to conduct a lawful recount.

 

That decision resulted in George W. Bush being awarded Florida's 25 electoral votes - and thus the presidency - over Democrat Al Gore.

 

Rehnquist presided over then-President Clinton's 1998 impeachment trial in the Senate, giving most Americans their first televised view of the chief justice. The previous year, he presided as the court ruled unanimously that Paula Jones could sue Clinton for sexual harassment.

 

The last vacancy on the court occurred in 1994, and then-President Bill Clinton appointed Stephen Breyer to fill the seat vacated when Justice Harry M. Blackmun retired.

 

Other members of the high court have also been treated for cancer. Justice John Paul Stevens, the oldest at 84, has had prostate cancer. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor had breast cancer and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had colon cancer.

 

Word of the illness comes as the Supreme Court deals with multiple legal fights stemming from the election campaign season. On Saturday, the court refused to place independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader on the ballot in Pennsylvania. The high court has not yet acted on a similar appeal from Nader involving Ohio.

 

Rehnquist, a widower since 1991, has three children.

 

Rehnquist has defied retirement rumors, even as some observers wondered aloud whether his conservative legacy - empowering states, limiting abortion and preserving the death penalty - may have run its course.

 

When he was appointed, Rehnquist was a conservative who had campaigned for presidential candidates Barry Goldwater and Nixon.

 

Rehnquist quickly became known as the "lone ranger" among his more liberal colleagues at the time, writing stinging dissents in cases upholding abortion rights and busing to desegregate schools.

 

A series of more conservative judicial appointments by presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush changed the court's makeup. By the late 1990s, Rehnquist was at the forefront of several majority rulings allowing the use of public money for religious institutions and greater government powers for police searches.

 

Rehnquist was a 47-year-old Justice Department lawyer with a reputation for brilliance and unbending conservative ideology when Nixon nominated him to succeed the retired Justice John Harlan.

 

It was a period when the court, under Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, was beginning a slow journey away from the liberal jurisprudence and civil rights agenda personified by Chief Justice Earl Warren.

 

"He probably had more of a crusader's attitude when he first got the job, and was writing lone and blistering dissents," Washington lawyer Charles Cooper once said about the justice he served as a law clerk in 1978-79.

 

Rehnquist's opinions are often simply worded and short, and his courtroom style is dry and brusque. He is known as a stern and efficient taskmaster at the court, and a fierce competitor on the tennis court and at the poker table.

 

Rehnquist has suffered from a chronic sore back, for which he had surgery in 1995. For several years, he has gotten up to stretch his back at least once during the court's hour-long oral arguments.

 

Rehnquist has varied interests in history, geography, music and painting. He is prolific author, with books on the Supreme Court's history and on a topic that later became prophetic - political impeachment.

 

While rulings on social issues, free speech and crime drew more headlines, many lawyers point to the notion of states' rights, or federalism, as the hallmark of the Rehnquist court.

 

Less combative than Justice Antonin Scalia, less doctrinaire than Justice Clarence Thomas, Rehnquist has been the low-key force behind the court's push for greater states' rights at the expense of federal control.

 

Rehnquist was in the majority as the court struck down part of the Violence Against Women Act, invalidated the Gun-Free School Zones Act and prevented state employees from suing their employers for various kinds of alleged discrimination.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20041025/D85UIUU02.html

It seems that Rehnquist, likely, does not have a great deal of time left.

-=Mike

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

It seems that Rehnquist, likely, does not have a great deal of time left.

 

Rehnquist, 80, underwent a tracheotomy at Bethesda Naval Hospital in suburban Maryland on Saturday, the Supreme Court announced Monday. It said he expects to be back at work next week when the court will next be in session.

 

Yeah..

 

I heard something like 90% of people survive thyroid cancer or something high.

 

Interesting how you're exploiting a man's age and exaggerating his health problems to try and pitch your candidate.

[Guest Wildbomb 4:20]

I don't think that Rehnquist will be on the bench much longer, although I wouldn't be surprised to see someone go before him. Mike's got it right though...depending on who is elected, there will be a shift one way in the other in the Court's make-up. A lot more than just the politics of the Presidency are at stake in this election.

 

--Ryan

...Who noticed that the Herald (!!!) says that it's Bush 254, Kerry 253 as of this morning...

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

It said Rehnquist was recently diagnosed with cancer and that he was admitted to the hospital on Friday. There were no other details about his condition.

 

News travels slowly.. it seems

[Guest MikeSC]

It seems that Rehnquist, likely, does not have a great deal of time left.

 

Rehnquist, 80, underwent a tracheotomy at Bethesda Naval Hospital in suburban Maryland on Saturday, the Supreme Court announced Monday. It said he expects to be back at work next week when the court will next be in session.

 

Yeah..

 

I heard something like 90% of people survive thyroid cancer or something high.

 

Interesting how you're exploiting a man's age and exaggerating his health problems to try and pitch your candidate.

The man is old as dirt and is now a cancer patient. I don't have a great deal of faith in him lasting a lot longer.

-=Mike

...The Supreme Court will need to state that filibusters on nominees is illegal if he ever hopes to be replaced...

[Vyce 0]

It seems that Rehnquist, likely, does not have a great deal of time left.

 

Rehnquist, 80, underwent a tracheotomy at Bethesda Naval Hospital in suburban Maryland on Saturday, the Supreme Court announced Monday. It said he expects to be back at work next week when the court will next be in session.

 

Yeah..

 

I heard something like 90% of people survive thyroid cancer or something high.

 

Interesting how you're exploiting a man's age and exaggerating his health problems to try and pitch your candidate.

Why are you pointing fingers here?

 

I'm currently IN law school (and a fairly liberal one at that) and this story was very much in discussion today, with the consensus being that "We've got to vote Kerry in so that Bush won't stack the court with another Scalia or Thomas".

 

Both sides are probably going to play this up over the next few days.

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

I wouldn't play up the health problems of a justice. It's not a good idea.

 

There will be a vacancy on the court by 2009. It's inevitable. But we don't know who will be the one to leave first. It could be Stevens or O'Connor.

 

I doubt that Scalia or Thomas would be confirmed

[Guest MikeSC]

I wouldn't play up the health problems of a justice. It's not a good idea.

 

There will be a vacancy on the court by 2009. It's inevitable. But we don't know who will be the one to leave first. It could be Stevens or O'Connor.

 

I doubt that Scalia or Thomas would be confirmed

Yet both are very solid justices.

 

However, Souter should have never been seated...

-=Mike

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

I wouldn't play up the health problems of a justice. It's not a good idea.

 

There will be a vacancy on the court by 2009. It's inevitable. But we don't know who will be the one to leave first. It could be Stevens or O'Connor.

 

I doubt that Scalia or Thomas would be confirmed

Yet both are very solid justices.

 

However, Souter should have never been seated...

-=Mike

You never know.

 

It's surprising that we've went for 10 years without a vacancy. Somebody should check history to see if this is a record.

 

and Kerry voted against Souter, so he's not to blame for that. Granted, he turned out to be a surprise, didn't he?

[teke184 0]

If Rehnquist has to leave the Court soon, I'd go with Clarence Thomas as the new Chief Justice if he can get re-confirmed.

 

Thomas is the youngest of the judges by 9 years (56, 9 years younger than the 65 year old David Souter), in the best health, and is solidly conservative.

 

 

Antonin Scalia, while I'd like him as Chief Justice, is about 70. That's the age at which a lot of health problems could crop up quickly.

 

Sandra Day O'Connor would be another good choice and one that would be a lot easier to confirm than Thomas or Scalia, but she already expressed an interest in stepping down as far back as 2000.

 

Anthony Kennedy could get confirmed as Chief Justice but many conservatives would be pissed, as he's the one who lead the SC's charge to de-criminalize homosexual sodomy, which lead into the current Gay Marriage political issue.

 

 

 

Souter, Ginsburg, Stevens, and Breyer don't have a hope in Hell of becoming CJ if Bush wins.

 

If Kerry wins, I'd say that Breyer probably has the best shot because Stevens is 80 years old, Ginsberg's had cancer, and Souter, while tending to vote liberal, also tends to side with Rehnquist a lot.

 

 

 

That doesn't discount the possibility of the new Justice being named to the court immediately becoming the Chief Justice. That's actually a remarkably common act, as Rehnquist is one of only three Chief Justices who were elevated within the Supreme Court to the role of Chief Justice.

[Special K 0]

I don't know why people (Edit: Rob) are getting on Mike about this. He's just making a point that he's most likely going to be replaced in the upcoming term. Whatever your political beliefs, that should be important for you.

 

We know Mike's political beliefs, but where does he attempt to 'pitch his candidate?' That's hardly 'exploiting.' So settle down.

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

it was a possible overreaction on my part.

 

Although it seems like the messege could be intrepreted as "This is more important, Rehnquist will die soon". The first part is true, the second probably isn't.

 

Now, if Kerry had mentioned that and used it as a reason to elect him, that would be exploiting it. Same as if Bush did it.

[teke184 0]

"Will die soon" is overstating it.

 

"Is more likely to vacate his spot" (by death or by choice) IS likely, though, depending on how much this takes out of him. He may decide it's not worth the stress.

[Guest MikeSC]

it was a possible overreaction on my part.

 

Although it seems like the messege could be intrepreted as "This is more important, Rehnquist will die soon". The first part is true, the second probably isn't.

 

Now, if Kerry had mentioned that and used it as a reason to elect him, that would be exploiting it. Same as if Bush did it.

Rob, Rehnquist will have to step down soon. He's not young, he has cancer, and I have doubts about his ability to continue doing his job. And, curse my pessimism, him not living a great deal longer isn't exactly outside the realm of the possible.

 

NEITHER candidate, however, has discussed this issue in any depth and THIS, in my opinion, is the biggest issue facing us.

 

The War on Terror isn't permanent. It will eventually end. Supreme Court decisions tend to be brutally difficult to change.

-=Mike

[teke184 0]

it was a possible overreaction on my part.

 

Although it seems like the messege could be intrepreted as "This is more important, Rehnquist will die soon". The first part is true, the second probably isn't.

 

Now, if Kerry had mentioned that and used it as a reason to elect him, that would be exploiting it. Same as if Bush did it.

Rob, Rehnquist will have to step down soon. He's not young, he has cancer, and I have doubts about his ability to continue doing his job. And, curse my pessimism, him not living a great deal longer isn't exactly outside the realm of the possible.

 

NEITHER candidate, however, has discussed this issue in any depth and THIS, in my opinion, is the biggest issue facing us.

 

The War on Terror isn't permanent. It will eventually end. Supreme Court decisions tend to be brutally difficult to change.

-=Mike

They talked about this briefly at one of the debates.

 

 

Bush's answer was "strict constructionalists", which means "Interpret the Constitution, not make shit up like Earl Warren did."

 

Kerry's answer was "There will be an Abortion litmus test."

 

 

Personally, I side with Bush, which comes as a suprise to about 1% of y'all. While I think abortion should be legal, the legality for it right now is VERY sketchy, as Warren Berger pulled the case for it together using bits and pieces of old Earl Warren decisions that talked about the right to privacy.

 

(Incidentally, privacy is NOT in the Constitution. It's just interpreted as such by the Warren-era court mainly by expanding the 14th Amendment.)

 

The legality of abortion should be covered state-to-state and, IMHO, should be subject to public voting. If the people want it allowed in their state, they'll get it. However, I'd say that the map of states where it would be legal will vaguely resemble the Electoral College map come next Tuesday.