To the editor: GOP antiabortion zealots discovered a tough lesson from the late Supreme Court docket Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s embrace of Roe vs. Wade — that many conservative ladies maintain average, pro-choice views. (“I believed Sandra Day O’Connor was too conservative. Now her moderation could be a present,” Opinion, December 3)
Then-President Trump proclaimed that he would select a “very courageous” lady—implying she wouldn’t be a average—to fill the third Supreme Court docket emptiness of his tenure, following the loss of life of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in September 2020.
Since Amy Coney Barrett had famously known as on legal professionals to construct “the dominion of God,” Trump discovered the right nominee to fulfill his staunch antiabortion evangelical base. As a justice, Barrett in the end determined to amend Roe, some 30 years after O’Connor had agreed to uphold that landmark determination.
Certainly, O’Connor needs to be freed to carry accountable those that would “renegotiate the boundaries between church and state.”
Fr Jane Weil, Sacramento
To the editor: It should be acknowledged that O’Connor participated in plenty of selections that had been average from a conservative perspective. However, it should be remembered that in what was arguably an important determination whereas she was on the sphere – Bush vs. Gore – engaged in rank rationalization to attain the outcome she needed.
In his e book “Supreme Injustice,” Alan Dershowitz reviewed the opinions of every of the bulk justices and confirmed how, to be able to attain the “desired” outcome, they ignored language that they both wrote or had accepted in earlier selections. If such language and attitudes had been adopted, it will have required them to resolve in favor of then-Vice President Al Gore.
O’Connor had many tremendous qualities, however when it got here time for her to behave with integrity, she selected to be a partisan. This could have an effect on her legacy so long as our nation is ready to endure.
Joel Drum, Van Nuys
To the editor: Once I consider O’Connor, I keep in mind these phrases from her Stanford graduation handle in 1982:
“Different communities haven’t had the identical want for legal professionals or courts as we have now right here. Whereas Japan has maybe essentially the most excessive instance, it’s attention-grabbing to notice that in Japan there’s one lawyer for each 10,000 residents, whereas in California there’s one lawyer for each 233 residents.”
I discovered it mildly amusing as I sat there receiving my engineering diploma just some rows from disheartened regulation college students who had simply heard a Supreme Court docket justice say in observe that we have now too many legal professionals on this nation.
Donald Bentley, La Puente