In the wake of Chief Justice William Rehnquist’s death Saturday night, many law theorists are wondering and speculating about the future of the Supreme Court.
Rehnquist, who had served as a justice since 1972 and as chief justice for 19 years, helped lead a conservative revolution on the Court.
With his passing, the Court now has two vacancies for the first time in more than 30 years.
President George W. Bush announced Monday the nomination of U.S. Court of Appeals Judge John Roberts as Rehnquist’s successor. Roberts, a well-known conservative jurist, was Bush’s choice to replace Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who announced her resignation July 1. He was scheduled to undergo open hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee Tuesday, but the hearings will likely be delayed until after Rehnquist’s funeral Wednesday.
All eyes have now turned to Bush, as he prepares to make his second nomination to the Court.
Law professor Erwin Chemerinsky, who has argued several cases in front of the Supreme Court, said the dynamics of Robert’s confirmation process will be complicated because of the looming nomination for O’Connor’s position.
The decision may be one of the most important of Bush’s presidential tenure, Chemerinsky said.
If approved, Roberts, who is 50 years old, will likely serve on the bench spend several decades; the selection of another right-wing justice would complement his long-term conservative influence on the Court.
“The nomination of Roberts puts all the pressure on the next nomination,” Chemerinksy said. “And so, the Democrats may demand they know the choice before they vote [on Roberts].”
There is currently a call from Democrats for the president to select a moderate judge to replace O’Connor, who is known for her swing votes in several of the Court’s major decisions.
“I think the pressure is on [Bush] to select someone other than a white male,” Chemerinsky added. “Perhaps a racial minority, especially a Latino. Not just a woman [to replace O’Connor].”
The two new justices could have an important influence on the Court’s rulings on many politically sensitive topics.
The Court ruled five votes against four in favor of abortion rights, for instance, in the case Roe v. Wade—but with two votes currently in question, the landmark verdict stands to be overturned if Bush’s two nominees oppose it.
“If there are two new justices, there could be a significant change in abortion rights,” Chemerinsky said.
Similarly, the debate over affirmative action could also be influenced by the new justices.
Three justices are currently in favor of eliminating affirmative action; if the two judges that replace Rehnquist and O’Connor share their viewpoint, affirmative action could potentially be eliminated, Chemerinsky explained.
Although Bush has not set any timetable for announcing his nomination for O’Connor’s replacement, Chemerinsky said his selection will decide the dynamics of the confirmation process for both Roberts and the undetermined nominee.
“The question, then, is, ‘Will President Bush decide that he and the country go about this without an intense confirmation fight?’” Chemerinsky said. “If Bush nominates a moderate, the confirmation process won’t be too bad. If Bush picks a conservative, it will likely be an intense fight.”
Chemerinsky also noted that Bush’s second nomination will do much to determine the president’s legacy.
“These justices are going to be on the court long after President Bush dies,” Chemerinsky said. “There’s nothing with more long-term consequences than this decision.”
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.