Home > Articles about Justice O'Connor > Single-Issue Nonsense

Single-Issue Nonsense

ITEM DETAILS

Type: Letter to the editor
Author: Stuart Litvak
Collection: The Kauffman-Henry Collection
Date is approximate: No

DISCLAIMER: This text has been transcribed automatically and may contain substantial inaccuracies due to the limitations of automatic transcription technology. This transcript is intended only to make the content of this document more easily discoverable and searchable. If you would like to quote the exact text of this document in any piece of work or research, please view the original using the link above and gather your quote directly from the source. The Sandra Day O'Connor Institute does not warrant, represent, or guarantee in any way that the text below is accurate.

Transcript

The big “to-do” over Judge Sandra O’Connor’s nomination to the Supreme Court 18 an obvious travesty, and more specifically, the hyperfocus on her stand on abortion as a basis for determining her fitness for the position. The pro- versus anti-abortion issue is also unfortunate, since whether or not a mother desires an abortion is a personal, private matter, and one in which the government has absolutely no right to interfere. Whether or not Judge O’Connor is fit to be a justice of the Supreme Court should depend solely upon her past performance as a legislator and judge, and her qualifications – not upon her particular stand on this or that issue. Everyone, whether in public office or not deserves the right to take a stand, and that is one of the privileges of being a free citizen. Since Judge O’Connor has in the past taken a stand on a broad range of issues, of which the abortion issue is only one, and should she be confirmed, she will also have to rule on a wide variety of varying issues, why the focus on Just the one, single issue? It doesn’t make any sense but then, neither do a lot of other things in today’s crazy, topsy-turvy world.

© COPYRIGHT NOTICE: This Media Coverage / Article constitutes copyrighted material. The excerpt above is provided here for research purposes only under the terms of fair use (17 U.S.C. § 107). To view the complete original, please retrieve it from its original source noted above.