Home > Articles about Justice O'Connor > O’Connor Worth $1 Million

O’Connor Worth $1 Million

September 2, 1981

ITEM DETAILS

Type: Newspaper article
Author: Associated Press
Source: The Phoenix Gazette
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.

WASHINGTON (AP) – Sandra D. O’Connor, nominated by President Reagan to be the first woman on the Supreme Court, says she and her husband are worth more than $1.1 million. The sum, which would place her among the wealthiest members of the court, includes her home in Paradise Valley valued at $300,- 000 and a joint partnership interest with her husband in a private law firm worth $342,850. Judge O’Connor’s husband, John J. O’Connor III, is a senior partner in the firm of Fennemore, Craig, Von Ammon & Udall, one of Arizona’s largest. Judge O’Connor bas been a judge on the Arizona Court of Appeals since 1979. THE financial statement was submitted last week to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which begins three days of public hearings on the nomination next Wednesday. Judge O’Connor arrived in Washington Tuesday for “isolated study and preparation” for her testimony at the hearings, a White House spokesman said today. Her nomination is expected to easily win Senate approval. In a statement to the committee, Judge O’Connor said she supports a limited role for the federal courts and is “keenly aware of the problems associated with ‘judicial activism.'” “THE separation of powers principle also requires judges to avoid substituting their own views of what is desirable in a particular case for those of the legislature,” she wrote. Judges are “ill-equipped” to. substitute their views for the executive or legislative branches, which are more “attuned to the public will” and more “politically

© 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.