Rather an Unknown: Nominee’s effect on Court is difficult to determine from her past rulings

WASHINGTON, July 7 – Sandra Day O’Connor’s opinions in her 18 months as an Arizona appeals court judge display careful reasoning and use of precedent. But they shed little light on her attitude toward most of the controversial constitutional issues she will face if she is confirmed as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Judge O’Connor, a former Republican majority leader of the Arizona State Senate, is widely regarded as conservative in her political outlook. Her legislative record has been attacked by anti-abortion groups that say she cast pro-abortion votes before she became a judge, but those assertions have been disputed by people who sat with her in the Arizona Legislature.

A review of Judge O’Connor’s 29 published opinions for the Arizona Court of Appeals disclosed none dealing with abortion. Nor did any of the opinions disclose her views on most of the other controversial issues that the Supreme Court has ruled on, such as busing as a means of desegregating schools, prayer in schools, the death penalty, affirmative action and the constitutional rights of criminal defendants.

The White House indicated tonight that Judge O’Connor was a supporter of the death penalty. Michael K. Deaver, the President’s deputy chief of staff, said that Judge O’Connor had been the author of an Arizona law providing for the death penalty and had sentenced at least one person under the law. However, no one has been executed in Arizona since she first became a Superior Court judge there