What to Ask Judge O’Connor

Some of the objections to Sandra O’Connor are about as relevant to her fitness for the Supreme Court as abortions are relevant to stadiums. The right-t~life movement seems to think that abortion is germane to everything, so it can’t understand why Judge O’Connor, when she was the majority leader of the Arizona State Senate, opposed an anti-abortion rider to a football stadium bill because it seemed non-germane. We’d be troubled if she had seen a connection. But zealotry is not the only basis for raising questions about nominees for the Supreme Court. Their long-run philosophical positions are generally wholly unpredictable. Yet a President’s most lasting legacy may reside in the mind and manner of the Justices he appoints. The Senate has a duty to explore both responsibly. At first glance, her record is appealing. But much more needs to be known about her and about the depth and nature of her conservatism. How Judge O’Connor handles herself under questioning also will tell much about the quality of the President’s choice. The art of getting confirmed is openness where possible – and circumspection when the _ questions get too close to prejudging issues that may come before the Court. • Some questions arise from the uniqueness of the nomination; Judge O’Connor follows 101 male justices. Others arise from the simple fact that so little is known of her outside Arizona, where she gained prominence as an assistant state attorney general, legislator, judge and civic leader. What does