Chicago Tribune, Newspaper article, The Kauffman-Henry Collection

O’Connor’s record: conservative, fair

Chicago Tribune, Newspaper article, The Kauffman-Henry Collection / By

WASHINGTON – In Sandra D. O’Connor, President Reagan has chosen a United States Supreme Court justice whose views are moderately conservative to the extent that her views can be discerned at all. As one of nine judges of the middle-level Arizona Court of Appeals since 1979, Judge O’Connor, 51, has written no opinions that reveal either a political

News analysis

ideology or a judicial philosophy, according to Arizona lawyers. As a member of the state legislature for seven years before that, state Sen. O’Connor was conservative, as are nearly all Arizona Republicans, but she was not predictably conservative on every issue. This could explain why moderates and liberals joined most conservatives Tuesday in praising Mrs. O’Connor’s intelligence, qualifications, and fairness. “IF YOU’RE going to have a Ronald Reagan appointment, you’re not going to do any better,” said Rep. Morris Udall

Arizona Republic, Newspaper mention, The Kauffman-Henry Collection

Conservative Arizona lawmaker backs Judge O’Connor

Arizona Republic, Newspaper mention, The Kauffman-Henry Collection / By

Rep. Donna Carlson West, R-Mesa, an ardent opponent of the Equal Rights Amendment and a pro-life advocate, threw her support Friday behind Judge Sandra O’Connor, a U.S. Supreme Court nominee. In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Howard Baker, R-Tenn., Rep . Carlson W~t laid she was deeply distressed by opposition to the Arizona Court of Appeals judge’s historic nomination. “I have known Sandra for many years, as a member of the Legislature and member of the judiciary,” Mrs: Carlson West said, “and I am convinced that there is nothing in her record in either capacity that warrants the many unfounded, untrue charges that are being raised in opposition to her nomination as the first woman justice of the Supreme Court.” She conceded that Mrs. O’Connor and two other conservative women legislators had introduced a resolution to ratify the ERA in Arizona. But many legislators and states have changed their minds on ERA since Congress passed it in 1972, Rep. Carlson West said. On the abortion issue, Judge O’Connor cast couple of votes as a legislator with which R Carlson West said she disagreed, “but I do kno that she is personally opposed to abortion.” Rep. Carlson West, immediate past chairman of the American Legislative Exchange Council. national organization of conservative legislator labeled as “untrue” allegations that Judge O’Connor is “pro-gun control, anti-religion and anti-capital punishment.”

Editorial, Mesa Tribune, The Kauffman-Henry Collection

O’Connor solid member of the conservative wing

Editorial, Mesa Tribune, The Kauffman-Henry Collection / By

WASHINGTON – Sandra O’Connor, after her first term as a Supreme Court justice, is a solid member of the court’s conservative wing. In the session that ended Friday, O’Connor voted to: – Give local school boards unlimited power to remove books they find offensive from high school and junior high libraries. Her side lost. – Let Washington state voters bar a school busing plan voluntarily adopted by the city of Seattle to achieve racial balance. Again, she was on the losing end. – Allow states to execute “non-triggerman” criminals whose crimes resulted in a death even though they did not intend to take part in a killing. Another minority view. O’Connor’s overall voting record indicates just how much she has joined the court’s conservative side since she was sworn in last September. In the 31 cases decided by 5-4 votes – rulings that generally indicate the thorniest disputes between liberals and conservatives – O’Connor sided with ultra-conservative Justice William Rehnquist 27 wnes. She sided only four times in 5-4 decisions with Justice William Brennan, leader of the court’s liberals. Only once were the three justices on the same side in a 5-4 ruling, a relatively minor case. In other key cases during the just-completed term, the 52-year-old O’Connor voted to: – Bar all lawsuits seeking monetary damages from U.S. presidents for misconduct in office. Her side prevailed. – Deny illegal alien children a free public school education. A minority view. – Expand the power of police to

Eastern Arizona Courier, Newspaper article, The Kauffman-Henry Collection

Confirmation hearings begin

Eastern Arizona Courier, Newspaper article, The Kauffman-Henry Collection / By

TRI-COUNTY: Gavel to gavel coverage of the Sandra O’Connor senate confirmation hearings will be broadcast on KAET/Channel 8, Sept 9, 10 and 11 beginning at 7 p.m. KAET, the public television affiliate in Phoenix, is producing the coverage on an exclusive basis for the Arizona market and will also transmit the program via the Westar I satellite to all public television stations and their affiliated cable channels. Sandra Day O’Connor, who spent her young years on her parents Lazy B Ranch southeast of Duncan and is now a judge on the Arizona Court of Appeals, is the first woman nominated for a seat on the United States Supreme Court. This makes the upcoming telecast especially interesting for people of eastern Arizona as well as the state as a whole The nominee will questioned by members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is chaired by Strom Thurmond (R, South Carolina ). Other Republican members of the committee include Paul Laxalt of Nevada, Orrin Hatch of Utah, Robert Dole of Kansas and Charles Mathias of Maryland . Democratic committee members include Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts , Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Howard Metzenbaum of Ohio and Dennis DeConcin i of Arizona. Witnesses will not question Judge O’Connor, but will read prepared statements. As of last Frid ay, the list of witnesses had not been confirmed, but it is expected that Senator Barry Goldwater would appear as a witness . While the confirmation of O’Connor appears to be a foregone conclusion, there is

Arizona Business Gazette, Op ed, The Kauffman-Henry Collection

O’Connor’s nomination paved by other women judges

Arizona Business Gazette, Op ed, The Kauffman-Henry Collection / By

Before the U.S. Supreme Court became an equal opportunity employer, there was Florence Allen. Wheµ she was 7 years old, her father said, “If Florence were a boy, I’d make her into a lawyer.” When she was grown, three U.S. presidents said that if Flprence were a man, she’d be a Supreme Court Justice. Florence Ellinwood Allen. Published _poet. Concert pianist. First woman to pronounce the death sentence . First woman judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals, and for three decades, best bet to become the first female on the nation’s highest bench. Two weeks ago, President Reagan nominated Sandra D. O’Connor for that honor and Florence Allen, who died in 1966, would have been as pleased as all the other women jurists __ who have struggled for the day a woman would get invited to join Washington’s most exclusive male club. When Reagan cho!’e O’Connor, a 51-year-old Arizona Appellate Court justice, to sit with those who “leave their footprints on the sands of time,” the president fulfilled a campaign pledge to nominate a woman to the Supreme Court. The historic value of the move was not lost on this president who, despite his opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment, cheerfully praised O’Connor as the equal of “the 101 ‘brethren’ who have preceded her.” Between Allen and O’Connor, there have been at least a dozen women judges publicly mentioned for justice jobs. But few of them have even come close to a seat on the big bench.

…

Letter to the editor, Phoenix Gazette, The Kauffman-Henry Collection

Compliments O’Connor

Letter to the editor, Phoenix Gazette, The Kauffman-Henry Collection / By

If Judge Sandra O’Connor is confirmed by the United States Senate as the first woman on the Supreme Court, she will go down in history as one of our most esteemed pioneers. We may even find her picture on a postage stamp someday. And to hear all the babble of nit-picking that is arising makes one wonder if even the motives of heaven would be questioned and subjected to the third degree. Mrs. O’Connor is a credit to the women of America. She is an example of that rare womankind who can carry a pitcher of water on both shoulders, an excellent mother, an excellent lawyer and a compassionate and brilliant human-being who has arisen to the height.a of awesome honor. Isn’t it about time that we look at personal integrity in out officials and have faith in their judgment instead of gagging on gnat.a and swallowing elephant.a? May we have more of Sandra O’Connor and her kind! CHARLOTTE ELDRIDGE SUTTER, Phoenix

Daily Reporter Tucson, Newspaper article, The Kauffman-Henry Collection

O’Connor’s net worth more than a million

Daily Reporter Tucson, Newspaper article, The Kauffman-Henry Collection / By

WASHINGTON (UPI) – Sandra O’Connor, President Reagan’s choice to be the first woman on the Supreme Court, shares a net worth of more than $1 million with her l~wyer husband, accor ding to documents filed Sept. 1. O’Connor, answering guestions for the Senate, also confirmed she is an advocate of the judicial restraint Reagan favors. The Constitution requires federal courts “s crupulously to avoid making law or engag ing in general superv ision of executive functions,” she sai d. The Senate Jud iciar y Comm ittee will hold hearings on her nomination Sept. 9-11, and it is expected O’Connor will be easily confirm ed despit e criticism from abortion opponents and New Right groups . Reagan announ ced his select ion of the 51-year -old Arizona Court of appeals judg e on Jul y 7, but waited Wltil late August to formally send her name to the Senate. The nomination dre w heated opposition based on Mrs. O’Connor’s ‘Otes on abortio n questions and he support of the Equal Rights Amendm ent while a member of the Arizona Senate. In answering a standa rd questionnaire for the jud iciary panel. O’Connor said she and her husband , J ohn. have a net worth of $1.1 mill ion. That places her in sam e financial league as Justice Lewis Powell and Chief Justice Warr en Burger , both millionnaires . Retired Justice Potter Stewar t – whom Mrs. O’Connor would replace – also had a net worth considerably in excess of $1 million. Most of the family wealth is in real estate and in her family ‘s Lazy 3 Ranch.

Newspaper article, San Francisco Examiner, The Kauffman-Henry Collection

Committee votes for Judge O’Connor

Newspaper article, San Francisco Examiner, The Kauffman-Henry Collection / By

WASHINGTON (UPI) – The Senate Judiciary Committee recommended unanimously today that Sandra Day O’Connor be the first woman Supreme Court justice. The vote was 17-0, with one vote of present. The full Senate is likely to consider the nomination with only nominal opposition Friday. Sen. Jeremiah Denton, R-Ala., saying he was dissatisfied that O’Connor had declined to give her “judicial view” on abortion during three days of confirmation hearings last week, cast the protest of “present.” But Denton, who questioned O’Connor at great length about abortion, said he won’t vote against her because her reluctance to answer was partly a defect in the confirmation process. “Thus, Mr. Chairman, my vote is to respond ‘present,'” Denton concluded after reading a four-page statement. Sens. John East, R-N.C., and Charles Grassley, R-lowa, voted for confirmation but joined in a statement read by East saying that they have reservations about O’Connor’s responses to abortion questions. While she found abortion “repugnant,” O’Connor refused under repeated questions to say whether her votes on the matter as a member of the highest court would reflect that personal view. East said O’Connor’s responses to other issues dear to conservatives – in favor of the death penalty and prp,ent1n’ dl’tmtion and against compulsory school busing indicated she would be a good justice. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R Utah, another conservative, issued a statement giving O’Connor unqualified support. “Judge O’Connor made it clear

Speech

Speech at the Chautaqua Institution

Speech / By

Sandra Day O’Connor
Thank you, Tom. And what a pleasure it is to be back here at Chautaqua. This such a special place, tucked under Lake Erie and along our border with Canada. The United States has only two next-door neighbors, Canada, and Mexico. I lived most of my life closer to the Mexican side of our border. I was born in El Paso, Texas and grew up on a ranch. And it was mostly in Arizona, and partly in New Mexico. And it’s a far cry from the shores of Lake Erie and Lake Chautaqua to that dry, semi-arid desert where I spent my early years.

When I first moved from Arizona to Washington, DC, John and I lived in an apartment in the Watergate that was kindly secured for us by my colleague Justice Lewis Powell as a temporary residence. We could look out our window, a view of a splendid statue of President Benito Juarez of Mexico, the former president. It’s inscribed with his words, “Respect for the rights of others is peace.” President Juarez has a place in Mexico’s pantheon of heroes, just as President Abraham Lincoln has in ours.

I thought of these two men as I reviewed one of the themes you’ve been considering this week, that human progress and human violence have been linked historical forces. In the 1860s, both these leaders, Juarez and Lincoln, led their countries out of violence and deadly conflict. Mexico faced a threat from outside in the form of the French intervention led by Napoleon [III]. The United States faced a threat from within. Now, having led their young

Post-Retirement Opinions

US v Cruz

Post-Retirement Opinions / By

O’CONNOR, Associate Justice (Ret.):

Section 7407 of Title 26 of the United States Code permits the United States to seek, and a district court to issue, an injunction prohibiting tax preparers from engaging in certain deceptive or fraudulent practices. 26 U.S.C. § 7407. The district court may specifically enjoin a tax preparer from engaging in a variety of deceptive practices, including misrepresenting his eligibility to practice before the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”). § 7407(b)(1)(A)-(D), (b)(2). If the district court finds that the tax preparer has continuously engaged in offensive conduct, and that an injunction specifically prohibiting such conduct would not be effective at preventing further abuses, “the court may enjoin such person from acting as a tax return preparer” altogether. § 7407(b)(2).

In this case, the Government brought a suit against Abelardo Ernest Cruz and four co-defendants seeking to enjoin them from operating as tax return preparers. The complaint alleged that the defendants engaged in a fraudulent tax preparation scheme in which they would intentionally overstate deductions and credits on their clients’ tax returns in an effort to reduce their clients’ tax liabilities and increase their refunds. It further alleged that the defendants made various misrepresentations regarding their eligibility to practice before the IRS.

The District Court found that the defendants had engaged in deceptive practices in preparing tax returns and issued an injunction