Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman on the US Supreme Court and a moderate conservative who often controlled the outcome on abortion and other issues, announced her retirement today, setting the stage for a major political battle over her successor.
“This is to inform you of my decision to retire from my position as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, effective upon the nomination and confirmation of my successor,” Ms O'Connor, 75, said in a letter to President George W. Bush.
Ms O'Connor (right) gave no reason why she was resigning from the nine-member court, whose decisions play a central role in shaping the social, cultural and political fabric of the United States. It has been closely divided on such hot-button issues as abortion, the death penalty and church-state separation.
A court spokeswoman said Ms O'Connor needed to spend time with her husband. He has Alzheimer's disease.
“It has been a great privilege, indeed, to have served as a member of the court for 24 terms,” Ms O'Connor said in the one-paragraph letter released by the Supreme Court.
Her resignation was announced four days after the end of the court's term. There had been widespread speculation that Chief Justice William Rehnquist, 80, who has thyroid cancer, would resign at the end of the term, and even some of her colleagues did not think Ms O'Connor would be leaving.
Her resignation allows Mr Bush to make his first appointment to the high court, which must be confirmed by the US Senate. Who Mr Bush nominates to replace Ms O'Connor could trigger a fierce fight between Republicans and Democrats, and could threaten a shaky truce over judicial nominations that has kept intact the minority's ability to block a controversial candidate.
Foreshadowing the likely battle over her successor, Mr Bush hailed Ms O'Connor in the White House Rose Garden and called for fair treatment for his yet-to-be-named nominee.
“The nation deserves and I will select a Supreme Court justice that Americans can be proud of. The nation also deserves a dignified process of confirmation in the United States Senate, characterized by fair treatment, a fair hearing and a fair vote,” he said.
Ms O'Connor's departure, the first in more than a decade, could shift the balance of power on the court, which has been closely divided between the conservative majority and a more liberal faction on the various controversies, including the power of the states versus the federal government.
Ms O'Connor has been a key vote to preserve the constitutional right to abortion and to allow race to remain a factor to be considered in admissions at universities.
Mr Bush pledged to be “deliberate and thorough” in naming a replacement and said he would announce a nominee in a timely manner in hopes of having the new justice start work when the court reconvenes in October. No decision is expected until Mr Bush returns on July 8 from the G8 summit in Scotland.
One possibility is Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, the former White House counsel and a longtime Bush aide dating back to when Bush was governor of Texas. Bush may want to make history by selecting the first Hispanic American for the Supreme Court.
Other possible candidates could include US Appeals Court judges J. Harvie Wilkinson, J. Michael Luttig, Michael McConnell, John Roberts, Samuel Alito and Emilio Garza.
If Mr Bush wants to name a woman, possibilities include federal appeals court judges Edith Jones and Edith Brown Clement and Judge Janice Rogers Brown of the California Supreme Court, who was recently confirmed as a US appeals court judge.
On the court, Ms O'Connor and another moderate conservative, Justice Anthony Kennedy, have often controlled the outcome. Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas are the court's most conservative members.
The court's more liberal members are Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, the last justice to join the court in 1994.
Mr Bush has often railed against what he calls “activist judges” who he says legislate from the bench, and says he wants justices to “strictly and faithfully interpret the law.“