Restricting Abortion In Sandra O Connor's Cases

To some up the verdict it was held to not further restrict abortion during that time. O’Connor always looked over each case with an open mind and with a clear understanding of the law. The court has always made the standard for affirmative action cases, high but without O’Connor moderating influence many cases probably could have gone another way.
Sandra O’Connor became the crucial fifth vote in cases that involves federalism. Born in Arizona it helped her construct her personal views of federal and state relations early in life. During her term as justice with matters concerning federalism she always stuck to the Constitution even when it guided her to the answer she did not like concerning the matter of policy. The amount of credit, she

Looking back over the mid to late 70’s the federal court system was overturning decisions that were made by the state because of their difference with the states judgment and questioning. Regard for state-court decisions had been a priority of hers since joining the Court in 1981. In the later years of the 80’s she started taking a tougher stance for her and on the behalf of the Court. This regard came concerning the ability of state prisoners to be heard by federal judges. In the case involving Teague v. Lane O’Connor took the challenge of limiting habeas corpus that overturned sentences based on laws created long after the state trial and appeal. “Because of the evolving nature of constitutional law, the potential ramifications of O’Connor’s opinion were great. Federal judges in habeas cases were often in the position to rule on questions for which there was not yet a directly controlling Supreme Court precedent (Bikupic, 2005). Shortly after the Teague case Justice O’Connor had to vote in another habeas case Penny v. Lynaugh in this case O’Connor submitted the deciding vote and also wrote the opinion that seemed to disembowel

Gore case the U.S. Supreme Court steps in and decides to end the recount and declares Bush as the winner. Justice O’Connor along with four other justices terminated the challenges to the presidential election held in December, which will conclude the ongoing recount in Florida. This ended Al Gore chances of becoming president. Since the election O’Connor in an interview with Chicago Tribune stated “maybe the court should have said, ‘We’re not going to take it, goodbye’. It turned out the authorities in Florida hadn’t done a real good job there and kind of messed up. And probably the Supreme Court added to the problem at the end of the day” (Weiner,