> Rehnquist's illness should sober up some voters.

Yes indeed ! One of the key reasons for undecideds to vote for Kerry is THE SUPREME COURT and CIVIL RIGHTS.

It is very likely than 3 or 4 vacancies will occur in the next four years. The Court will undoubtedly have to rule on cases involving Civil rights like the Patriot Act and other divisive issues like abortion. The next president's appointments could shape the country for a couple of decades.

Redefining Rights in America
The Civil Rights Record of the George W. Bush Administration, 2001–2004
http//www.usccr.gov/pubs/bush/bush04.pdf

THE NET NET OF EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ( pages 8-15 )

1. PRESIDENT BUSH HAS NOT DEFINED A CLEAR AGENDA, NOT EXHIBITED LEADERSHIP ON PRESSING CIVIL RIGHTS, NOR TAKEN ACTIONS THAT MATCHED HIS WORDS EXCEPT FOR FUNDING OF RELIGIOUS GROUPS.

2. IF BUSH IS RE-ELECTED WE'LL GET CONTINUED WEAKENING OF CIVIL RIGHTS LAWS ESPECIALLY WITH "APPOINTEES TO THE SUPREME COURT" AT STAKE.

Justice....................Appointed by ....Age
Stephen Breyer........ Clinton 1980.......66
Ruth Bader Ginsburg..Carter 1980........71
Anthony M. Kennedy. Ford 1975...........68
Sandra O'Connor...... Reagan 1981......74
William H. Rehnquist.. Nixon 1972.........80
Antonin Scalia........... Reagan 1986......68
David H. Souter......... Bush 1990.........65
John Paul Stevens...... Ford 1975.........84
Clarence Thomas...... Bush 1990..........56

I'm sorry to say this but given the current political climate my first thought when I heard the news was that Rehnquist smelled a republican November loss in the air. But, I guess this is ridiculous because Bush couldn't push a nominee through before January. Could he? Nah. Couldn't happen. Could it???

Two words: recess appointment.

If Kerry wins, I expect Rehnquist's resignation and a quick Bush appointment of a Scalia manque.

October surprise?

The Supreme Court issue is one that energizes the anti-abortion base of Mr Bush probably moreso than pro-choice voters. Roe V Wade is the only barrier to all abortion becoming illegal in numerous red states. The legislation is already in place. The abortion issue is a huge motivator for the evangelicals and one that the GOP is trying to use to wedge evangelical blacks away from the Democratic Party. If you lived in the Retro instead of the Metro, you would understand this.

The GOP will eventually win on this issue if the Democrats cannot move beyond stalemate. Democrats need to push alternative solutions for reducing the number of abortions in the US. Unfortunately, politicians cannot discuss sex without getting their head handed to them. There was Dr Elders and "masturbation" and we see how quickly Kerry was whacked for using the word "lesbian". These are two words that are not allowed on prime time TV.

Just thought I would mention that overturning Roe V Wade would not take us back to 1971. Legal abortions would go from difficult to get to not available in the Retro but could be obtained by travel to Metro states.

However, RU486 changes a lot of things. We would see the development of an underground market in areas where abortions were illegal that would creep into poor areas where abortions were legal. Black market prices for illegal RU486 abortion kits could be less than the price of a legal abortion in the Metro. Making abortion illegal could actually make it more available and affordable in some areas than it is today. Of course, safety goes out the window.

Oh, so "a balanced Supreme Court" is something that John Kerry would bring to the table?

John Kerry would appoint liberal judges. If he appointed 3 or 4 liberal judges, what kind of "balance" would that be? It's fine to be supporting Kerry because of Court issue, but at least make an effort to be reasonable, Steve.

And BTW Standa, your chart of appointees is full of mistakes.

What's your definition of 'balanced', jd? I want judges that don't hold the bible in higher regard than the constitution, and I don't want any more sexually harrassing justices either. Based on what Bush has said and done, he wouldn't mind having more of both.

Kerry's election would make sure that women's reproductive rights are protected for future generations. I don't understand why men don't see how scary this is for women. I'm not sexually active, but there are still plenty of women in the United States who do not have full control over their bodies, who are stuck in violent and abusive relationships with their husbands, boyfriends, and even fathers and brothers. Women do not need to be preached to or jailed, they need medical choices, and they need privacy protection.

What happens if the election gets thrown to the Supreme Court and Rehnquist is to ill to participate in any litigation?

The remaining eight justices voted 4-4 on Bush v. Gore.

Since this would presumably end up as Bush v. Kerry it is beyond absurd to think that one of the litigants could be allowed to Recess Appoint one of his judges.

Is there provision in the law made for such a scenario?