Honoring Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist
HONORING CHIEF JUSTICE WILLIAM H. REHNQUIST -- (Senate - September 07, 2005)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, today I rise to pay tribute to one of the greatest legal minds of our day: Chief Justice William Hubbs Rehnquist, who passed away late Saturday night. His death is a tremendous loss to our entire Nation. I join my fellow Americans in both mourning his passing and honoring his profound contribution to our country.
Chief Justice Rehnquist faithfully served the American people on their Supreme Court for 33 years. Without question, our country owes him a debt of great gratitude.
The individual who occupies the center seat on the Supreme Court is not the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, but the Chief Justice of the United States--the one person who embodies our national commitment to constitutional democracy and to the rule of law. Throughout his life, William Hubbs Rehnquist revered the Supreme Court and the rule of law as few people have--not only as our Nation's Chief Justice for 19 years, as Associate Justice for 14 years, and as a high Court law clerk, but also a student and a scholar of the Supreme Court. Rehnquist has written numerous books on legal history and the Supreme Court--including: The Supreme Court: How It Was, How It Is; Grand Inquests: The Historic Impeachments of Justice Samuel Chase and President Andrew Johnson; All the Laws But One: Civil Liberties in Wartime; and Centennial Crisis: The Disputed Election of 1876.
William Hubbs Rehnquist was born October 1, 1924, in Milwaukee, WI. He entered the U.S. Army Air Force and served in World War II from 1943 to 1946. Rehnquist obtained his undergraduate degree from Stanford University and two master's degrees from Stanford and Harvard Universities. He received his law degree from Stanford, graduating first in his class. Rehnquist served as a law clerk for Justice Robert H. Jackson, then practiced law in Phoenix, Arizona. President Richard Nixon appointed Rehnquist to serve, first as Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Office of Legal Counsel at the U.S. Department of Justice, and then as Associate Justice in 1972. President Ronald Reagan nominated him Chief Justice in 1986.
The Supreme Court enjoyed renewed admiration under Rehnquist's leadership. Guided by Rehnquist's steady hand, the United States Senate weathered one of the most difficult and controversial moments in our nation's modern history--the impeachment trial of a sitting U.S. president.
Rehnquist believed that the best judiciary was a restrained judiciary--one that would adhere to the letter of the law--not to the personal policy preferences of its members. Two areas in particular stand out in my mind as perhaps the most lasting examples of this legacy.
The Rehnquist Court may perhaps best be remembered for the restoration of common sense to our criminal justice system. Many Americans perhaps do not remember the days of the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren. The 16 years under Warren, from 1953 to 1969, were nothing short of a heyday for criminals in America. Many Americans probably are familiar with the notion of letting a criminal off on the basis of a ``technicality.'' This notion originated in the years of the Warren Court. The Supreme Court let countless criminals go free because police officers did not say precisely what the Court wanted them to say when they arrested criminals, or because warrants did not say precisely what the Court wanted them to say when the police searched criminals. It is no exaggeration to assert that, at that time, the rights of criminals were placed before the rights of victims--not to mention before the wellbeing of society in general.
This period ended when President Reagan elevated William Rehnquist to Chief Justice. Chief Justice Rehnquist did his level best to return our Constitution to its original understanding, an understanding that gives law enforcement officials the freedom they need to protect society from criminals. Over the last decade, we have witnessed an historic decline in violent crime all across America. This is due, in no small part, to the efforts of Chief Justice Rehnquist.
The second area, one equally, if not more important than the first, was the effort to restore the federal-state partnership known as ``federalism'' envisioned by our Founding Fathers. Our Founding Fathers believed that States and the Federal Government should be equal partners. Indeed, it was the view of our Founding Fathers that the Federal Government should have limited and enumerated powers, and, in fact, the primary authority to legislate should be left to State governments. I know this might come as a surprise to some, but not all wisdom emanates from Washington DC. State governments, after all, are closer to the people than the Federal Government is. Our Founding Fathers realized this fact.
Unfortunately, many Supreme Court Justices did not. Over the years, many of these Justices had interpreted the Constitution to give the Federal Government unlimited powers. These Justices characterized everything the Federal Government wanted to do as a regulation of ``interstate commerce.''
This was a fiction, of course, but over the years the Federal Government grew bigger and more powerful, the State governments grew smaller and less powerful, and the American people became less free.
Chief Justice Rehnquist did his part to stem this tide. He tried to stand for our Constitution and the founding vision that not everything should be left to the Federal Government. Although this project is still unfinished, Chief Justice Rehnquist made impressive strides, and there is no question that our Nation is better off today for his efforts.
Chief Justice Rehnquist's passing also reminds us that Supreme Court Justices are, after all, human beings--and that they should be treated with civility and respect, not as political pawns. Thus, perhaps the best way that we in the Senate might pay tribute to Chief Justice Rehnquist's legacy is to put partisanship aside in the judicial confirmation process.
President Bush has now fittingly nominated one of Rehnquist's former law clerks, Judge John Roberts, to replace him as Chief Justice. We should do the right thing by Chief Justice Rehnquist and vote on Judge Roberts's nomination as expeditiously as possible--and without some of the political posturing that has greeted other well-qualified nominees.
My thoughts and prayers are with Chief Justice's Rehnquist's family. The Nation suffered a profound loss on Saturday night. I am confident, however, that we in the Senate will do our part to proceed in a manner that honors the memory of our late Chief Justice and in a manner that would make him proud.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, the death of William Hubbs Rehnquist leaves us saddened but also grateful for his more than three decades of service to his country as a Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, including 19 years as its Chief Justice.
I first met Chief Justice Rehnquist when he was a lawyer in Phoenix. He spent most of the 1950s and 1960s practicing law in our State, and raising a family there with his wife, Natalie, who passed away in 1991. He made an annual return to Arizona from 1994 until last year, to teach a course on Supreme Court history at the University of Arizona College of Law, my alma mater.
Appointed to his seat by President Nixon in 1972, and elevated to Chief Justice by President Reagan in 1986, he provided steady leadership at the Court through turbulent decades. He showed that one man of integrity really can make a difference.
He was a conservative whose philosophy did not always carry the day, especially in his early years on the Court. More recently, there has been greater acceptance of his notion of balance between the authority of States and the Federal Government. His decisions helped prevent the rights of criminal suspects from being overemphasized to the point that law enforcement was hampered in doing its job. They curbed the Government's use of racial quotas, deemed by most Americans to be a squandering of the moral authority of the civil rights movement. They reaffirmed the religious freedom clause of the first amendment. They upheld restrictions on the practice of abortion, again in keeping with the views of most Americans.
On a personal level, William Rehnquist had a quick, dry wit and a manner that was warm and courteous. He was a straight shooter, devoid of pretentiousness, yet deeply learned in the law and many other things. The legacy he leaves includes the histories he wrote, namely his four books on the Court and the American legal system: ``The Supreme Court: How It Was, How It Is,'' 1987; ``Grand Inquests: The Historic Impeachments of Justice Samuel Chase and President Andrew Johnson,'' 1992; ``All the Laws But One: Civil Liberties in Wartime,'' 1998; and ``Centennial Crisis: The Disputed Election of 1876,'' 2004.
Notice those titles. We had, during his tenure as Chief Justice, a Presidential impeachment--over which he presided with a dignity and good sense that were reassuring to all, in and out of the Senate Chamber. We had a disputed election--in which he led the Court in delivering the U.S. Government and the country from a nightmare of litigation and partisan combat.
His death has left mourners even among those who disagreed with him. The liberal law professor Laurence H. Tribe offered words of praise for his brilliance, his honesty, and his calm leadership. He called Chief Justice Rehnquist ``a master'' at enabling the Court to ``earn the respect of all who take part in its proceedings or are affected by its rulings.'' Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said he ``was the fairest, most efficient boss I have ever had.''
The admiration he inspired in people all across the political spectrum is due also to the superb job he did as the Federal judiciary's top administrator, which is part of the role of Chief Justice. He staunchly asserted the independence of the Federal court system and fought to see that those who worked in it were adequately compensated.
William Rehnquist loved his family; he loved the law; he loved America and its history; and he loved the Supreme Court as an institution. The courage and tenacity he showed, despite suffering from thyroid cancer, were typical of him. He presided over oral arguments in the spring and continued his work on that group of cases until just last month.
It is the right of every citizen to be tried by judges as free, impartial, and independent as the lot of humanity will admit.
So said the Massachusetts Constitution of 1780, which influenced the writing of the U.S. Constitution. William Rehnquist was a free, an impartial, and an independent judge. His combination of strong-mindedness and meticulous fairness made him perfect for the position he held. He makes Americans, and especially Arizonans, very proud. We mourn his loss.
http://thomas.loc.gov/