Talk:William Rehnquist/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about William Rehnquist. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Super Friends?
Didn't know he worked with Superman!
You know, not to be negative, but can we find a better picture of the Chief Justice than one of the back of his head?
- It may be his best side... - Nunh-huh 00:56, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
William Renquist article .. who he replaced
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Rehnquist
President Nixon nominated him to replace [John Harlan]** on the Supreme Court, and he took his seat as an Associate Justice on January 7, 1972, after being confirmed by the Senate by a 68-26 vote.
October 21, 1971 In History Event: William H Rehnquist & Lewis F Powell nominated to US Supreme Court by Nixon, following resignations of Justices Hugo Black & John Harlan
- Linked in Wikipedia to John Marshall Harlan. [John MARSHALL Harlan died on October 14, 1911 after 34 years with the Supreme Court] Nixon most assureadly did not nominate Renquist to replace a justice dead for sixty years. There appear to be two John Harlans, this needing a fact checking.
[email protected] theo
Does anyone else have an opinion on whether this:
- Some notable cases in which Rehnquist wrote an opinion:
- Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe
- Wallace v. Jaffree, dissenting
- Hustler Magazine v. Falwell
- United States v. Alfonso Lopez, Jr.
- Grutter v. Bollinger, dissenting
- Except where noted, Rehnquist wrote for the majority on the court.
should be in the article? Unless these cases have been chosen just to present some skewed perspective of Rehnquist, it seems to me they should, but an anon editor disagrees. Even if these cases do present a skewed perspective, though, couldn't we just include other cases in the list to balance it? Personally, I think having a list like this is a good reference for the reader. Everyking 01:34, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Shouldn't we link to every opinion he's written in a case on which we have an article? john k 04:59, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- I think I added that list some time ago. It includes the cases for which we have a Wikipedia page. If these cases represent a skewed side of Rhenquist then that is true of the encyclopedia as a whole as well. I suggest you find some (important) cases that represent a different side of him, and add an (non-existant) link. If they interest me, I'll might write one or two or at least contribute. (Please use the citation finder of the supreme court: [1] to naming new court pages. I'll revert the removal. Sander123 13:09, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Noah, we should try to find an agreement on the list of notable cases. I appreciate your concern that this list, at the moment, may not be the best possible selection when looking at it from the viewpoint of Rehnquist the person. On the other hand this contains cases that contained landmark decisions. He was involved, as chief justice no less. Also these are the cases that are in Wikipedia.
As a compromise, I split the list in two parts. The first list contains cases notable because they may show Rehnquists opinion. The second list is merely a list of cases, currently present in Wikipedia, done by his court.
For the first list I have chosen Wallace v. Jaffree and Grutter v. Bollinger. The remaining cases I've put on the second list. If you feel any other cases are more 'notable' please add them. Or shuffle the lists around, if you want.
I'm also open to change the wording perhaps to 'Some landmark decision of Rehnquist's court.' Let me know what you think. But please do not remove them altogether. Sander123 11:17, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- How do we fit Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer in there? It's a Rehnquist opinion restricting states rights in favor of the federal government under the 14th Amendment. -- BD2412 talk 18:56, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
Image
hey neutrality, why did you mess the image back up? Whats the deal? Sam [Spade] 16:35, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Edit conflict. Sorry. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 19:25, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)
Mixed ethnicity?
Article says he has Norwegian lineage and Category list has him as a person of Swedish descent? Also,should there be mention of his purchase of Vermont and Virginia homes with anti-Jewish and anti-black deed restrictions?--L.E./12.144.5.2/[email protected]
- As for the deed restrictions, they are irrelevant. They were in place long before he bought them and they had been invalidated by statutes and court rulings as unenforceable. It is irrelevant to mention them. PedanticallySpeaking 17:03, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)
- That's one POV.Others thought he should have gone to the expense of vacating them as a matter of principle.--L.E./12.144.5.2/[email protected]
Ethnicity
The name "Rehnquist" is Swedish, not Norwegian. William Rehnquist was also named Swedish-American of the year for 1993 so I guess we have a typical case of "mixing up the Scandinavians" here.
Earl Warren's mother was Swedish and his father Norwegian - so he isn't the first Scandinavian justice either.
A little bit of jumping the gun....
His record of accomplishment on the Court is coming to a close, however, because on July 8, 2005, Rehnquist announced his retirement from the Supreme Court, effective upon the confirmation of his successor.
He hasn't announced his retirement yet. I'll do a revert and when it comes in the next few days, we can put it back with an accurate date. Ramsquire 9 July 2005 00:18 (UTC)
- Per Ramsquire, this is not even being hinted at by any serious news source. -- BD2412 talk July 9, 2005 00:24 (UTC)
Outside of his residence on July 8th, 2005, a reporter asked Chief Justice Rehnquist if he was going to retire. He replied, "That's for me to know and you to find out". --robox 12:56, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
- I am not sure that the paragraph discussing the retirement rumors are appropriate. We all know that Rehnquist days as Chief Justice are short. However, shouldn't we wait for something from a more credible source than Drudge before we start adding gossip and rumor to Wiki? 64.3.70.12 23:31, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
- It is appropriate. Since these rumors do exist, they should be mentioned here. There is widespread speculation that Rehnquist will announce his retirement very soon. We are reporting that these rumors exist, not that they are true. Of course they should not be presented as fact. Rhobite 23:47, July 11, 2005
(UTC)
- For the record I have no problem with a retirement rumor section in principle. My major reason for deleting the last one was that it pointed out that Rehnquist would retire after certain events occurred. Since all the events had occurred and he didn't retire, I felt it was inappropriate to keep it there. My second problem was the poor sourcing of the rumors. It was coming from only one source, Robert Novak, and reported in one quasi-news internet site, Drudge.Ramsquire 17:48, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
Should we Add "Retirement Speculation" Chapters to other Supreme Court Justice articles.
Some of the same sources that had Rehnquist retiring are also postulating that Ruth Bader-Ginsberg and John Paul Stevens may also retire in the near future. Should we add that to the articles of these justices.Ramsquire 22:21, 20 July 2005 (UTC)