Sandra Day O'Connor receives Virginia Military Institute's Harry F. Byrd Jr. Public Service Award during her campus visit Wednesday. (DREW SCARANTINO / Rockbridge Report)
Former Justice O'Connor visits VMI
Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor told an audience at Virginia Military Institute Wednesday that Congress, rather than the courts, should take the lead in regulating interrogation methods used on terrorism suspects.
O’Connor appeared at VMI to accept the institute’s Harry F. Byrd Jr. Public Service Award.
O’Connor acknowledged that if Congress passes comprehensive legislation regulating such techniques as waterboarding, the high court will ultimately review it. But she said the court’s role is to rule narrowly rather than to set sweeping public policy.
In her remarks O’Connor also acknowledged a connection to VMI. She was one of a majority of justices who voted in 1996 to require VMI to begin admitting women. Wednesday, she noted the impact of that decision by recognizing the female cadets in the audience.
VMI officials would not say how much O’Connor was paid to speak at the college. Her appearance comes as Congress considers legislation that could restrict the outside income of sitting federal judges and Supreme Court justices.
The amendment, proposed by Sen. Russell Feingold, D.-Wisconsin, was attached to the Federal Judicial Salary Restoration Act. The act, proposed in the Senate last June, would increase the pay of federal judges by about $50,000.
Under Feingold’s amendment, a judge or justice could receive $2,000 from any single trip or event with a maximum annual limit of $20,000.
Both public and private colleges would be subject to those limits. Exempt programs and events include those sponsored by a bar association, a judicial association or a government.
The Judiciary Committee approved Feingold’s amendment but turned down another amendment that would have exempted colleges and universities from the restrictions.
Because she is a retired justice, O’Connor’s visit would not have been affected by the legislation. But many law schools invite sitting Supreme Court justices and federal appeals court judges to speak to their students, judge moot court competitions and even teach short courses. Neither VMI nor Washington and Lee would disclose how much it spends on such visitors.
Although the bill has yet to be voted on in the Senate and the House, many are already objecting to the possible outcomes of Feingold’s amendment.
In a letter last month, the Judicial Conference of the United States, the administrative body that oversees the federal court system, said that the amendment would "severely and unnecessarily restrict judges from traveling to law schools for ... activities that provide enormous benefit to the public, the bench and the bar."
Robert T. Danforth, associate law dean at W& L, said that then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist once spoke at the university’s law graduation ceremony. And, like many law schools, W&L has federal judges teach courses as adjunct professors.
Danforth said that law students and the general public would miss out on important learning opportunities if Feingold’s amendment were enacted.
"There’s also always been a certain . . . lack of understanding on the part of the public about what judges do because they lead very cloistered lives," said Danforth. "And this will only exacerbate the problem more because they will spend less time making appearances.
"It would really be a shame if this were passed."
Produced by
Washington and Lee
journalism students.
Lead Supervisors:
Prof. Brian
Richardson
Prof. Phylissa
Mitchell
Editing supervisor:
Prof. Pamela Luecke
Technical supervisor: Michael Todd