O'Connor urges state control in civil rights damage cases

March 16, 1982

ITEM DETAILS
Type: Newspaper article
Author: Lyle Denniston
Source: Arizona Business Gazette
NOTE: Due to copyright restrictions, the high-resolution scans and full text of this article are not currently available. The O'Connor Institute will publish that content if and when it receives permission from the copyright holder, Gannett. Please contact us at the email address at the bottom of this page with any questions.

DISCLAIMER: This text has been transcribed automatically and may contain substantial inaccuracies due to the limitations of automatic transcription technology. This transcript is intended only to make the content of this document more easily discoverable and searchable. If you would like to quote the exact text of this document in any piece of work or research, please view the original using the link above and gather your quote directly from the source. The Sandra Day O'Connor Institute does not warrant, represent, or guarantee in any way that the text below is accurate.

Article Text

(Excerpt, Automatically generated)

WASHINGTON - A Supreme Court justice has hinted strongly to Congress that a key case will be decided in favor of keeping federal courts open for the growing volume of civil rights damage claims. The highly unusual hint came March 9 in testimony by the newest justice, Sandra Day O'Connor, before the House Appropriations Subcommittee that is studying the court's $14.9 million budget request. The issue arises in a pending Florida case that has the potential of cutting off many civil rights cases. She did not say, in so many words, how the court would rule. But she did urge Congress to pass a law to achieve that result by requiring most civil rights cases to be pursued first with state agencies, instead of going directly to the federal courthouse. It would not be necessary for Congress to act, of course, if the justices were to interpret present law to give state agencies priority in handling such cases. Asked after the hearing if the issue she had discussed were not the same one now under review by the court in the Florida case, O'Connor replied: "I will rest on what I said." Just two weeks ago, the court heard lawyers argue the case. Under normal procedures, the justices would have cast their preliminary vote on the case at their secret conference on Friday. O'Connor's promotion of a federal law to shunt more civil rights cases to state agencies echoed a proposal she made in a law review article last summer, before she was chosen for the Supreme Court. An Arizona appeals court

© COPYRIGHT NOTICE: This Media Coverage / Article constitutes copyrighted material. The excerpt above is provided here for research purposes only under the terms of fair use (17 U.S.C. § 107). To view the complete original, please retrieve it from its original source noted above.