News Release

July 11, 2005

Media Contact: (202) 789-5200

Cato Legal Experts Available to Comment on Rehnquist's Imminent Retirement

WASHINGTON -- Chief Justice Rehnquist may soon announce his retirement. The following Cato legal experts are available for comment on Rehnquist's legacy and the future of the Supreme Court.

Roger Pilon, founder and director of the Cato Institute's Center for Constitutional Studies. Pilon held senior posts at the Department of Justice and the State Department during the Reagan administration:

"If and when Chief Justice Rehnquist retires President Bush will have the opportunity he has long wanted to shape the Court for years to come. The question is, what shape does he have in mind? Will his nominees have a deep and clear understanding of the Constitution's first principles, liberty and limited government? Or will the president succumb to the mistaken view held today by many conservatives -- and many liberals too -- that the Constitution authorizes majorities to rule in wide areas of life, even when that lets government run roughshod over individual rights? James Madison, the principal author of the Constitution, wrote in Federalist 45 that the powers of the new government would be 'few and defined.' One can only hope that the Bush nominees will share Madison's vision and that we can begin the process of restoring limited constitutional government in America."

"How Constitutional Corruption Has Led to Ideological Litmus Tests for Judicial Nominees," by Roger Pilon. Cato Policy Analysis no. 446, August 8, 2002.

Mark Moller, editor of the Cato Supreme Court Review. Moller was a member of the legal team that successfully litigated Bush v. Gore before the Supreme Court in 2000:

"With another potential vacancy on the Court, Chief Justice Rehnquist's most important legacy, reviving federalism, hangs in the balance, threatened by those who benefit most from Rehnquist's support for constitutional limits on federal power: liberals. Many liberal policies -- from gay rights, to stem cell research, to assisted suicide -- not only face the best odds at the state level but are threatened by the Bush administration's federal activism. Sadly, liberal activists seem determined to shoot themselves in the foot by indiscriminately opposing any conservative judicial nominee, even those who would vote to extend the Rehnquist Court's protections for federalism and political pluralism. Confirming judges who will enforce limits on federal power should be a nonpartisan priority."

"Why Justices Matter," by Mark Moller.