The court says she died in Phoenix on Friday, of complications related to advanced dementia and a respiratory illness.

In 2018, she announced that she had been diagnosed with “the beginning stages of dementia, probably Alzheimer’s disease.” Her husband, John O’Connor, died of complications of Alzheimer’s in 2009.

O’Connor’s nomination in 1981 by President Ronald Reagan and subsequent confirmation by the Senate ended 191 years of male exclusivity on the high court. A native of Arizona who grew up on her family’s sprawling ranch, O’Connor wasted little time building a reputation as a hard worker who wielded considerable political clout on the nine-member court.

  • ZhaoYadang@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’ll never forgive her for Bush v. Gore. Literally destroyed the country. If she’d voted for the law, not for her party, there’d have been no Bush Administration, no was on terror, no Trump, no Dobbs. And we’re not done yet; there’s probably a Republican dictatorship in our near future.

    The damage she did is incalculable. I’m glad she’s gone.

  • yesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’ll never forget Bush v. Gore, but at least she knew how to retire.

    The Republican justices of today are going to die on the bench right after they rule that guns have the right to vote.

    • derf82@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      10 months ago

      She retired to care for her husband, who wound up dying 3 years later. It was no benevolent choice. She also was free to do so as Republican Bush got to pick the replacement, who would up being Alito.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        She retired to care for her husband, who wound up dying 3 years later. It was no benevolent choice

        This seems pretty benevolent?

        • derf82@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          What I mean is it’s not like she said justices should retire by that age. If not for her husband’s poor health, she would have stayed much longer. She also likely would have ignored her husband’s health had Gore or Kerry had been president. She had the convenience of being a Republican with a Republican President with a Republican 55-45 Senate majority to ensure a Conservative replacement.

  • MiltownClowns@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Slightly off topic, but a supreme court joke is the main reason I hated the Barbie movie. At the end, when one of the Kens asks to be on the Supreme Court, and Barbie says not until a woman in the real world gets that level of power. Like motherfucker, if the point your movie is trying to make depends on erasing Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sandra Day O’Connor from history then maybe your message isn’t as fucking progressive as you think it is.

    EDIT: I’m probably wrong, see comment below. The phrasing could be misinterpreted and I likely gave it the least charitable interpretation. The line isn’t divorced from reality but apparently I am.

    • randy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      10 months ago

      one of the Kens asks to be on the Supreme Court, and Barbie says not until a woman in the real world gets that level of power.

      I’m afraid your memory is a bit off. A Ken asks for a supreme court seat, President Barbie says “maybe one of the lower circuits”, and shortly thereafter the narrator says something like “maybe one day the Kens will enjoy all the rights that women do in the real world”. The movie certainly did not erase Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sandra Day O’Connor.

      • MiltownClowns@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Just went back and rewatched it and you are absolutely correcct, its not what I remember at all. I saw an early run in the theatres and wonder if they changed it, but its probably just my confirmation bias after watching the whole movie feeling icky at how ham-fisted it was.

  • Dkarma@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Her ego resulted in hurting women across the us.

    Shame.

    Bush v Gore set women back significantly. Downvote me all you want. sDO is a huge part of the reason Dobbs got overturned in the end.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Bush v Gore set women back significantly.

      I mean, I guess, in the sense that it set everybody back significantly. Framing it as an anti-feminist ruling in particular is a weird take, though.

  • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    Ronald Reagan was all for ‘affirmative action’ when he picked her over hundreds of other, much more qualified candidates.

    Ronnie was a RINO.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      10 months ago

      On the contrary; blatant hypocrisy is a very genuine Republican trait.