TIME: Almanac 1993/TIME Almanac 1993.iso/time/101590/1015110.000

Text File | 1992-08-28 | 6.0 KB | 125 lines

                                                                                LAW, Page 67

Mr. Souter Comes to Town


The frugal bachelor sets up housekeeping after his confirmation

By JEROME CRAMER/WASHINGTON


    Even before David Souter takes his place as the 105th
Justice of the Supreme Court, he has been assured a place in
history. Well into the next century, future court nominees are
certain to pore over videotapes of his Senate Judiciary
Committee hearings, searching for inspiration on how to win
easy confirmation. Souter's low-key, courteous performance was
so skillful that the final 90-to-9 vote for his confirmation
on the Senate floor last week sparked little emotional debate.
Kate Michelman, director of the National Abortion Rights Action
League, simply called the Senate vote a "dangerous leap of
faith."

    The fact was that Senators and the American public seemed
as impressed with Souter's intelligence as they were with his
image as a shy, decent man who likes old cars, black-and-white
television sets and the Boston Red Sox. During the confirmation
hearings, Souter, 51, slept on an extra bed at the apartment
of his mentor, New Hampshire Senator Warren Rudman; soon he
will settle into a modest one-bedroom apartment that the
Justice-to-be found, with Rudman's help, within walking
distance of the court. Souter's few sticks of furniture and
more numerous stacks of books will be trucked down by friends
from Weare, N.H., after the Justice takes his oath of office
this week. "Nearly every lawyer and friend in New Hampshire
wants a ticket to the ceremony," says Souter's longtime
confidant, Tom Rath, a former state attorney general.

    Life surely will change for Souter once he officially dons
his robe -- the same one he wore as a U.S. Court of Appeals
judge in Boston -- for the first time, one week into the
court's new term. The Washington Post has already named him the
town's leading bachelor, while admitting that he is not exactly
"your standard hunka hunka burning love." In an effort to help
him with the local ladies, the Post printed the Supreme Court's
telephone number (202-479-3000).

    Along with a barrage of media attention, Souter faces
several immediate housekeeping tasks. First is the hiring of
a secretary and four legal clerks to help sift through the
mounds of paperwork and petitions that are every Justice's lot.
His clerks will have a say in which cases the court will hear
and, along with their fellow clerks, are the only individuals
who can openly argue the merits of pending cases with the
Justices. Souter will probably bring at least one clerk with
him from New Hampshire and will soon begin interviewing the
flood of candidates clamoring for the remaining jobs.

    The clerks will be even more overworked than their peers,
since tradition dictates that the court's newest member must
assume additional duties for the eight other Justices. Souter
will be, among other things, the court's private doorkeeper,
messenger and designated party giver. Last week Justice Anthony
Kennedy (until now the low Justice on the totem pole) called
in Souter, in part to discuss handing over the "new boy's
duties." Souter will sit on the far left of the bench in a
chair recently built by the court's carpenters; he will be the
last person to enter or exit the chamber. When the Justices
meet in private sessions, Souter will open and close the door
as well as receive and relay messages. He and his clerks will
record which of the many thousands of cases the Justices have
decided to accept for argument. And the newest Justice will be
responsible for organizing the court's annual staff Christmas
party. "It's likely to be a pretty meager affair," warns Rath,
aware of bachelor Souter's frugal habits.

    By missing the start of court deliberations, Souter will be
ineligible to vote on two major cases to be decided this term.
Last week the court heard arguments in Board of Education of
Oklahoma City v. Dowell, a case that challenges the power of
judges to continue court-ordered integration plans after a
school system has stopped discriminating. The Oklahoma school
board is petitioning for relief from a 1972 federal district
court ruling that found the school system segregated and
ordered a busing plan to promote integration. Almost 20 years
later, the schools are again divided along racial lines, but
the board claims this is a result of local housing patterns,
not of district policies.

    Souter also misses the chance to decide on a challenge to
the constitutionality of heavy punitive damages in civil suits.
Oral arguments on that issue were presented last week in the
case of Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Haslip. Lawyers
for the company claim that a $1.1 million punitive-damage award
imposed in 1987 by a jury, in a case where $4,000 in actual
damages was awarded, violates 14th Amendment due-process
rights. Proponents of the damage awards argue that large jury
penalties help prevent future misconduct.

    Feminists who opposed Justice Souter's nomination are much
more interested in where he will stand on one of the first
cases to arrive before the court after his swearing in: United
Auto Workers v. Johnson Controls. The company, which makes
automotive batteries, excludes all fertile women of
childbearing years from jobs that would expose their fetuses to
lead, which can cause birth deformities. Women employees sued
in 1984, claiming the policy was intentional discrimination
that limited their right to choose employment opportunities
over reproduction, and thus was illegal under the 1964 Civil
Rights Act.

    Two lower courts have backed the company, but two prominent
conservative federal court judges, Frank Easterbrook and
Richard Posner, sided with the challengers. Court watchers say
this case will be Souter's first chance to demonstrate his
sensitivity -- or lack of it -- to the issues of sexual
politics that prompted what little opposition there was to his
setting up bachelor housekeeping in Washington.