Reply
Fri 5 Jan, 2007 07:35 pm
Controversial allegations continue to surround late Chief Justice William Rehnquist in the wake of newly released FBI documents. The first issue is whether political machinations were used to confirm Rehnquist's appointment: the second whether he was addicted to a powerful prescription drug during his time on the bench.
The first controversy suggests that witness intimidation may have been used to ensure Rehnquist's appointment to the Supreme Court. According to FBI reports, in 1971 the Nixon administration requested criminal background checks on witnesses scheduled to testify against Rehnquist's appointment as an Associate Justice. Criminal background checks of negative witnesses were also requested in Rehnquist's 1986 confirmation hearings. These checks have been viewed by some to be a form of harassment, a political strategy used to intimate negative witnesses, thus guaranteeing Rehnquist's confirmation.
The second revelation from the FBI files suggests that Rehnquist may have struggled with an addiction to the powerful prescription drug Placydil. Rehnquist was prescribed Placydil for his chronic back pain, but at one point was noted as taking three times the prescribed dose. He was hospitalized and treated for back pain and what has been described as hallucinatory withdrawal symptoms.
Rather than entertain these issues as the bashing of our 16th Chief Justice, perhaps we as the American public should take this opportunity to reevaluate our system. How we appoint and monitor the powerful judicial branch of our government should be the focus, not the possible failings of a mere mortal man.
Yeah, I agree. The drug issue -- which has been done to death by the media in the last couple of days -- is really a side issue. That the man was in pain and, as a result, became addicted to pain-killers in no way diminishes the achievements of that man.
That other thing, though . . .It now seems pretty well established that the Nixon White House, using J. Edgar Hoover's FBI as a blunt weapon, sought to intimidate anyone fool enough to testify against Rehnquist's appointment. If the FBI digs deep enough, those agents can always find something that a person in the public limelight would rather not see come to light. It need not be a criminal or grossly immoral thing, just a youthful indiscretion will be enough to intimidate anyone who depends on the public goodwill for his/her job. If you ask me (and I think you did), the system sucks.