Unless the line-up changes, I think O'Connor will not be hearing it -- Roberts will -- and some unknown draft choice to be named later. That's going to make a difference. This one depends on the composition of the court almost entirely. I hate saying that. I spend my life teaching there is law here.

You would have to show that your vote is diluted by recounting. That seems unlikely given all the recounting there has been in the past.

I had the distinct impression he didn't think it was a good idea. There was a real risk of the proposal reducing the intended role of the Supreme Court as the final voice.

Suddenly, a blockage that had existed for at least 50 years was removed. What the Reagan administration was able to do was recover the original understanding of the religion clauses. Neutrality toward religion does not mean secularity. It means evenhandedness.

It is a Reagan personnel officer's dream come true. It is a graduation. These individuals have been in study and preparation for these roles all their professional lives.

Moderate liberal heart.

We should look for a court with a lowered profile, a court that tries to resolve cases but one that does not discover new constitutional rights.

This case is important to law schools [some of which initiated the legal challenge] and, because it is, a lot of people will pay attention. This is a tug of war between Congress and the people who receive its money.

There are people in Washington who become a kind of tight political circle, in the sense of almost the secret handshake.

William H. Rehnquist is by nature quiet and humble. His legacy is that he has shown us how to disagree with civility.

I think it's unfortunate that we're still at a point in our nation where we have to ask these questions.

He is genial, warm, welcoming, not quick to take umbrage or disagree. He will be very effective by wit, intelligence and the ability to build coalitions for particular points of view.

I think what happens in this process is there is an initial search and so much work is required to satisfy the competing constituencies that once a list is assembled, few people want to give it up. Some of the names on the list are almost venerable by virtue of age and longevity. There is a certain comfort in going with what you know, but it may not be the best.

It makes almost no sense to come into a department and ignore the people who have the most experience. And, it's a sure recipe for disaster because it will build up resentment from people who have made the department of justice their life's work and it will make it less possible for the president to get his policies implemented.

I expect intense pressure on the president from the loyal opposition to nominate as moderate a voice as he can find for the O'Connor replacement.