I don’t buy Robert Alt’s analysis of the political effects of Chief Justice Rehnquist’s decision to hold off on retiring. I think Rehnquist’s decision has two effects, which one of which will end up mattering depends on the president’s intent.

First, it makes it slightly easier for the president to name Gonzales. With O’Connor going first, Bush can tell conservatives that they should be okay with Gonzales since he’s replacing a moderate rather than a conservative. Some conservatives would (wrongly in my mind) buy this argument. With Rehnquist going first, Bush would not have had this advantage.

Second–and more relevant to Alt’s article–it makes it easier to put conservatives on the Court. Again, think about what would have happened if Rehnquist had gone first. Bush puts up a conservative and gets him confirmed, in all likelihood. Then O’Connor goes and the Democrats strongly object–and many of them would be able to go on tv and say that they are reasonable people, that they did not object to Bush’s first nominee–a nominee to a more powerful position!–but that this current nominee is too extreme and poised to make radical changes. The fact that O’Connor went first has put them in a bind. Her position is the one they’re more concerned about, and her going first means they haven’t had a chance to build credit for moderation. I have no doubt that most Democrats would have preferred the reverse sequence.