Sandra Day O'Connor helped secure George W. Bush’s 2000 election win, new documents show

Newly released documents show that former Justice Sandra Day O’Conner played a pivotal role in resolving a dispute over the 2000 election in favor of George W. Bush, CNN reports.

The documents released Tuesday show that O’Conner “provided the early framework that steered the outcome in the dispute over the 2000 presidential election and ensured George W. Bush would win the White House over Al Gore,” CNN’s Joan Biskupic reports.

O’Conner partnered with former Justice Anthony Kennedy in “effectively squeezing out an argument advanced by then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist,” Biskupic’s report said.

O’Conner’s four-page memo was distributed to her colleagues before oral arguments in the historic Bush v Gore case, and according to Biskupic’s report, O’Conner’s “move may have guaranteed that she and Kennedy had the greatest influence on the final ‘per curiam’ opinion that spoke for a five-justice majority.”

IN OTHER NEWS: Marjorie Taylor Greene: It's 'very likely' impeachment articles coming over alleged Biden crimes

The 5-4 Bush v. Gore decision halted recounts Florida’s decisive presidential electors, handing the presidency to then-Texas Gov. Bush in one of the closest races in American history against then-Vice President Al Gore.

Biskupic writes: “O’Connor’s views, expressed in a December 10, 2000, memo, were endorsed by fellow conservative-centrist Kennedy as he took the lead in writing the unsigned “per curiam” opinion issued late on the evening of December 12, the new documents show.

“The shared views of O’Connor and Kennedy eventually forced Rehnquist to abandon his effort to author the main opinion with a boundary-pushing view of federal election principles – views that would come up during Donald Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election.”

The first woman to serve on the high court was appointed by former President Ronald Reagan in 1981 and served until 2006, when she retired to care for her ill husband.

She told The Chicago Tribune’s editorial board in 2013 that she questioned the court’s involvement in the election controversy.

“It took the case and decided it at a time when it was still a big election issue,” she told The Tribune. “Maybe the court should have said, ‘We’re not going to take it, goodbye.’”

According to The Tribune’s report she added: “Obviously the court did reach a decision and thought it had to reach a decision. It turned out the election authorities in Florida hadn’t done a real good job there and kind of messed it up. And probably the Supreme Court added to the problem at the end of the day.”