WASHINGTON (AP) – The Supreme Court opened its term Monday with a young new leader, a veteran justice eager to retire and a calendar packed with contentious issues such as abortion, assisted suicide and capital punishment.

For the first time in 33 years, William H. Rehnquist will not be on the top U.S. court. The 80-year-old chief justice died Sept. 3. Every day since, the flags in front of the court have flown at half-staff.

The Rehnquist court became the Roberts court following a brief tradition-rich ceremony for John Roberts, who learned about the inner workings of the place a quarter-century ago while clerking for Rehnquist.

Also on Monday, President Bush named White House counsel Harriet Miers to replace Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, turning to a longtime loyalist without experience as a judge or publicly known views on abortion to succeed the retiring justice. O’Connor announced her retirement on July 1, and Roberts was originally supposed to replace her.

Bush shifted Roberts into the chief justice opening following Rehnquist’s death.

O’Connor, 75, delayed her retirement following a personal appeal from the president.

Miers’ confirmation could take as little as two months, or it could last many more if the nomination is contested by Senate Democrats.

Miers “will strictly interpret our Constitution and laws. She will not legislate from the bench,” the president said Monday as the 60-year-old former private attorney and keeper of campaign secrets stood nearby in the Oval Office.

Miers was Bush’s second selection in three months for vacancies on a high court long divided on key issues. The announcement came shortly before the president attended a ceremony marking John Roberts’ new tenure as the nation’s 17th chief justice.

“The wisdom of those who drafted our Constitution and conceived our nation as functioning with three strong and independent branches has proven truly remarkable,” Miers said at the White House before departing for the Capitol and a confirmation campaign already taking shape in the Senate.

Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said through his spokesperson that he wanted a confirmation vote by Thanksgiving, a compressed, seven-week timetable by recent historical standards. Sen. Arlen Specter, chair of the Judiciary Committee, pledged thoroughness.

“There needs to be, obviously, a very thorough inquiry into her background as a lawyer and her activities, people who will know her on the issues of character and integrity, which we will find out,” he said.

In conference calls and interviews on Monday, the White House worked aggressively to tamp down concern among conservatives determined as Bush has pledged to turn the court in a new direction.

Despite criticism, initial reaction suggested Bush had managed to satisfy many of the conservatives who helped confirm Roberts without inflaming Democrats who repeatedly warned against the selection of an extreme conservative to succeed O’Connor, who has voted to uphold abortion rights and preserve affirmative action.

It has not taken long for the court to begin delving into important social issues.

On Wednesday, the court heard a challenge to Oregon’s one-of-a-kind law that allows doctors to help terminally ill patients die more quickly.

In November, justices will review a state abortion law. In December comes an appeal that involves gay rights, as part of a protest against the Pentagon’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.

“This will be a real watershed year,” said University of Connecticut law professor Paul Schiff Berman.

There are five death penalty cases and two appeals challenging spending limits on political candidates and advocacy groups.

In a test of states rights, justices will consider if states and counties can be sued for not accommodating disabled prisoners, and a religion case will decide the constitutional rights of people who want to use hallucinogenic tea as part of their worship.

The court’s workload “touches on all these hot-button issues. It will be a good weather vane for where the court is going,” said Martin Flaherty, a professor at Fordham Law School.

Roberts is expected to vote similarly to Rehnquist, although it is unclear whether he will go as far as Rehnquist in supporting a reversal of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 ruling that established a woman’s right to abortion.

The abortion case before the court this term involves New Hampshire’s parental notification law. The case does not pose a threat to Roe, but it gives the court a chance to make it harder to contest restrictions on the procedure.

Several high-profile appeals are awaiting action by the court and could be argued this term, including the Bush administration’s attempt to reinstate a law that bans a type of late-term abortion and a challenge to military trials for foreign terror suspects.