Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, the court’s oldest member and leader of its liberal bloc, says he is retiring. President Barack Obama now has his second high court opening to fill.
Stevens says he will step down when the court finishes its work for the summer in late June or early July.
His announcement Friday in Washington had been hinted at for months. It comes 11 days before his 90th birthday.
[…]
The timing of his announcement leaves ample time for the White House to settle on a successor and Senate Democrats, who control 59 votes, to conduct confirmation hearings and a vote. Republicans have not ruled out an attempt to delay confirmation.
The leading candidates to replace Stevens are Solicitor General Elena Kagan, 49, and federal appellate Judges Merrick Garland, 57, and Diane Wood, 59.
Stevens’ departure will not change the court’s conservative-liberal split because Obama is certain to name a liberal-leaning replacement. But the new justice is not likely to be able to match Stevens’ ability to marshal narrow majorities in big cases.
Stevens was able to draw the support of the court’s swing votes, now-retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor and Justice Anthony Kennedy, to rein in or block some Bush administration policies, including the detention of suspected terrorists following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, its tilt toward protecting businesses from some lawsuits and its refusal to act against global warming.
Well, if nothing else, the selection and vetting process will once again bring to the forefront for public scrutiny the kernel assumptions liberal justices allow to inform their legal thinking.
And that’s always good for legal conservatism — at least, among those Americans left who bother to pay attention.
(h/t bh)
In this thread at Transterrestrial Musings there was some discussion of what a new SCOTUS nominee should be asked in confirmation hearings.
Peter Kirsanow at the Corner had suggested a question about the Commerce Clause, and a TTM commenter argued that a simpler question — “What are the limits of the Commerce Clause?” — would be more likely to get answered.
I’m not so sure.
It would be neat to have someone who was not a previous appellate judge on the court.
“Peter Kirsanow at the Corner had suggested a question about the Commerce Clause, and a TTM commenter argued that a simpler question — “What are the limits of the Commerce Clause?” — would be more likely to get answered.”
Cue recitation of Raich, Lopez and Morrison. And saying that you won’t prejudge any case.
Stupid textualists! Hint: for any of Obumble’s appointees, it will have neither to do with Commerce nor matters Interstate. “Interpretation,” my dear friends, “interpretation.”
i imagine O will appoint someone that will work to muzzle Robert’s pet corporation’s and foreign corporation’s money voices.
66% of the electorate disagrees with that “interpretation”.
:)
Let’s add law to the list of things nishi knows jack shit about.
i imagine O will appoint someone that will work to muzzle Robert’s pet corporation’s and foreign corporation’s money voices.
The ideological makeup of the court will remain the same, genius.
So, the stem cell debate even caused nishi to turn hard left on judicial issues?
Again, bullshit.
*** waves at griefer ***
muzzle Robert’s pet corporation’s and foreign corporation’s money voices.
Hey – let’s “muzzle” the “voices” we don’t like! Liberal – it doesn’t mean what they think it does, does it?
Instead of the usual liberal/conservative dichotomy, perhaps we should label prospective Associate Supreme Court Justices as proponents of the Constitution or proponents of the living Constitution, i.e., proponents of the rule of law or proponents of the rule of man.
That is OK, Kate – we know you prefer Droit de Jackass over any of that icky US Constitution. Or was it Shaira law?
I’m a big supporter of the Raich decision. Yup.
Never hear me saying a word against it.
well….that is what O just said in his presser, re Stevens retirement.
“…to reverse the attempt to drown out the voices of the American people…” [with corporate money$]
hehe, Obama gets to take the populist side here.
66%
It’s kinda gruesome watching an imbecile dance delightedly around a rotting corpse, ain’t it?
hehe, yeah. Obama’s big on listening to the voice of the American people. So there’s not a chance anyone will take what he has to say with a grain of salt.
Robert Bork is still available.
heh and he gets to not know shit about law too
he should get hiz money back from havard
*-(((:~{>
It’s funny, but I never got a paycheck from somebody who was poorer than me.
She’s not an imbecile, sdferr. She’s a genius who is so geniusy that her genius is lost on the lot of us, who happen to be Team R dead-enders who aren’t smart enough to deal with the smartness of the left progressive gambit.
Just ask happyfeet. Who is the staunchest of the staunch.
That would be the same Obama that just paid tribute to Steven’s faithfulness to the Constitution? That Obama?
Yes. Well. um
Yup, nishi is a total genius. I wonder how smart she’ll be when us “dead-enders” quit feeding her, supplying her power and water, and bringing her all those neat tech toys she likes so much?
Hungry, cold and dehydrated will look SO good on her…
Obama’s big on listening to the voice of the American people.
Obama ran on HCR, he won.
365 to 173 ec votes.
He promised, he performed.
What did your guys promise?
oh yeah.
Obama’s big on listening to the voice of the American people.
Which is why he pushed a health care Bolshevization bill that a majority of American oppose. And as for Waterloo? That’s scheduled for November 2, 2010. Obama’s regime is a dead-ender. Tick-tock, tick-tock…
That is what swung the election for everybody I know.
Even if not a single one of them knows what the fuck HCR is.
“Limits?!! Limits?!! How dare you demand limits!! You racist, sexist, homophobic, teabagging nazi thugs!!”
what is nishi’s link to?
Obama ran on HCR…
No he didn’t, liar.
what is nishi’s link to?
A YouTube video of ABBA’s “Waterloo”.
that song’s been ruined forever
Yup. No disaffection with Obama’s policies or the performance of the Democratic Congress. It’s all love and rainbows out there.
I don’t even have to look. I’ve read science, and we’re moving toward the progressive singularity.
Don’t fight it, baby. Just relax. You might even like it.
I don’t think I can do it. She’s just too fucking annoying.
I remember Obama running against the individual mandate with regard to HCR. I also remember him running on a “net spending cut,” no tax increases on anyone making under $200K, (or $150K if you were listening to his idiot VP choice), no lobbyists in the Whitehouse. I could go on and on about positions he ran on that have not and will not come to fruition. So I fail to see that he’s delivered what he promised.
I mean, even Green Day has to be unhappy about his decisions with regard to Afghanistan
We are.
”It’s like the back of the refrigerator. You see all these wires and the rest,” said Pelosi. “All you need to know is, you open the door. The light goes on. You open this door, you go through a whole different path, in terms of access to quality, affordable healthcare for all Americans.”
Damn if Pelosi didn’t have the likes of Nishi in mind when she said that. Too stupid to understand why the light goes on.
Greens? Damn right we’re unhappy with that bastard.
And if the leading candidates aren’t bad enough, maybe Obama can fast-track Goodwin Liu!
Reparations for everyone!
I just want someone to let me know when I should surrender my principles and belly up to the trough.
36: It’s like Pelosi’s saying HCR will be like OZ “Pay no attention to the bureaucrats berhind the curtain!”
Only, it’s not OZ. There’s no Yellow Brick Road, and no flying monkeys.
Plenty of Wicked Witches though, so there’s that…
I wonder if Orrin “Collegiality” Hatch has caught on to the fact that rejecting Obama’s nominees for political reasons is consistent with his oath of office.
Naaaaah.
You’re treading on thin ice, wingnut!
Obama has HCR? He doesn’t even look sick! Is that why he can’t throw a ball? If he’s running on HCR, he better quit, that shit messes up the joints. True story. Saw it on House. He needs to take copper supplements.
OI, I am sorry, on behalf of the Flying Monkeys, I condemn myself.
5. Comment by Pablo on 4/9 @ 11:01 am #
Let’s add law to the list of things nishi knows jack shit about.
Along with punctuation.
Shit, and I missed the live video of him resigning? I gotta get a TV!
Dawn Johnsen has dropped out, for those who give two shakes of a hoochies’ ass.
A little cheer of relief issues forth, a big breath taken-in awaiting the next assault on liberty.
I am going to roll the dice, and say that the new supreme court nominee will be a fossilized half-a-commie trapped in the yellow amber of the sixties socialism’s-gonna-work-this-time-we-swear ethic.
So, John Paul Stevens’ successor will be John Paul Stevens?
Beck predicts that Obama will nominate the most radical lefty he can find, both to further his agenda and also to provoke another fight.
They’re goading us but good, hoping to start something they can use to smear us.
I think he goes with the Asian dude.
He’s just that simple.
The Senate should seek answers on:
-are there limits to the commerce clause
-will the appointee follow the law or seek “justice”
-where does he stand on the 2nd Amendment
-should any group be treated differently under the law from all others
#47 – Zombie Thurgood “Welfare benefits are a Constitutional Right” Marshall?
I am letting my chip ride on a minority chick. Lesbian if one is available.
I’m going with illegal alien as a candidate. We don’t have one on the Court yet and it would certainly help out the Won’s agenda. Plus O cites it as a reason to grant amnesty. Rahm knows his crisises.