It is truly the end of an era. Associate Justice John Paul Stevens, who is only a week shy of his 90th birthday, is retiring from his 35-year tenure on the United States Supreme Court. His departure marks the exodus of many things from the court: its most senior member, its single military veteran (Stevens joined the Navy the day before the attack on Pearl Harbor; he has joked that "the enemy responded the following day") and its only justice with a quirky fondness for bowties.
Although appointed by Richard Nixon to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals and then by Gerald Ford to the court in 1975, Stevens has earned the reputation of being one of the more liberal justices, with decisions that furthered equality for gay Americans, protected the constitutional rights of prisoners both in our nation and at Guantánamo Bay and established a greater role for judicial authority in interpretations of legislative and executive actions. While Stevens has admitted to some shifts in his personal views (likening such changes to the swing in public opinion about Prohibition), he still considers himself to be moderately conservative. However, he has vehemently maintained that the court has progressively shifted to the right with the appointment of each new justice; in a 2007 dissenting opinion regarding race policies in schools, Stevens wrote, "no Member of the Court that I joined in 1975 would have agreed with today's decision."
Stevens was also known for his intelligence and an endearing independence. When he graduated from Northwestern University Law School, he did so with the highest grade point average in the school's history. He is the only justice to write his own first drafts for opinions, rather than relying on his law clerks. And until he was joined by Justice Samuel Alito in 2008, Stevens was the only justice to opt out of the "cert. pool," in which the justices combine their law clerks to decide which appeals the court will hear.
If I sound a bit obituarial, it is not unintentional. Stevens' retirement is an enormous loss, especially in many of the behind-the-scenes activities of the court. According to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, he constantly and quickly provided revisions or suggestions to the drafts of the other justices' opinions. Additionally, Stevens was able to maximize his power as the court's most senior justice. When the senior justice and the chief justice are on opposing sides (which commonly occurred with both John Roberts and his predecessor, William Rehnquist), the senior justice decides who writes the opinion. Stevens often used this privilege to lock in the swing-vote from Justice Anthony Kennedy (or, in earlier years, retired Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O'Connor) by allowing him to pen the majority opinion. Thus, even the replacement of Stevens with an ideologically similar new justice will not be enough to fill the legendary role of this Supreme Court great.
So, the imperative question remains. Who will Barack Obama choose as his second appointment to the Supreme Court? With the addition of a female Hispanic justice, Sonia Sotomayor, Obama added diversity to the court. However, this second appointment may speak even more about the president's goals. He was visibly angered by the Supreme Court's recent strike down of limits on political spending by corporations in elections, coyly remarking that he wants a justice who "knows that in a democracy, powerful interests must not be allowed to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens."
The speculations by other groups are already vast. The president of the grassroots Eagle Forum organization is wary of leaving the court without a military veteran serving as a justice, especially considering the current wars in the Middle East. The writers at Slate magazine offered an intriguing choice: Hillary Clinton. Although Clinton can be polarizing, she's smart and she advocates strongly for families and children; a position on the highest court of the nation may finally satiate her desire to leave a political legacy.
My vote doesn't correspond to a name, but rather an area of expertise: I want to see a justice who has strengths in legal issues involving modern technology. Because things like cell phones and the Internet are recent advancements, there will undoubtedly be a myriad of court cases involving the legality of restrictions on these devices and privacy of information. Our new justice must have the ability to understand the scope of this technology and be able to apply logical legal principles as it becomes even more ubiquitous. John Paul Stevens' retirement will leave a large hole in the Supreme Court, but hopefully his replacement will be able to navigate the tricky waters of 21st century issues.
Enjoy what you're reading?
Signup for our newsletter
Read More
How one professor and her classes are preserving Oxford’s Black history
By Sean Scott | March 20, 2024Jazma Sutton, an assistant professor of history, teaches The Black Midwest (HST 350Q) and Black Women in America (HST 450D) classes. In both courses, she has students working with the Smith Library of Regional History and Miami’s archives to document and preserve Black history in Oxford.
Miami faculty members recount Freedom Summer in new documentary
By Luke Macy | February 25, 2022After seven years of work, “Training for Freedom,” a documentary highlighting Oxford’s involvement in the Freedom Summer of 1964, premiered on PBS Western Reserve on Valentine’s Day.
“Documenting the COVID-19 Pandemic”: History in the making
By Alice Momany | August 29, 2021In March 2020, Miami University’s archives launched “Documenting the COVID-19 Pandemic,” a collection focused on life during the COVID-19 pandemic.