Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens retiring

[sledgehammer]

Source: HuffPo

WASHINGTON — 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.

Stevens began signaling a possible retirement last summer when he hired just one of his usual complement of four law clerks for the next court term. He acknowledged in several interviews that he was contemplating stepping down and would certainly do so during Obama's presidency.


Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20100409/us-supreme-court-stevens/

[onehandle]

1. Five to ten percent more right-wingers just decided to head to the polls this Fall. nt

[Lochloosa]

3. His replacement will be confirmed before the election.

[onehandle]

6. The GOP has stated that they will stop everything.

I think we will need a super-majority for this.

To get that, Obama would have to stay far away from liberal candidates.

[defendandprotect]

Did Bush stay away from right wing extremists? Neither should Obama abandon liberal candidates!

Especially when we reflect on the dangers to democracy from the right wing

gang of 5 putting W in the Oval Office!

And their latest corporate decision which also has the power to completely wipe

out a people's government --

[n.michigan]

42. Is Obama liberal? Was Bush right wing extreme?

[uppityperson]

48. What? I'd welcome you to Du, but don't feel like it from this post.

[L. Coyote]

18. What crap

Okay, let's start searching for a paranoid John Bircher to appease the right :rofl:

[dotymed]

30. This may well happen.

I do not hold out any hope that we will get a SCOTUS justice that will put people before profits. Obama has not and I am sure that his nominee will fit in with the court majority....sad

[No Elephants]

74. Yep And his nominee will still get stalled. And stalled.

[onehandle]

56. No, of course not. He needs liberal votes too. nt

[Hawkeye-X]

19. GOP can sit down and shut up - the Nuclear Option will finally be invoked

and all the Thugs are removed from any consideration.

That includes new single-payer plan to go effective immediately.

[mvd]

41. That's what I've said. Nuclear option if they obstruct just to obstruct

I think Sotomayor is going to be a reliable vote. And who may seems like a liberal might not be so much on the bench. So, even though he didn't do what I thought was best on some other things, I think President Obama's pick will be fine. There are a couple I don't want to see, though (insiders like Napolitano.)

[No Elephants]

76. Please name a liberal Justice who turned the other way on the bench.

Souter went a way that was different from Poppy Bush's intentions. Earl Warren went a way that was VERY different from Ike's intentions. I THINK--not sure--that Justice Douglas was more liberal than people expected.

However, I cannot think of one liberal Justice since Ike who became more conservative on the SCOTUS bench.

As far as Sotomayor, we'll see. People who reviewed her entire career, both before and after her appointment to the federal bench, consider her a moderate. Only time will tell, though.

[CreekDog]

51. You're saying if Obama nominates a moderate it will not be problematic?

:shrug:

[onehandle]

55. No, but it would be his only chance of getting a new justice placed before the election.

But, you're right. Maybe not even then.

[CreekDog]

59. Not even then...there will be a fight and it should be someone worth fighting for

not doing something because the other side will react (they will anyway) is losing.

[No Elephants]

82. + Thanks for telling the truth, instead of posting that Democrats should just surrender up front.

Gad! That mentality is scary!

[No Elephants]

77. It's going to be a problem, no matter what, so he should nominate a liberal.

Sorry, but with more thinking like yours, the Democratic Party will cease to exist, other than in name only. We're not far from that as it is.

[No Elephants]

75. He could nominate McConnell and the Republicans would still stall his candidate.

[Supersedeas]

8. Given the leaning of Sotomayor - Stevens replace would be important for balance

Nominating an openly liberal justice will be difficult, but confirming one will be almost impossible if Dems lose the seats in the Senate that pundits have predicted.

Justice Stevens replacement will need to be on a fast track.

[defendandprotect]

Did W or the GOP ever rein in their agenda? No -- they kept expanding it --

They had two illegal, brutal, wars of aggression going on --

An alleged attack on their watch which was preventable -- in every way!

To top it off, no response from NORAD --

How could they not have known?

But they still nominated Robertsm, who played a large role in guiding the W steal --

and the fascist rally at Miami-Dade HQs to stop the vote counting -- and Alito --

two absolute radical right wing candidates.

[Supersedeas]

61. we knew then that DINO's would break any filibuster of Roberts or Alito, if Obama is going to go

strong, at least stronger than Sotomayor (who may be right of center), then he will need to do so prior to the middeterm elections.

[No Elephants]

78. Sotomayor is a moderate, ffs Please see Reply ##s 76 and 77.

[FBaggins]

5. Which is why it's a good thing this is happening now.

With the right selection and a little luck, it could even help in November.

[krispos42]

9. Time to make the Repubs filibuster for real, then.

I'm sick and tired of the presumed default setting for this country to be "right of center".

It's fiction, pure fiction.

[Democat]

12. Right! If they do filibuster, then we will never let another Republican appoint a judge.

Ever.

[defendandprotect]

28. Are you kidding? Did you see anything of Biden's efforts re Clarence Thomas, a right wing pervert?

[Kablooie]

73. You don't know Democrats very well, do you. They will let the GOP get away with anything.

They absolutely refuse to stand up against Republicans.

[No Elephants]

81. IMO, it's beyond that. Every term, it gets harder to tell the

Republicrats and the Demlicans apart. Both are corporatists.

The Republicans have an easier time. They never pretended to be anything else. And they've somehow sold their base the idea that wanting to tax or regulate big business and wealthy folk outrageously unfair, bad for the economy, etc.

Most of today's Democrats believe essentially the same things. However, they have a gap between what they believe and what they've sold their base for the eighty or ninety years. So, their only choice is to look as though they can't get anything done except what the Republicans want, even if the Republicans are in the minority.

Problem with 2008's overwhelming win: It's getting harder and harder for people to understand why their supposedly populist Party can't get a populist agenda through DC when they own the WH, the House and had 60 Senators in the Democratic Caucus. No one wants to face the reality: They could have, but they did not choose to.

[No Elephants]

79. If the country is right of center, it's because Democrats dragged it there.

And mostly Democrats who mistakenly care more about the Presidency than they do about the House and Senate.

Democrats crapped their underwear and started tacking right after McGovern, and then again after Reagan. And then there was the decision of the DNC in 1980 to tell Democrats in Congress to see if they couldn't figure out a way get some of that good ole lobbyist money that was then going only into Republican coffers. So, the Democrats figured out a way--legislate like Republicans and the money will come your way, too--especially if you get control.

That's why the health insurance, PHRMA and Big Health Provider donations went to Coakley, not Brown. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704586504574654704100186542.html

They, too, were shocked when she lost. Remember that pharaceutical lobbyist who got fired right after she lost?

For many voters, it's not about Democrats or Republicans anymore, but about Washington/Belttway insider v. someone not yet associated with Washington. Trouble is, once they get to Washington, they vote with their respective caucuses anyway, but many frustrated voters haven't woken up to that yet.

[Deep13]

2. Big news, but to no ones surprise.

Was he a Ford appointee? Seems like he has been around forever.

[Lochloosa]

4. Yes. Ford appointee.

[BumRushDaShow]

7. Let's hope

the Dems don't end up going through another nightmarish summer with rethuglican clowns posturing before their beholden lunatic fringe right wing media.

[Paper Roses]

32. This was my first thought. Stevens should retire but we're in for it.

Another long stretch of fighting, complaining, time wasting by the opposition.

I think we need to get beyond the party fighting and pick a qualified legal scholar and be done with it.

I'm really not up for more months of squabbling just for the sake of it.

[CreekDog]

52. I don't get that: Was the fighting ever going to stop anyway?

:shrug:

[No Elephants]

80. Why? Let them scare the rest of the country as much as they scare those of us who keep up.

[Democat]

10. Obama needs to appoint a real liberal to counter the right wing activists

This is where he should stand and fight. No bullshit, no weakness!

[defendandprotect]

26. Agree . . . but notice the out-of-the-gate fear-mongering by DU'ers . . ..

[Mithreal]

57. +1

[No Elephants]

83. +1 from me, too.

What does it matter who wins elections if Democrats surrender to Republicans before the battle even starts?

When has showing weakness to the Republicans ever worked? --And if it does "work", the Republicans won anyway.

And, the Democratic rank and file applauds that as chess mastery, instead of revolting against the capitulators?

It's starting to sound like a frickin' cult.

Surrender is Victory.

[Jefferson23]

11. Stevens, your participation on this court, EXEMPLARY!! Thank you good sir.

[Phoonzang]

13. Begun, the Judge Wars have

[Mojambo]

21. LOL... totally. n/t

[shotten99]

14. Too bad it wasn't that asshat, Scalia

[USA_1]

40. Scalia & Clarence Thomas Should both Retire, NOW!

[onenote]

54. maybe if you ask them nicely they will.

[harun]

43. No way Scalia leaves on Obama's watch.

[TomCADem]

15. Republicans - "Obama's Nominee, [Fill In Blank], Is A Liberal, Activist, Socialist"

Anyone short of Bybee and Yoo will be called a socialist by the Republicans.

[Robb]

16. DU-"Obama's Nominee, [Fill In Blank], Is A Corporatist, Centrist, DLC Stooge"

:D

[JTFrog]

25. LOL!

[Mithreal]

60. Why do you hate the DU community? Divisive much?

I am sure you will be there to tell us Obama's choice was heavenly and could do no better every time.

:)

[Robb]

66. Thanks

I just won a side bet. :rofl:

[Mithreal]

67. Of course, you did. Loves ya some baiting, dontcha.

[tekisui]

17. I can't wait for this fight.

Please nominate a clear, unapologetic liberal, President Obama!

We need a liberal anchor against the con-squad.

[Mojambo]

20. Big test for Obama here. There needs to be absolutely NO ambiguity about the nominee's liberal cred

Big. So, so big.

This is where he locks down (or loses) a shit ton of progressive support in 2012.

[Democat]

23. This is why we elected Obama!

At least one of the major reasons. Now he needs to stand up for the voters that stood for him and push a real liberal justice onto the court to stand up to the right wing activists.

Elections have consequences.

[Mojambo]

27. It was certainly the reason why I did. n/t

[Hell Hath No Fury]

29. I am not counting on it.

As with much of his legislation, I suspect he will go for what is "doable" -- I think he will not want a big fight on his nominee.

[defendandprotect]

31. I'm surprised no names have been floated out -- what's the corporate-press been doing on this?

Obviously, this is why many of us voted for Obama . . .

but as with many other issues, he's been disappointing for liberals/progressives.

[Democat]

47. They have been floating Goodwin Liu, 39 years old....

Obama has plans for Asian-American judge, and GOP isn't happy
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20100407/pl_mcclatchy/3471681

He won't get this spot, but down the road anything is possible - if Democrats can hold on to their majority.

[defendandprotect]

63. Heard that, but obviously premature . . . some here must have some guesses?

[n.michigan]

39. Not Granholm please. A lawyer? ( with ethics..) David Boies would be judicious.

[sadbear]

22. Message to republicans: Elections have consequences

They can peel Snowe or Collins away to break a filibuster. No worries. Just a bunch of gop grandstanding, full of sound and fury signifying nothing.

[droidamus2]

24. Screw the right

The Democrats are in charge and were elected to do a job not placate the far right wing in this country. The party and its supporters should immediately start pushing the idea that a President has the right to have his nominees approved as long as their qualified and that there should be no 'ideological' test to become a justice. I wish we were as cynical as the right wing so we could do what they do pick a jurist that is on the far (in our case left) of the ideological spectrum and then tell them to lie or refuse to answer any question in the Senate that would indicate their left leaning positions. I believe it is a valid position for Obama to take that it is good if not imperative to keep balance on the court, the court currently leans right, so it is appropriate that the replacement for Steven's is similar to Steven's.

[Elmore Furth]

33. Favorite JPS quote: The Supreme Court Lost Credibility in Bush v. Gore

<<He believed that the holding displayed "an unstated lack of confidence in the impartiality and capacity of the state judges who would make the critical decisions if the vote count were to proceed." He continued, "he endorsement of that position by the majority of this Court can only lend credence to the most cynical appraisal of the work of judges throughout the land. It is confidence in the men and women who administer the judicial system that is the true backbone of the rule of law. Time will one day heal the wound to that confidence that will be inflicted by today's decision. One thing, however, is certain. Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year's Presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation's confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law.">>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Paul_Stevens

[bluestateguy]

34. Here we go

Get ready.

[Hestia]

35. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens retiring

Source: Yahoo News

Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens retiring
By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer Mark Sherman, Associated Press Writer 16 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, the court's oldest member and leader of its liberal bloc, is retiring. President Barack Obama now has his second high court opening to fill.

Stevens said Friday he will step down when the court finishes its work for the summer in late June or early July. He said he hopes his successor is confirmed "well in advance of the commencement of the court's next term."

The timing of Stevens' announcement leaves ample time for the White House to settle on a successor and for Senate Democrats, who control a 59-vote majority, to conduct confirmation hearings and a vote before the court's next term begins in October. Republicans have not ruled out an attempt to delay confirmation.

Stevens' announcement had been hinted at for months. It comes 11 days before his 90th birthday.

Throughout his tenure, which began after President Gerald Ford nominated him in 1975, Stevens usually sided with the court's liberal bloc in the most contentious cases — those involving abortion, criminal law, civil rights and church-state relations. He led the dissenters as well in the case of Bush v. Gore that sealed President George W. Bush's election in 2000.

read more:

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100409/ap_on_go_su_co/us_supreme_court_stevens;_ylt=AoPdSFbNaSein8v6cE6ozw.s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNvampnNHVyBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNDA5L3VzX3N1cHJlbWVfY291cnRfc3RldmVucwRjY29kZQNtb3N0cG9wdWxhcgRjcG9zAzEEcG9zAzIEcHQDaG9tZV9jb2tlBHN

---

this will really retract from the elections this summer.

[elocs]

36. Since I've already read 8-10 threads about this already, how is this LBN?

Or did the others simply forget to post it in LBN so this is a loophole? :shrug:

[Pryderi]

45. What were the time stamps on the "8-10" threads? This one started over 2 hours ago.

[uppityperson]

50. News gets posted once in LBN, irregardless of how many times other places

Keeps LBN more readable for news. Not a loophole, but the rules. If you notice something hasn't been posted in LBN, feel free to do so. here's the link for Lbn rule posting.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=87249&mesg_id=87249

[Kablooie]

72. I expect that the GOP will try to filibuster until 2012.

and will only stop if it looks like the GOP candidate might win.

[Demeter]

37. Ladies and Gentlemen, Start Your Engines

and fasten your seatbelts; it's gonna be a bumpy ride.

Are there any good candidates in the system? After 30+ years of GOP court packing, that is?

[Pryderi]

38. SHRIEEEK!!! SHRIEEEK!!! SHRIEEEK!!! SHRIEEEK!!! ! SHRIEEEK!!! SHRIEEEK!!! SHRIEEEK!!! SHRIEEEK!!!

RIGHT WING

[Pryderi]

44. What are the ages of the other Justices?

[onenote]

53. here:

Roberts: 55
Sotomayor: 56
Alito: 60
Thomas 61
Breyer: 71
Kennedy 73
Scalia 74
Ginsburg: 77

[Pryderi]

58. Thanks! :)

[superconnected]

46. Obama is usally my hero, but I've learned not to turst him. I don't on this. I hope he'll do right

and replace Stevens with a liberal judge but Obama has failed me many times over the last year. Sad that I don't know or trust what he will do with this. I don't want to vote in candidates in the future where it's a coin toss on if they'll support the causes I believe in or even half of them.

[chelsea0011]

49. She wouldn't want the job, but HRC would be one great confirmation hearing.

[Submariner]

62. Gov. Deval Patrick

imho will get Obama's nod. Not much of a Governor....albeit better than Romney was, but Obama has been making a big deal about getting him re-elected here, getting Patrick's face in the news. Probably a better justice than a governor.

[Paper Roses]

71. I'm from MA and I do not dislike Patrick, I think he is in the wrong job

Your thought of him as an appointee is a good idea, I think he would do a good job.

[thereismore]

64. President Obama has made one great appointment already - let's all look forward to this one! nt

[MissMillie]

65. They're laying in wait over at FR... frothing at the mouth

they want a fight... no matter who the nominee is.

The party of "no" shows their colors:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2489765/posts?q=1&;page=101

[Mithreal]

68. When are they not?

[No Elephants]

84. I need that graphic.

[Yo_Mama]

69. I am sorry

to see him go.

[Odin2005]

70. The GOP will pull out all the stops against any nominee to the left of Mussolini.

[Mithreal]

85. and Dems will pull out every excuse to nominate a "moderate"

[Honeycombe8]

86. Shit. The Dems need this like a hole in the head. nt