WASHINGTON -- Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens says he "will surely" retire while President Barack Obama is still in office, giving the president the opportunity to maintain the high court's ideological balance.
Stevens said in newspaper interviews on the Web Saturday that he will decide soon on the timing of his retirement, whether it will be this year or next. Stevens, the leader of the court's liberals, turns 90 this month and is the oldest justice.
His departure would give Obama his second nomination to the court, enabling him to ensure there would continue to be at least four liberal-leaning justices. The high court is often split 5 to 4 on major cases, with the vote of moderate Justice Anthony Kennedy often deciding which side prevails.
"I will surely do it while he's still president," Stevens told The Washington Post.
But Stevens, who was named to the court by Republican President Gerald R. Ford in 1975, says he still loves the job, and says he continues to write the first draft of his own opinions.
Stevens says if it ever gets to point where he stopped doing that, it would be a sign he wasn't up to the job anymore.
Stevens is the second-oldest justice in the court's history, after Oliver Wendell Holmes. He is the seventh-longest-serving justice, with more than 34 years on the court.
Another liberal, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, had surgery last year for early-stage pancreatic cancer. While Ginsburg has been her usual energetic self, including frequent speaking engagements and a teaching stint in Europe, long-term survival rates for pancreatic cancer are low.
Ginsburg, 77, has said she intends to serve into her early 80s, and she has hired her clerks for the court term that begins in October 2010.
Justices are reluctant to retire in bunches, mainly because they want the nine-member court as close to full strength as possible.
Stevens also is nearing two longevity records. When he joined the court, he replaced the longest-serving justice, William O. Douglas, and would need to serve until mid-July 2012 to top that service record. He would surpass Holmes as the oldest sitting justice if he were to remain on the court until Feb. 24, 2011.
"I do have to fish or cut bait, just for my own personal peace of mind and also in fairness to the process," Stevens told The New York Times. "The president and the Senate need plenty of time to fill a vacancy."
The Huffington Post interviewed a host of constitutional law professors and other legal cognoscenti. Below is a look at the candidates that have emerged as leading contenders for Justice Stevens' seat on the bench -- click here (and scroll down) for much more reporting about each potential new Justice.
There appears to be a growing consensus that Solicitor General Elena Kagan is the front-runner for the position. Kagan comes armed with a formidable set of credentials: Associate White House Counsel during the Clinton Administration; Professor and then Dean of Harvard Law School; and now, Solicitor General of the United States, the appointee tasked with representing the U.S. Government in cases before the Supreme Court.
At Harvard, Kagan forged a reputation for herself as a savvy consensus-builder, uniting a factious faculty divided along ideological lines.
"She has a terrific political sense," says Charles Fried, Professor at Harvard Law School and Solicitor General in the Reagan administration. "She knows how to frame issues so that people see things her way."
Her interpersonal political prowess shone through in a law school then plagued by inertia.
"The faculty had been divided politically on left-right grounds and had difficulty making [faculty] appointments," explains Harvard Professor Mark Tushnet. "But she was able to break the logjam by explaining to people that the law school was stagnating and that it could move forward only if it overcame these issues."
On a fractured Court with an ascendant right wing, her capacity for persuasive diplomacy could prove pivotal.
Equally in Kagan's favor is the absence of a potentially compromising legal paper trail. In the wake of a bruising health care debate, it's likely that President Obama will want to minimize the amount of political capital he expends on a Supreme Court nominee.
"Kagan is unique in that, like Justice John Roberts, she's universally respected but hasn't written on divisive topics that could make confirmation difficult," says University of Pennsylvania Law Professor Theodore Ruger.
Kagan, 49, also has youth on her side. Opting for a young Supreme Court nominee has traditionally allowed a President to extend his influence beyond his term in office and cement his political legacy, a trend that arguably started with President Reagan's appointment of Antonin Scalia, who was 50 at the time of his nomination to the bench.
There appears to be a growing consensus that Solicitor General Elena Kagan is the front-runner for the position. Kagan comes armed with a formidable set of credentials: Associate White House Counsel during the Clinton Administration; Professor and then Dean of Harvard Law School; and now, Solicitor General of the United States, the appointee tasked with representing the U.S. Government in cases before the Supreme Court.
At Harvard, Kagan forged a reputation for herself as a savvy consensus-builder, uniting a factious faculty divided along ideological lines.
"She has a terrific political sense," says Charles Fried, Professor at Harvard Law School and Solicitor General in the Reagan administration. "She knows how to frame issues so that people see things her way."
Her interpersonal political prowess shone through in a law school then plagued by inertia.
"The faculty had been divided politically on left-right grounds and had difficulty making [faculty] appointments," explains Harvard Professor Mark Tushnet. "But she was able to break the logjam by explaining to people that the law school was stagnating and that it could move forward only if it overcame these issues."
On a fractured Court with an ascendant right wing, her capacity for persuasive diplomacy could prove pivotal.
Equally in Kagan's favor is the absence of a potentially compromising legal paper trail. In the wake of a bruising health care debate, it's likely that President Obama will want to minimize the amount of political capital he expends on a Supreme Court nominee.
"Kagan is unique in that, like Justice John Roberts, she's universally respected but hasn't written on divisive topics that could make confirmation difficult," says University of Pennsylvania Law Professor Theodore Ruger.
Kagan, 49, also has youth on her side. Opting for a young Supreme Court nominee has traditionally allowed a President to extend his influence beyond his term in office and cement his political legacy, a trend that arguably started with President Reagan's appointment of Antonin Scalia, who was 50 at the time of his nomination to the bench.
BobRobertsFeltRedundantsaid on 4 Sunday 2010 am30 10:36 am:
yup, alito and roberts always on the losing side of every decision, off in the corner wringing their hands and muttering to themselves....
WASHINGTON -- Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens says he "will surely" retire while President Barack Obama is still in office, giving the president the opportunity to maintain the high court's id...
WASHINGTON -- Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens says he "will surely" retire while President Barack Obama is still in office, giving the president the opportunity to maintain the high court's id...
WASHINGTON — The retirement of Justice John Paul Stevens, the Supreme Court's leading liberal, touched off an immediate election-year political battle Friday over President Barack...
WASHINGTON — Justice Antonin Scalia tends to see things as black or white. Justice Stephen Breyer sees a lot more gray. When contentious decisions come...
John Paul Stevens, the longest serving Supreme Court justice speculated about his own retirement from the high court in an interview with Jeffrey Toobin of...
If two U.S. Supreme Court vacancies materialize this spring, they may have the same impact on the nation's capital that two heavy snowfalls have had...
Lawyers for President Obama have been working behind the scenes to prepare for the possibility of one, and maybe two Supreme Court vacancies this spring....
Regardless of when Justice Stevens retires, Obama will appoint a centrist, center-to-left or liberal leaning replacement. The replacement will not be conservative or conservative-leaning -- period.
Sometimes high-profile public figures do reveal something meaningful about themselves. John Roberts' concern over the fact that he had to sit "expressionless" while Obama criticized the Citizens' United ruling is one of them.
Our government is not broken; it's been bought out from under us. On the right and the left and smack across the vast middle, more and more Americans doubt representative democracy can survive the corruption of money.
The private sector is adept at many things; financing political outcomes shouldn't be one of them. To transform our democracy, we must make elections publicly-financed, issue-based contests, open to all.
While Republican Minority leader Boehner is whipping up violence against Democrats, and Republican Minority Whip Cantor is blaming Democrats for violence against themselves, it's worth looking at reality.
Was the President right to admonish the Supreme Court publicly for their decision? Certainly. If corporations have the right to free speech, doesn't the leader of the free world?
Obama would do himself proud, and his progressive base proud, and the Constitution proud, by nominating Russ Feingold to fill the next vacancy on the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court hasn't been balanced for years. Replacing Stevens with a more liberal judge will not maintain or balance the court, it will keep it from going so far to the right it tunnels through the earth and ends up in China.
We'd have to clone Michael Moore and appoint three of him to balance the court as it is now.
Stop letting the extreme rightwingers redefine what left is. We would ALL benefit from balance, but we'll never get it if we let the delusional right define what left is, they have no idea.
ajwriter: The Supreme Court hasn't been balanced for years. Replacing Stevens
Justice Stevens is a true American Treasure! As is Justice Ginsburg! How skillfully they interpret the law, rather than use their postions as "bully pulpits" to push some misplaced personal ideological "morals" on the rest of us.
It is now inevitable that Justice Stevens will retire during the Obama Administration. Sad to see him go, but glad it will happen at a time when he is sure to be replaced with another who will strive to maintain sanity and balance.
If we're all extremely lucky, maybe Justice Ginsburg will enjoy a full and total recovery. And maybe another two or three Justice will also retire during the Obama years. Maybe during his second term!
Jim281: Justice Stevens is a true American Treasure! As is Justice
John Paul Stevens' retirement will be a great loss.
I hope Obama replaces him with a liberal. There is no need to appease the Republicans who will vote against anyone Obama nominates, no matter who they are.
olivia: John Paul Stevens' retirement will be a great loss. I
Really.
But Starr, comparatively speaking, may now be too much the pencil-neck college boy pinko libral treehugging terrorist - especially if the black clinton nominates him.
ellwort: Really. But Starr, comparatively speaking, may now be too much
I say lets give them something to talk about. The Pres should nominate his wife. I here she is a great lawyer in her own right. Talk about making history.
rn08251: I say lets give them something to talk about. The
Impeachment has to be based on something, not just the fact that you personally don't like someone. And if Obama were impeached, then Biden would be President, not one of your Republican wannabes.
IrisMozenter: Impeachment has to be based on something, not just the
this man is 90 years old... why in the he// is he still working? really??
I mean come on, I feel these judges and politicians need to be forced in retirement at 70 years old.. It looks like to me being a politician is such a cushy job , I guess its not really work, so you can work your whole life and never retire..
Rictracee: this man is 90 years old... why in the he//
capable? i bet this man cant even drive a car... I feel they should take old people licence at a certain age.. well at least they need to be retested with sight and taking another driving test.
Rictracee: capable? i bet this man cant even drive a car...
Ric., I totally agree - there should be term limits for the court. It's ridiculous major decisions affecting the lives of Americans are made by people that can't even do the research and work themselves. Can they even hear what is going on? ha! Why should our country be held hostage by ideologues for 40 years or more?!! Scalia and Thomas would have been fired a long time ago...
LisaO8: Ric., I totally agree - there should be term limits
Please show evidence that any of these people are incapable. "Use it or lose it" applies here – these people have been "using it" their entire lives and are probably a lot sharper than people in the corporate world at 50 who are phoning it in from the golf course.
IrisMozenter: Please show evidence that any of these people are incapable.
your spot on... i feel the judgement they make are based on time period when they were living in the REAL world but once they are on the supreme court they lead such unnomral life they know nothing about real issues that affect ordinary people..
fanned ya
Rictracee: your spot on... i feel the judgement they make are
AP//The Huffington Post First Posted: 06/03/10 06:12 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 05:05 PM ET