Stephen Colbert Interviews John Paul Stevens, Disagrees With Retired Supreme Court Justice On Citizens United (VIDEO)

It's been widely reported that politicians have been warned against appearing on "The Colbert Report" for fear of Stephen Colbert using comedy trickery to make them appear foolish. But when you're a retired Supreme Court Justice, you have nothing to lose. John Paul Stevens, who wrote the dissenting opinions on Bush v. Gore as well as the landmark Citizens United case, agreed to be interviewed by Colbert, and more than held his own.

After Colbert accepts the fact that he wasn't able to get a "real" Justice, accusing him of setting a poor example to kids by "quitting" in 2010, and asking Justice Stevens to help him out of a speeding ticket, the comedian had plenty of questions about Stevens' 35 year career on the Supreme Court.

For instance, whether he went "mad with power" when Stevens was acting Chief Justice. Or who was the best basketball player on the Court (and the court). Or whether he ever felt like "zazzing up" his robes with feather boas.

But then, Colbert grilled Stevens at his own game -- the legal profession. As mentioned, Stevens wrote the dissenting opinion on Citizens United, the case that directly led to the creation of Super PACs. Of course, Colbert's own Super PAC has grabbed headlines, as he has raised money to fund various pranks during the election season before turning over the PAC to Jon Stewart so he can run for president.

Without ever bringing up Colbert's own electoral shenanigans explicitly, Colbert and Stevens discussed the concept of corporate personhood, which Stevens rejects. He defends his rejection, claiming that just as not all rights are afforded to all people equally at all times, corporations are not entitled to the same rights as citizens.

Of course, Colbert felt that Stevens was being a little judgmental. And just because he's a former judge gives him no right to do so.

Also on HuffPost:

Comments

[markburn]

08:02 AM on 01/26/2012

One of those hilarious "instant classic" Colbert interviews.

[moonlightesq]

06:30 PM on 01/23/2012

Great interview. Very funny!

[News Fan]

09:54 AM on 01/22/2012

John Paul Stevens has a great legal mind! He got it right in Citizens United! Too bad he's retired!

A lot of people are now seeing the folly of the Citizens United decision and it will eventually be overturned! GOOD!!!

[Pat Bateman2000]

07:39 PM on 01/22/2012

It's not too bad he's retired but just too bad that more don't especially Thomas and Scalia and Kennedy. Wretched people

[SalesmanForLife]

01:23 AM on 01/22/2012

Who are the two dud's on huffpost politics? I get the message but I also started snoring. Let'r rip boys....you can do it.

[Kassandra]

12:03 PM on 01/22/2012

Everybody's a critic..........snore

[InedaName]

05:36 PM on 01/21/2012

I wish Stephen had asked Justice Stevens why he retired from Led Zeppelin.

[blueman00009]

02:15 PM on 01/21/2012

That was incredible. I loved that interview. John Paul Stevens was awesome too. Amazing. Wish there were more like him on the supreme court. Awesome interview.

[talkmedown]

02:12 PM on 01/21/2012

Great line at the end by JPS
Colbert always pushes the boundary

[booshh]

01:22 PM on 01/21/2012

Great interview.

I like John Paul stevens now.

[pittmom]

01:08 PM on 01/21/2012

I want to be as sharp as Justice Stevens when I am 90! Scratch that- I'd settle for it at 55.

[OneInEveryFamily]

12:50 PM on 01/21/2012

JPS is a national treasure.

[javagirl023]

01:12 PM on 01/21/2012

As is Colbert.

[Billyeveryteen]

12:32 PM on 01/21/2012

Sooo awesome. The wife and I were crying laughing.

[Rjchinook]

01:09 PM on 01/21/2012

Me too! I almost peed my pants!

[sciphy]

09:50 AM on 01/21/2012

Colbert and Stewart (since he is now in charge of the superpac) are going to ride this thing until they get in front of SCOTUS. Can't wait. Colbert was awesome when he testified before congress. Can wait to see his opening arguments in front of Roberts, Scalia et al. Advancing the greater good through comedy. Move over peace movement, we've got a new mechanism for change.

[lulubelle1956]

09:03 AM on 01/21/2012

What a treasure Justice Stevens is.

[Rjchinook]

01:11 PM on 01/21/2012

Treasure? You must be a corporate person.

[lulubelle1956]

01:55 PM on 01/21/2012

It is an older term of endearment. You would not know much history I guess.

[aklib]

10:22 PM on 01/21/2012

Rjchinook, Justice Stevens wrote the DISSENTING opinion in the citizens united case.

[bookmanjb]

08:57 AM on 01/21/2012

The reason Colbert is so funny in bits like this is that his shtick is only slightly more cringe-making than many "serious" journalists.

[gweedosezz]

07:03 AM on 01/21/2012

With all due respect Justice Stevens, contrary to what any court decides, corporations are NEVER people. Corporations are property, owned by people, and people are NEVER property owned by corporations.

[MothballViking]

10:21 AM on 01/21/2012

People are never property except when they are. Read some American history. Anything is possible if you get enough of the right people to say so. Five of the right people said Corporations are people in 2010, ergo they are.

[smr3226]

01:04 PM on 01/21/2012

Stevens is correct, the legal definition of "people" differs depending upon context. Corporations are artificial people so they can own property and enter into contracts. They are not people in that they can be killed (dissolved or merged), owned -bought and sold - by real (natural) people and other corporations. They can and are regulated by laws and regulations not applicable to humans.

In the unlikely event Citizens United is not repealed by a constitutional amendment or supreme court reversal of its decision, the damage can be mitigated by disclosure of funding sources of the pacs.

[javagirl023]

01:15 PM on 01/21/2012

If the dems retake the house this year and retain the presidency and the senate, the Rs may just want to revisit the wisdom of Cit U, never imagining it might not always favor them.

[gweedosezz]

11:51 AM on 01/23/2012

"Legal definitions" are irrelvant nonsense. Legal definitions, as well as the nations and legal systems which create them come and go. Physical reality on the other hand is eternal and in the real world, no non-living thing is, or will ever be, a person.

And no, corporations can not own property nor enter into contracts. Things cannot own other things.The human beings who manage them, acting as a collective bargaining agency, (investor/stockholder union) can ,on behalf of those humans it represents, purchase other things or enter into contracts. Contrary to your assertions corporations are not and connot be regulated by laws and regulations, since inanimate objects have no ability to repond to these laws in any way. The living, breathing human beings who own, manage or work for those who, own or manage a corporation are the only "persons" capable of complying with laws, so they are the only ones regulated by them.