By Stella Templo
Immigration Attorney, The Law Offices of Spar & Bernstein
Last week, Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens announced that he would retire at the end of this term.
Stevens was nominated in 1975 by President Gerald Ford, who wrote 30 years later that he was prepared to allow history’s judgment of him to rest exclusively, if necessary, on that Stevens decision.This was a very smart statement, as the Stevens legacy is sure to resound.
Justice Stevens is the longest-serving member of the current Court and will turn 90 in just a few days on April 20.
By retiring at the end of this term, he narrowly misses two Supreme Court records. He will be two years short of longest service ever, a record held by Justice William Douglas at 36 years and 209 days, and a year short of being the oldest justice ever, a record held by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, age 91.
The retirement announcement was both expected and unexpected. It was expected because the man is almost 90.
He deserves to spend some time enjoying himself and he’s reputed to enjoy golf and bridge.
It is unexpected because he still has so much to give.
He showed his fire earlier this year when he delivered his 20-minute dissent in Citizens United, which includes this stinging rebuke, “essentially five justices were unhappy with the limited nature of the case before us, so they changed the case to give themselves an opportunity to change the law.”
With Justice Stevens’s departure, the court loses its only Protestant member and its last WW II veteran. It also leaves the pool representing only two law schools.
Justice Stevens is part of the losing liberal bloc of 4 and he will likely be replaced by someone who will vote the same way; thereby, preserving the current count.
Through Justice Stevens, we, as a society, have considered and defined our concepts of law and humanity as when he eloquently explained the importance of privacy rights of prisoners and when he opined that the death penalty is a violation of the Eight Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and inhuman punishment.
Without any disrespect to the supposed short-list candidates, the Court will suffer a huge loss.
Sure, Elena Kagan, Merrick Garland and Diane Wood are fantastic nominees and would be good justices, but will be they great?
Justice Stevens was great.
