Justice John Stevens may step down

[jblomenberg16]

Monday's intriguing people – This Just In - CNN.com Blogs


Combine this and rumors that David Souter may retire and Obama may get to name two justices...

 

[Joe Williams]

Won't be any change in the balance or direction of the courts. Both of those justices are very far left, and neither has any regard for the Constitution as written. Mr Soetoro's nominees will mirror those "qualities." Court will remain the same until one of the conservative Justices has an accident.

 

[Fletch]

Good riddance to both of them. I realize it won't change anything, but I'm tired of these two windbags.

 

[jedi]

Flecth but if they leave now then I7BO gets to put 2 more "lefties" in there. Best if they hold on and leave after I7BO leaves and we "hopefully" have someone that can put a "righty" in there.

BTW has the court always leaned conversative? Or was there a time when it leaned left.

Thanks

 

[Eddie]

Flecth but if they leave now then I7BO gets to put 2 more "lefties" in there. Best if they hold on and leave after I7BO leaves and we "hopefully" have someone that can put a "righty" in there.

BTW has the court always leaned conversative? Or was there a time when it leaned left.

Thanks

Even if they do leave at least he can't do much worse than those two.

 

[jblomenberg16]

Won't be any change in the balance or direction of the courts. Both of those justices are very far left, and neither has any regard for the Constitution as written. Mr Soetoro's nominees will mirror those "qualities." Court will remain the same until one of the conservative Justices has an accident.

My concern isn't so much the balance of the court. If these two both step down, and Obama appoints two more far lefties, those new appointees will likely be on the SCOTUS for a long time. Many justices serve for decades at a time, meaning we would be stuck with them far into the future.

 

[jaramia20]

Flecth but if they leave now then I7BO gets to put 2 more "lefties" in there. Best if they hold on and leave after I7BO leaves and we "hopefully" have someone that can put a "righty" in there.

BTW has the court always leaned conversative? Or was there a time when it leaned left.

Thanks

Keep in mind , " righty " Judges only leave when " righty " presidents are in office and " Lefty " Judges only leave when " Lefty " presidents are in office . Considering the age of the 2 Judges we are talking about , I think they will leave in the next year . Most people think they where just waiting for George to get out to retire anyway . I don't know how I feel about this , It's " the devil you know " .....

 

[jedi]

Keep in mind , " righty " Judges only leave when " righty " presidents are in office and " Lefty " Judges only leave when " Lefty " presidents are in office . Considering the age of the 2 Judges we are talking about , I think they will leave in the next year . Most people think they where just waiting for George to get out to retire anyway . I don't know how I feel about this , It's " the devil you know " .....

Which means then that the court is not really a court following the law but one that followes it's ideas/feelings then.

So when did it tilt to the 5-4 we have now?

 

[Expat]

If we had actual conservative Republicans in the Senate instead of RINOs like Lindsey Graham and little Dick Lugar, that will rubber stamp whoever President Obama appoints, we might have some hope for someone not completely communist. But unfortunately that isn't the case.

 

[CarmelHP]

BTW has the court always leaned conversative? Or was there a time when it leaned left.

Thanks

The Stone, Vinson, Warren, and Burger Courts were all very liberal or liberal leaning.

 

[dross]

The Stone, Vinson, Warren, and Burger Courts were all very liberal or liberal leaning.

I would argue that it was pretty well liberal with O'Connor.

I wouldn't even call this a conservative court. I'd say that with Kennedy as swing vote, the court is as moderate as it can possibly get. I've written this before, I'll write it again: Justice Kennedy, as much as I can't stand him, and as little as I think of his philosophy and legal scholarship, may be the only thing standing between freedom and my daughter growing up under the state-sponsored slavery of socialism.

 

[Paco Bedejo]

When you guys use Left/Right or Liberal/Conservative...are you talking socially or economically? It's really confusing to read your posts since you're using, what appears to be, nonsense gibberish without firmly defined meanings.

I mean...when you say liberal, if you mean economically, that could be either the Rs or the Ds, as they both love the flavor of my cash. If you mean socially, then I'm pretty sure you're talking about the Ds.

When you say conservative, economically that would be...well, nobody? If you mean socially, then that would definitely be most of the Rs...and some of the Ds.

 

[CarmelHP]

When you guys use Left/Right or Liberal/Conservative...are you talking socially or economically? It's really confusing to read your posts since you're using, what appears to be, nonsense gibberish without firmly defined meanings.

I mean...when you say liberal, if you mean economically, that could be either the Rs or the Ds, as they both love the flavor of my cash. If you mean socially, then I'm pretty sure you're talking about the Ds.

When you say conservative, economically that would be...well, nobody? If you mean socially, then that would definitely be most of the Rs...and some of the Ds.

The Court is not subject to partisan election, so speaking of Republican or Democrat in that context is "nonsense gibberish."

 

[dross]

When you guys use Left/Right or Liberal/Conservative...are you talking socially or economically? It's really confusing to read your posts since you're using, what appears to be, nonsense gibberish without firmly defined meanings.

I mean...when you say liberal, if you mean economically, that could be either the Rs or the Ds, as they both love the flavor of my cash. If you mean socially, then I'm pretty sure you're talking about the Ds.

When you say conservative, economically that would be...well, nobody? If you mean socially, then that would definitely be most of the Rs...and some of the Ds.

I usually avoid the word "liberal" as the meaning is skewed.

I would prefer pro-freedom and anti-freedom, which I basically mean as more or less libertarian.

I tend to use "left" and "right" to generally mean what they mean to mainstream politics, which often crosses the line both ways on freedom issues, though I believe the Republicans are more consistently pro-freedom than the Dems which is why I vote that way.

For the Court, I generally mean "right" as being dedicated to interpreting the Constitution, whereas I mean "left" as being dedicated to outcomes they feel are just.

If you refer to my above explanations, you'll see why most folks, me included, try to find shortcut phrases like "left" and "right."

 

[Expat]

When I use liberal or conservative as to SCOTUS, they do not have the same meaning as in the usual political terms. By conservative, I mean someone that believes the words as written in the Constitution actually have meaning. That in reaching a decision they would read things such as the Federalist Papers, read minutes of the debate, read the other writings of the Founders. By Liberal, I mean ones that feel it is proper(or at least fashionable) to base their decisions on foreign law and decisions. They look for an outcome they want and then make up whatever tortured reasoning is needed to support that outcome. Fortunately we finally have a few Justices that seem to think the Constitution is important, but sadly that should be unanimous.

 

[jblomenberg16]

When I use liberal or conservative as to SCOTUS, they do not have the same meaning as in the usual political terms. By conservative, I mean someone that believes the words as written in the Constitution actually have meaning. That in reaching a decision they would read things such as the Federalist Papers, read minutes of the debate, read the other writings of the Founders. By Liberal, I mean ones that feel it is proper(or at least fashionable) to base their decisions on foreign law and decisions. They look for an outcome they want and then make up whatever tortured reasoning is needed to support that outcome. Fortunately we finally have a few Justices that seem to think the Constitution is important, but sadly that should be unanimous.