Justice Stevens Bemoans Changed Court ("Corporate power at the cost of the individual")

[kpete]

Source: ABC


Justice Stevens Bemoans Changed Court
Condemnation of campaign finance ruling fuels rumors of retirement
By JOAN BISKUPIC
WASHINGTON, Jan. 23, 2010


When liberal Justice John Paul Stevens dissented Thursday as the Supreme Court permitted new corporate spending in elections, he invoked the names of influential and long-gone justices.
Nominating John Paul Stevens is one of President Ford's most enduring legacies.

He began with retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, with whom he had worked on a 2003 case the majority was partially overruling. He referred to the late Justice Thurgood Marshall's warning in a 1990 case, also overturned, about how corporate money can distort political debate. Stevens then cited the late Justice Byron White about the importance of deferring to Congress, which had passed the law the majority discarded Thursday.

As Stevens invoked lions of the past and decried the majority's decision, he spoke for twice as long from the bench as Justice Anthony Kennedy had for the majority. Over the course of his 20 minutes, Stevens also spoke with more passion — and more weariness.

.............

"The court's blinkered and aphoristic approach to the First Amendment may well promote corporate power at the cost of the individual and collective self-expression the Amendment was meant to serve," Stevens wrote.

Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/justice-stevens-bemoans-changed-court/story?id=9635321

[onehandle]

1. He is a short timer. Only hired one new clerk this year. Obama will replace him by next year.

I suggest a 25 year old super-liberal with a family history filled with 90+ year olds.

[BrklynLiberal]

3. How about a gay, black woman? I would just LOVE it!!!

[Downwinder]

6. How about Anita Hill?

[BrklynLiberal]

17. She came to my mind as well...

[No Elephants]

37. Didn't she teach at Falwell's college for a while?

[FarPoint]

42. Very good Karma

I'd say.O8)

[Fearless]

11. Needs to have only one leg though...

:evilgrin:

[BrklynLiberal]

16. WOW! Too bad Tammy Duckworth is not a judge.

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

She may not be African-American, but there are no Asians on the Supreme court yet!!

She is a decorated war vet and her family dates back to the revolutionary war.

[blue_onyx]

28. Being a judge isn't a requirement

Obama considered candidates with no experience being a judge for the last Supreme Court nomination. But since the Dems no longer have 60 votes, Obama will probably go with a safe nominee so candidates with no experience as a judge probably won't considered this time.

[Peregrine Took]

18. How about a true progressive no matter what other factors?

Its quite possible for a gay black woman to be conservative/moderate, too.

[BrklynLiberal]

22. I wastaking the progressive part for granted...just wanted to add the black & gay part to

poss off the freepers.

[No Elephants]

38. If Massachusetts just taught us anything, IMO, it was to cease identity politics.

IMO, if Coakley had not been a woman, she would never have been the nominee and she was not fit to be the nominee.

[John Kerry VonErich]

44. Knowin them they'll say.....

"As long as she is sexy and not butch....."

[inna]

7. I like your idea, but there must an age requirement. Or is there one?

[onehandle]

10. There are no restrictions in the Constitution.

Obama could nominate a chair if he wished.

It doesn't even have to be an American chair.

[inna]

35. Jesus! Better a foreign chair than....

... Roberts and Scalia & Co.!

x(

[No Elephants]

40. Well, at least Justice Thomas would have a colleague then.

Of course, Thomas is American, but he may as well be a chair.

[Fearless]

12. No age requirement... Google "FDR packing the court".

Age discrimination is not helpful. Of course, if they can't do their job or are out of touch with American society... That's another story.

[Iowa]

13. I expect he'll appoint some lightweight with an ambiguous record...

The Senate will scream that he's a liberal, the nominee will withdraw, and he'll be replaced with someone "we can all agree on"... so we can put all this unpleasantness behind us and "look forward".

[kath]

29. and don't forget the importance of keeping the powder dry.

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[Hawaii Hiker]

19. How about this - a 30-something year old lawyer from the ACLU

who would look Sam Brownback right in the eye during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing & say "Look you wacko, I'm 100% pro-choice & I'm also 100% in favor of very limited restrictions on internet pornography" :woohoo:

After yesterday's horrific decision, (not to mention Bush V. Gore) its about time Democrats stress the importance of the Supreme Court & look at where Republican court confirmations have gotten us.....President Obama needs to hammer home the significance of the court in his re-election campaign....

[Q3JR4]

26. Times like this I'm reminded of

the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court on the West Wing who was a "liberal icon" named Roy Ashland who said when the president was talking to him about retiring:

"Brandeis, Blackmun, Douglas, but you can't get them, can you? Because it's all compromises now, the ones who have no record of scholarship, no body of opinions, nothing you can hold them to. That's who they'll confirm -- raging mediocrities."

"I have good days and bad, but on my worst day, I am better than the amped-up ambulance chasers you could get confirmed by this Senate."

"Go ahead, see who they pick of their favorite sons. See what segregationist, anti-miscegenationist, Isaiah-quoting, gay-bashing bastard they come up with."

Very apt I would say, with the exception that they were talking about a republican controlled senate. I'm not quite sure if it would be any difference in this day and age though....

Q3JR4.

[kath]

30. Wow. What a great quote.

"never saw The West Wing, but, wow, such writing...)

[BrklynLiberal]

33. I remember that episode. Milo O'Shea played the judge who was showing signs of ill health.

THAT is a show that I still miss.....

[No Elephants]

39. Given all the lawsuits in which the ACLU and the D of J have battled this year, I doubt it.

[cureautismnow]

32. Let's hope he gets to replace 73-year-old Justice Kennedy first.

Or 73-year-old Scalia. Or one of the younger nitwits - Thomas, Alito, or Roberts.

[onehandle]

41. I hate to tell you this, but none of those justices will be leaving during Obama's terms.

Stevens and maybe Ginsburg will be leaving. Both liberals.

Ralph Nader, GOP criminal cheating, and a crooked SCOTUS ended our chance of changing the balance of the court in 2000 and extended it for as much as three decades.

[bemildred]

2. I think the consequences of this are quite unpredictable.

The felonious five may well live to regret this.

[smoogatz]

5. This is a reasonable point.

Who was better at the marketing their candidates in the last election cycle--conservatives or progressives? In a country that's becoming steadily more progressive on the issues, will a lot of high-powered rightwing propaganda resonate, or fall flat? Will the banksters and insurance fatcats really be able to stir up a groundswell of grass-roots support for their hug annual bonuses at the taxpayers' expense, or will they be preaching entirely to the wingnut choir?

[bemildred]

9. It's an attack on the two parties, the party system.

It means you can do politics without making "contributions", and contributions are where the national and state parties get their power, the power to dole out money. Now all you need is rich "friends". It's like a grenade tossed into the middle of the current way of doing business.

[smoogatz]

14. Interesting take.

I'm guessing it'll be used much more as an attack vehicle; a completely unregulatable means of intimidating politicians that have the temerity to stand in the way of unfettered corporate profiteering. Such ads won't be subtle, and they'll run constantly--and they won't be required to contain a shred of truth. They'll pop up three or four days before key elections, much too late to litigate, etc. I think it's likely to generate a certain amount of voter backlash, though. We'll see.

[bemildred]

15. Well, that too.

It's much more direct than buying politicians with "campaign contributions". It makes politics a sort of free-for-all based on money. There is still the distinction between political organizations and private "persons", but that will be easy to circumvent. I'm just wondering if the parties will fight back, and how. I would expect the two parties to treat this like they do "open primary" initiatives, it's the same sort of threat to party power.

[msongs]

4. quick, which 5 justices are employees of the Republican Party? nt

[CreekDog]

8. Justice O'Connor, do you see what you helped create from your worst decision ever?

Re: Bush v. Gore?

a decision it appears you spent little time thinking or doing legal research before coming to it?

thanks so damned much, i hope you regret it until your dying day because hundreds of millions are suffering from it too.

:grr:

[BrklynLiberal]

20. and she had the unmitigated gall to write an article decrying the turn the court had taken

after she retired!!

DUH! Did she actually think pres shit-for-brains was going to nominate someone more liberal than she was???
The sad part is that the Dems in Congress rolled over for the most horrendous nominees ever.
That will NEVER happen for Pres Obama.

It will be another Charlie Brown/Lucy story...over and over and over

[kath]

31. Yep - I thought of that the other day. Thanks a whole fucking lot, Sandy.

[boomerbust]

21. I wonder

How Harriet Meyers would have ruled.:evilgrin:

[BrklynLiberal]

23. oy.

[Jefferson23]

24. Justice Stephens, one can only imagine his frustration while he spoke.

[tomm2thumbs]

25. David Boies for Supreme Court - :))

Get a fighter in there with some backbone

[Indydem]

43. Boies Works for whoever pays him...

Look it up.

Pro IBM
Anti Microsoft
Pro Gore
Pro Napster
Pro Enron Jackass

He has no moral compass and is definately not the friend of progressive liberals.

[pscot]

27. Stare decisis doesn't seem to mean much

to these guys. If the Court can be moved to the left, this ruling can be overturned. Why should a new set of justices show much respect for this kind of blatant judicial legislating?

[Saxon]

34. This guy named Allan.

I think I heard of this young lawyer somewhere. Allan something.

Oh yea, Allan Grayson.

[StatGirl]

36. +10000!