When Justice John Paul Stevens announced his retirement on April 9, the news was accompanied by the inevitable counting of votes on the U.S. Supreme Court. The conventional wisdom is that Stevens’ retirement means the departure of the most senior liberal justice from the Court and that Stevens’ successor will not substantially change the political orientation of the conservative Court currently led by Chief Justice John Roberts Jr.
It is understandable that the politics of Stevens’ retirement would take priority in news stories. The Court’s decisions often have political implications and with certain matters — including campaign finance, the treatment of military detainees and even, in Bush v. Gore, the election of the president — the Court’s decisions often resolve controversial political disputes.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
