Skip to comments.Justice Stevens to retire soon?
Posted on 02/02/2006 1:49:42 PM PST by Tarkin
(...) Third party sources are now telling me that the John Paul Stevens rumor is true and that the White House is now planning for a third vacancy, but not until the end of the year . Third party sources, who I treat as credible, say that Stevens has begun taking actions in his personal life to make arrangements for personal affairs. It is presumed that Stevens is taking steps to retire. A separate third party source tells me that Ginsberg is not expected to retire, as her health is fine. Stevens has reportedly sent signals that he will retire once replacements for both O'Connor and Rehnquist have been confirmed.(...)
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
Won't retire...but he might start pining for the fjords.
Stevens should retire now. He deserves a long and healthy retirement.
I don't know if Stevens will retire, but can you imagine where we would be if Al Gore had won in 2000, or if John Kerry had won in 2004? The court would be disastrous.
There's a crowd of about 50 Million, almost people, who would like a word with him.
Tough to do in an election year. I heard he said he would like to have a Repbulican replace him, since he was appointed by one (Byron White did the same thing). My guess is between January and June 2007.
The Reaper might come for him first...
I'd wait a good while until buying anymore SCOTUS gossip.
Rush indicated the posibility of a third vacancy during the Bush administration.
His clerks will nail his feet to his perch so he can keep voting (Democrat style).
I don't think he'll retire. But it's likely that one of them will move on to a worser place. We can only hope.
Just like they did with Marshall and Blackmun...
Senile liberal justices have for years had their clerks write their opinions for them based on how the justices would vote if they were still mentally competent. For prestige, law schools pay to rent these senile fools as adjunct instructors. Brennan barely knew his own name at the time he was serving as an instructor at Georgetown in the early 90s. Thurgood Marshall had similar issues.
It occurs that it doesn't matter if we turn the court to the right or not. dRats have show they will ignore laws and rulings they don't agree with. It will be sad if after all the work and wait it means nothing.
I think that the president playfully hinted that this could be so in the SOTU speech. My husband did a double take. I just went back and read what he said (at least what was written in advance) and I think he maybe was doing just that.
... The Supreme Court now has two superb new members, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Sam Alito. I thank the Senate for confirming both of them. And I will continue to nominate men and women who understand that judges must be servants of the law, and not legislate from the bench. Today marks the official retirement of a very special American. For 24 years of faithful service to our Nation, the United States is grateful to Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
Even though he said he would continue to nominate judges, he sandwiched that statement between other statements about the supreme court. And it would be consistent with his subtle, playful, tweaking of the dems during the speech.
I hope he knows something that we don't.
what?! Pining for the fjords!? That is an ex parrot.
Tell Teddy aka "The Poster Boy for Jack Daniels" we're gonna "stack the court" just a little more. I'm getting giddy just thinkin' bout it..........Life is good........
It would be unusual to retire before the end of the 2005/2006 session in the summer. If he were to do so then, however, it would be political armegeddon.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.