So, none of today's justices are Masons? What went wrong, I thought they controlled everything?
At least they aren't openly masonic. It's possible that they decided that the legal environment was sufficiently dominated by their liberalism by 1968. It's also possible that they simply are no longer overt. Stevens is certainly radically leftist; he was appointed by a freemason; he has ancestral ties to the right lands. But we don't KNOW he's Masonic. I will say that I doubt that Ginsburg is, since I can't help but notice that none of the Jewish justices in the era of Masonic domination were Masonic. I wouldn't be surprised if Souter is Masonic, but there's vastly insufficient (i.e., no reliable) evidence to support that conclusion.