SUPPORT THE WORK

GetWiki

John Paul Stevens

ARTICLE SUBJECTS
aesthetics  →
being  →
complexity  →
database  →
enterprise  →
ethics  →
fiction  →
history  →
internet  →
knowledge  →
language  →
licensing  →
linux  →
logic  →
method  →
news  →
perception  →
philosophy  →
policy  →
purpose  →
religion  →
science  →
sociology  →
software  →
truth  →
unix  →
wiki  →
ARTICLE TYPES
essay  →
feed  →
help  →
system  →
wiki  →
ARTICLE ORIGINS
critical  →
discussion  →
forked  →
imported  →
original  →
John Paul Stevens
[ temporary import ]
please note:
- the content below is remote from Wikipedia
- it has been imported raw for GetWiki
{{Short description|American judge}}{{redirect|Justice Stevens}}{{pp-move-indef}}{{Use mdy dates|date=May 2011}}







factoids
|birth_place = Chicago, Illinois, U.S.|death_date =|death_place =Republican Party (United States)>Republican{{Marriage1942end=div}}Maryan Mulholland Simon2015|end=died}}}}|children = 4University of Chicago (Bachelor of Arts>BA)Northwestern University (JD)|signature = John Paul Stevens Signature.svgUnited States|1912}}United States|navy-1864}}|serviceyears = 1942–1945|battles = World War IIUSNO4Lieutenant commander (United States)>Lieutenant commanderBronze Star MedalWorld War II Victory Medal (United States)>World War II Victory MedalPresidential Medal of Freedom}}John Paul Stevens (born April 20, 1920) is an American lawyer and jurist who served as an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court from 1975 until his retirement in 2010. At the time of his retirement, he was the second-oldest-serving justice in the history of the court,The oldest-serving justice was Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., who was 90 years and 309 days at the time of his retirement in 1932.WEB,weblink John Paul Stevens Second-Oldest Justice Ever, Weiss, Debra Cassens, ABA Journal. abajournal.com, November 19, 2007, September 18, 2013, yes,weblink" title="archive.is/20130918183721weblink">weblink September 18, 2013, mdy-all, WEB
,weblink
, From Justice Stevens, No Exit Signs
, Washington Post
, Barnes
, Robert
, November 18, 2008
, September 18, 2013
, yes
,weblink" title="web.archive.org/web/20131112203737weblink">weblink
, November 12, 2013
, mdy-all
, the third-longest serving Justice. A registered Republican when appointed, Stevens was considered to have been on the liberal side of the court at the time of his retirement.Born in Chicago, Stevens served in the United States Navy during World War II and graduated from Northwestern University School of Law. After clerking for Justice Wiley Blount Rutledge, he co-founded a law firm in Chicago, focusing on antitrust law. In 1970, President Richard Nixon appointed Stevens to the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Five years later, President Gerald Ford successfully nominated Stevens to the Supreme Court to fill the vacancy caused by the retirement of Justice William O. Douglas. He became the senior Associate Justice after the retirement of Harry Blackmun in 1994. Stevens retired during the administration of President Barack Obama and was succeeded by Justice Elena Kagan.Stevens's majority opinions in landmark cases include Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Apprendi v. New Jersey, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, Kelo v. City of New London, and Massachusetts v. EPA. Stevens is also known for his dissents in Texas v. Johnson, Bush v. Gore, D.C. v. Heller, and Citizens United v. FEC.

Life and career

Early life, 1920–1947

Stevens was born on April 20, 1920, in Hyde Park,William Mullen, "Justice John Paul Stevens has strong Chicago ties", WGN, (April 9, 2010). Chicago, Illinois, to a wealthy family.Jeffrey Rosen, "The Dissenter", The New York Times Magazine (September 23, 2007). His paternal grandfather had formed an insurance company and held real estate in Chicago, while his granduncle owned the Chas A. Stevens department store. His father, Ernest James Stevens (1884–1972), was a lawyer who later became a hotelier, owning two hotels, the La Salle and the Stevens Hotel. He lost ownership of the hotels during the Great Depression and was convicted of embezzlement (the conviction was later overturned). (The Stevens Hotel was subsequently bought by Hilton Hotels and is today the Chicago Hilton and Towers.) His mother, Elizabeth Maude (Street) Stevens (1881–1979), was a high-school English teacher. Two of his three older brothers also became lawyers.As a boy, Stevens attended the 1932 World Series baseball game in Chicago's Wrigley Field in which Babe Ruth called his shot. Stevens later recalled: "Ruth did point to the center-field scoreboard. And he did hit the ball out of the park after he pointed with his bat, so it really happened."NEWS, After Stevens, Toobin, Jeffrey,weblink The New Yorker, March 22, 2010, 41, He also had the opportunity to meet several notable people of the era, including the famed aviators Amelia Earhart and Charles Lindbergh, the latter of whom gave him a caged dove as a gift.Terry Stephan, "A Justice For All", Northwestern Magazine, Spring 2009. p. 16.The family lived in Hyde Park, and John Paul Stevens attended the University of Chicago Laboratory School. He subsequently obtained a bachelor of arts in English from the University of Chicago in 1941; while in college, Stevens also became a member of the Omega chapter of Psi Upsilon.He began work on his master's degree in English at the university in 1941, but soon decided to join the United States Navy. He enlisted on December 6, 1941, one day before the attack on Pearl Harbor, and served as an intelligence officer in the Pacific Theater from 1942 to 1945. Stevens was awarded a Bronze Star for his service in the codebreaking team whose work led to the downing of Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto's plane in 1943.Stevens married Elizabeth Jane Shereen in June 1942. Divorcing her in 1979, he married Maryan Mulholland Simon that December; that marriage lasted until Simon's death in 2015 following complications from a hip surgery.WEB,weblink Wife of retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens dies - CNNPolitics, Eugene, Scott, He has four children: John Joseph (who died of cancer in 1996), Kathryn, Elizabeth, and Susan.With the end of World War II, Stevens returned to Illinois, intending to return to his studies in English, but was persuaded by his brother Richard, who was a lawyer, to attend law school. Stevens enrolled in the Northwestern University School of Law in 1945 (the G.I. Bill mostly paying his way). He was a brilliant student, earning the highest GPA in the history of the law school. He received his J.D. in 1947, graduating magna cum laude.WEB
,
,
,
, John Paul Stevens
, Supreme Court Collection
, Cornell University Law School
,weblink
,
, May 1, 2009,

Legal career, 1947–1970

Given his stellar academic performance in law school, several prominent Northwestern faculty members recommended Stevens for a Supreme Court clerkship: he served as a clerk to Justice Wiley Rutledge during the 1947–48 term.Following his clerkship, Stevens returned to Chicago and joined the law firm of Poppenhusen, Johnston, Thompson & Raymond (which, in the 1960s, would become Jenner & Block). Stevens was admitted to the bar in 1949. He determined that he would not stay long at the Poppenhusen firm after he was docked a day's pay for taking the day off to travel to Springfield to swear his oath of admission. During his time at the Poppenhusen firm, Stevens began his practice in antitrust law.In 1951, he returned to Washington, DC, to serve as associate counsel to the Subcommittee on the Study of Monopoly Power of the Judiciary Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives. During this time, the subcommittee worked on several highly publicized investigation concerns in many industries, most notably Major League Baseball.In 1952, Stevens returned to Chicago and, together with two other young lawyers with whom he had worked at the Poppenhusen firm, formed his own law firm, Rothschild, Stevens, Barry & Myers. They soon developed a successful practice, with Stevens continuing to focus on antitrust cases. His growing expertise in antitrust law led to an invitation to teach the "Competition and Monopoly" course at the University of Chicago Law School, and from 1953 to 1955, he was a member of the Attorney General's National Committee to Study Antitrust Laws. At the same time, Stevens was making a name for himself as a first-rate antitrust litigator and was involved in a number of trials. He was widely regarded by colleagues as an extraordinarily capable and impressive lawyer with a fantastic memory and analytical ability, and authored a number of influential works on antitrust law.John Paul Stevens, Exemptions from Antitrust Coverage, 37 Antitrust L.J. 706 (1972); John Paul Stevens, Cost Justification, 8 Antitrust Bull. 413 (1963); John Paul Stevens, The Regulation of Railroads, 19 Antitrust L.J. 355 (1961); John Paul Stevens, The Robinson–Patman Act Prohibitions, 38 Chicago Bar Rec. 310 (1956); John Paul Stevens, Tying Arrangements, in Northwestern Antitrust Conference on the Antitrust Laws and the Attorney General's Committee Report (1955); John Paul Stevens, Defense of Meeting the Lower Price of a Competitor, in 1953 Summer Institute on Federal Antitrust Laws, University of Michigan Law School; Book Review, 28 Notre Dame L. Rev. 430 (1952); Edward R. Johnston & John Paul Stevens, Monopoly or Monopolization – A Reply to Professor Rostow, 44 Ill. L. Rev. 269 (1949).In 1969, the Greenberg Commission, appointed by the Illinois Supreme Court to investigate Sherman Skolnick's corruption allegations leveled at former Chief Justice Ray Klingbiel and current Chief Justice Roy Solfisburg, named Stevens as their counsel, meaning that he essentially served as the commission's special prosecutor. The Commission was widely thought to be a whitewash, but Stevens proved them wrong by vigorously prosecuting the justices, forcing them from office in the end.BOOK
, Manaster
, Kenneth A.
, Illinois Justice: The Scandal of 1969 and the Rise of John Paul Stevens
, University of Chicago Press
, 2001
, Chicago, Illinois, As a result of the prominence he gained during the Greenberg Commission, Stevens became Second Vice President of the Chicago Bar Association in 1970.

Judicial career, 1970–2010

Stevens's role in the Greenberg Commission catapulted him to prominence and was largely responsible for President Richard Nixon's decision to appoint Stevens as a Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit on November 20, 1970. His nomination was put forth by a former University of Chicago classmate, Illinois Senator Charles H. Percy.Ward, Stephanie Francis (May 2010). "Man of Moderation: Last Justice of ‘Greatest Generation,’ Says Farewell". ABA Journal. abajournal.com. Retrieved March 28, 2018.President Gerald Ford then nominated him as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court in 1975 to replace Justice William O. Douglas, who had recently retired, and he took his seat December 19, 1975, after being confirmed 98–0 by the Senate.When Harry Blackmun retired in 1994, Stevens became the senior Associate Justice and thus assumed the administrative duties of the Court whenever the post of Chief Justice of the United States was vacant or the Chief Justice was unable to perform his duties. Stevens performed the duties of Chief Justice in September 2005, between the death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist and the swearing-in of new Chief Justice John Roberts, and presided over oral arguments on a number of occasions when the Chief Justice was ill or recused. Also in September 2005, Stevens was honored with a Symposium by Fordham Law School for his 30 years on the Supreme Court, and President Ford wrote a letter stating his continued pride in appointing him.The Jurisprudence of Justice John Paul Stevens {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131112192207weblink |date=November 12, 2013 }}, Fordham Law School, April 9, 2010.Justice John Paul Stevens, 30 Years on the Supreme Court {{webarchive|url=https://www.webcitation.org/5tChtPias?url=http://law.fordham.edu/assets/Newsroom/FordhamLRev74_PresidentFordLetter.pdf.pdf |date=October 3, 2010 }}, President Ford, Fordham Law School, September 21, 2005.In a 2005 speech, Stevens stressed the importance of "learning on the job"; for example, during his tenure on the Court, Stevens changed his views on affirmative action (initially opposed), as well as on other issues.Justice Stevens Renounces Capital Punishment, April 18, 2008. President Ford praised Stevens in 2005: "He is serving his nation well, with dignity, intellect and without partisan political concerns."NEWS,weblink USA Today, Bush's words saddle Miers: 'She's not going to change', Tony, Mauro, October 9, 2005, May 7, 2010, Additionally, he participated actively in questioning during oral arguments.Charles Lane, "With Longevity on Court, Stevens' Center-Left Influence Has Grown", Washington Post, February 21, 2006. Stevens was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2008.WEB, Book of Members, 1780–2010: Chapter S,weblink American Academy of Arts and Sciences, April 6, 2011, File:John G. Roberts.jpg|thumb|250px|right|Stevens, right, swears in Chief Justice John RobertsJohn RobertsOn January 20, 2009, Stevens administered the oath of office to Vice President Joe Biden at Biden's request.NEWS,weblink In culminating moment, Biden is vice president, Feller, Ben, Associated Press, The Washington Post, January 20, 2009, January 30, 2009, {{Dead link|date=September 2010|bot=H3llBot}} It is customary for the vice president to be inaugurated by the person of his or her choice: Vice President Al Gore chose to be sworn in by Justice Byron White in 1993 and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 1997. Vice President Dick Cheney was sworn in by Chief Justice William Rehnquist in 2001 and U.S. House Speaker Dennis Hastert in 2005, while Vice President Mike Pence received the oath from Justice Clarence Thomas in 2017.On April 9, 2010, Stevens announced his intention to retire from the Court;Justice Stevens Retirement Letter to President Obama, April 9, 2010. he subsequently retired on June 29 of that year.United States Supreme Court Journal for October 2009 – June 2010 Term, June 28, 2010, entry. Stevens has said that his decision to retire from the Supreme Court was initially triggered when he stumbled on several sentences when delivering his oral dissent in the 2010 landmark case Citizens United v. FEC. Stevens said "I took that as a warning sign that maybe I've been around longer than I should."{{Citation|last=PBS NewsHour|title=How retired Justice Stevens would change the constitution|date=2014-04-21|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeNSDzdEE9I|accessdate=2017-04-03}}

Tenure and age

Stevens retired as the third-longest-serving justice in the history of the Supreme Court with 34 years and six months of service and just 3 days short of tying the tenure of the second-longest serving justice in history (Stephen Johnson Field, 1863-1897). The longest-serving is his immediate predecessor, Justice William O. Douglas, who served 36 and a half years. Stevens is also the second-oldest justice, aged 90 years and two months at retirement, in the Court's history behind Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. who retired at the age of 90 years and 10 months. On July 23, 2015, Stevens became the longest-lived retired justice, surpassing Stanley Forman Reed who died at age 95 years and 93 days.On June 26, 2015, Stevens attended the Court's announcement of the opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges,WEB, Liptak, Adam, Supreme Court Ruling Makes Same-Sex Marriage a Right Nationwide,weblink New York Times, June 27, 2015, June 25, 2015, Justice John Paul Stevens, who retired in 2010, was on hand for the decision, in which the Court narrowly ruled 5–4 that recognition of same-sex marriage is protected under the Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment.

Political affiliation

When he was appointed to the Supreme Court, Stevens was a registered Republican.Bryan A. Garner (ed.), Black's Law Dictionary (8th ed., West: St. Paul, Minnesota) p. 1792. Asked as a sitting Justice in September 2007 if he still considers himself a Republican, Stevens replied, "That's the kind of issue I shouldn't comment on, either in private or in public."NEWS, Rosen, Jeffrey, Jeffrey Rosen (academic), September 23, 2007, The Dissenter, Justice John Paul Stevens, The New York Times Magazine,weblink April 11, 2010, I asked whether he still considers himself a Republican. 'That's the kind of issue I shouldn't comment on, either in private or in public!' he said with a smile., 50, Abner Mikva, a close friend, said that as a judge, Stevens refused to discuss politics. "He was more particular about it than a lot of them," Mikva stated.In 2018, Stevens told a Boca Raton crowd that Brett Kavanaugh's performance during recent Senate hearings should disqualify him from the U.S. Supreme Court bench, citing the potential for political bias should he serve on the Supreme Court.NEWS, Reuters, Editorial, 2018-10-05, Kavanaugh does not belong on Supreme Court, retired Justice Stevens says,weblink Reuters, Kavanaugh was nominated by Republican president Donald Trump.WEB,weblink Trump nominates Brett Kavanaugh to Supreme Court, 2018-07-10, ABC News, en, 2018-10-04, Stevens is generally considered to be one of the last-surviving Rockefeller Republicans.{{cn|date=April 2019}}

Judicial philosophy

On the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, Stevens had a moderately conservative record. Early in his tenure on the Supreme Court, Stevens had a relatively moderate voting record. He voted to reinstate capital punishment in the United States and opposed race-based admissions programs such as the program at issue in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, {{ussc|438|265|1978}}. But on the more conservative Rehnquist Court, Stevens joined the more liberal Justices on issues such as abortion rights, gay rights and federalism. His Segal–Cover score, a measure of the perceived liberalism/conservatism of Court members when they joined the Court, places him squarely on the conservative side of the Court.WEB,weblink Perceived Qualifications and Ideology of Supreme Court Nominees, 1937-2012, Segal, Jeffrey A., 2012-04-04, However, a 2003 statistical analysis of Supreme Court voting patterns found Stevens the most liberal member of the Court.See, The Unidimensional Supreme Court, July 10, 2003.Lawrence Sirovich, "A Pattern Analysis of the Second Rehnquist Court", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 100 (June 24, 2003). President Ford expressed no regrets about Stevens' drift toward liberalism, writing in a 2005 letter to USA Today, "Justice Stevens has made me, and our fellow citizens, proud of my three decade old decision to appoint him to the Supreme Court."JOURNAL, Ford, Gerald, Gerald Ford, September 21, 2005, Letter from Gerald R. Ford, USA Today,weblink February 19, 2016, Stevens's jurisprudence has usually been characterized as idiosyncratic. Stevens, unlike most justices, usually wrote the first drafts of his opinions himself and reviewed petitions for certiorari within his chambers instead of having his law clerks participate as part of the cert pool. He was not an originalist (such as Antonin Scalia) nor a pragmatist (such as Judge Richard Posner), nor does he pronounce himself a cautious liberal (such as Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg). He was considered part of the liberal bloc of the Court starting in the mid-1980s, and was dubbed the "Chief Justice of the Liberal Supreme Court",Lawrence D. Jones, weblink Justice Stevens Mulls Supreme Court RetirementJOURNAL, Toobin, Jeffrey, Jeffrey Toobin, March 22, 2010, After Stevens. What will the Supreme Court be without its liberal leader?, The New Yorker,weblink March 31, 2010, though he publicly called himself a judicial conservative in 2007.WEB,weblink EXCLUSIVE: Supreme Court Justice Stevens Remembers President Ford, A. B. C., News, January 15, 2007, ABC News, NEWS,weblink The Dissenter, Rosen, Jeffrey, February 14, 2008, September 23, 2007, The Times Magazine, In 1985's Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, {{ussc|473|432|1985}}, Stevens argued against the Supreme Court's famous "strict scrutiny" doctrine for laws involving "suspect classifications", putting forth the view that all classifications should be evaluated on the basis of the "rational basis" test as to whether they could have been enacted by an "impartial legislature". In Burnham v. Superior Court of California, {{ussc|495|604|1990}}, Stevens demonstrated his independence with a characteristically pithy concurrence.Stevens was once an impassioned critic of affirmative action; in addition to the 1978 decision in Bakke, he dissented in the case of Fullilove v. Klutznick, {{ussc|448|448|1980}}, which upheld a minority set-aside program. He shifted his position over the years and voted to uphold the affirmative action program at the University of Michigan Law School challenged in 2003's Grutter v. Bollinger, {{ussc|539|306|2003}}.Stevens wrote the majority opinion in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld in 2006, in which he held that certain military commissions had been improperly constituted. He also wrote a lengthy dissenting opinion in Citizens United v. FEC, arguing the majority should not make a decision so broad that it would overturn precedents set in three previous Supreme Court cases.(File:US Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens - 1976 official portrait.jpg|thumb|upright|Stevens' official portrait from 1976)

Freedom of speech

Stevens's views on obscenity under the First Amendment changed over the years. He was initially quite critical of constitutional protection for obscenity, rejecting a challenge to Detroit zoning ordinances that barred adult theaters in designated areas in 1976's Young v. American Mini Theatres, {{ussc|427|50|1976}}, ("[E]ven though we recognize that the First Amendment will not tolerate the total suppression of erotic materials that have some arguably artistic value, it is manifest that society's interest in protecting this type of expression is of a wholly different, and lesser, magnitude than the interest in untrammeled political debate"), but later in his tenure adhered firmly to a libertarian free speech approach on obscenity issues, voting to strike down a federal law regulating online obscene content considered "harmful to minors" in 2002's ACLU v. Ashcroft, {{ussc|535|564|2002}}, which in a dissenting opinion Stevens argued that while "[a]s a parent, grandparent, and great-grandparent", he endorsed the legislative goal of protecting children from pornography "without reservation": "As a judge, I must confess to a growing sense of unease when the interest in protecting children from prurient materials is invoked as a justification for using criminal regulation of speech as a substitute for, or a simple backup to, adult oversight of children's viewing."WEB,weblink FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions., Findlaw, Perhaps the most personal and unusual feature of his jurisprudence was his continual referencing of World War II in his opinions. For example, Stevens, a World War II veteran, was visibly angered by William Kunstler's flippant defense of flag-burning in oral argument in 1989's Texas v. Johnson, {{ussc|491|397|1989}} and voted to uphold a prohibition on flag-burning against a First Amendment argument. Wrote Stevens, "The ideas of liberty and equality have been an irresistible force in motivating leaders like Patrick Henry, Susan B. Anthony, and Abraham Lincoln, schoolteachers like Nathan Hale and Booker T. Washington, the Philippine Scouts who fought at Bataan, and the soldiers who scaled the bluff at Omaha Beach. If those ideas are worth fighting for – and our history demonstrates that they are – it cannot be true that the flag that uniquely symbolizes their power is not itself worthy of protection from unnecessary desecration."Stevens generally supported students' right to free speech in public schools. He wrote sharply worded dissents in Bethel v. Fraser, {{ussc|478|675|1986}} and Morse v. Frederick, {{ussc|551|393|2007}}, two decisions that restricted students' freedom of speech. However, he joined the court's ruling on Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, {{ussc|484|260|1988}} that upheld a principal's censorship of a student newspaper.

Establishment Clause

In Wallace v. Jaffree, {{ussc|472|38|1985}}, striking down an Alabama statute mandating a minute of silence in public schools "for meditation or silent prayer", Stevens wrote the opinion for a majority that included Justices William Brennan, Thurgood Marshall, Harry Blackmun, and Lewis Powell. He affirmed that the Establishment Clause is binding on the States via the Fourteenth Amendment, and that: "Just as the right to speak and the right to refrain from speaking are complementary components of a broader concept of individual freedom of mind, so also the individual's freedom to choose his own creed is the counterpart of his right to refrain from accepting the creed of the majority. At one time, it was thought that this right merely proscribed the preference of one Christian sect over another, but would not require equal respect for the conscience of the infidel, the atheist, or the adherent of a non-Christian faith such as Islam or Judaism. But when the underlying principle has been examined in the crucible of litigation, the Court has unambiguously concluded that the individual freedom of conscience protected by the First Amendment embraces the right to select any religious faith or none at all."Stevens wrote a dissent in Van Orden v. Perry, {{ussc|545|677|2005}}, which was joined by Justice Ginsburg; he argued that the ten commandments displayed in the Texas Capitol grounds transmitted the message: "This State endorses the divine code of the 'Judeo-Christian' God." The Establishment Clause, he wrote, "at the very least ... has created a strong presumption against the display of religious symbols on public property", and that it "demands religious neutrality – Government may not exercise preference for one religious faith over another". This includes a prohibition against enacting laws or imposing requirements that aid all religions as against unbelievers, or aid religions that are based on a belief in the existence of God against those founded on different principles.

Commerce clause and states' rights

When interpreting the interstate commerce clause, Stevens consistently sided with the federal government. He dissented from United States v. Lopez, {{ussc|514|549|1995}} and United States v. Morrison, {{ussc|529|598|2000}}, two prominent cases in which the Rehnquist court changed direction by holding that Congress had exceeded its constitutional power under the commerce clause. He then authored Gonzales v. Raich, {{ussc|545|1|2005}}, which permits the federal government to arrest, prosecute, and imprison patients who use medical marijuana regardless of whether such use is legally permissible under state law.

Fourth Amendment

Stevens had a generally libertarian voting record on the Fourth Amendment, which deals with search and seizure. Stevens authored the majority opinion in Arizona v. Gant, which held that "police may search a vehicle incident to a recent occupant's arrest only if the arrestee is within reaching distance of the compartment at the time of the search or it is reasonable to believe the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest." He dissented in New Jersey v. T.L.O., {{ussc|469|325|1985}} and Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton, {{ussc|515|646|1995}}, both involving searches in schools. He was a dissenter in Oliver v. United States, {{ussc|466|170|1984}}, a case relating to the open fields doctrine. However, in United States v. Montoya De Hernandez, {{ussc|473|531|1985}}, he sided with the government, and he was the author of United States v. Ross, {{ussc|456|798|1982}}, which permits the police to search closed containers found in the course of searching a vehicle. He also authored the dissent in Kyllo v. United States, {{ussc|533|27|2001}}, which held that the use of thermal imaging requires a warrant.In a 2009 paper, Ward Farnsworth argued that Stevens's "dissents against type" (in Stevens's case, votes in dissent in favor of the government's position and against the accused, such as the one in Kyllo) suggest that while Stevens "[believed] strongly in laying out resources for the sake of accuracy and opportunities to protest an unfair trial, [he is] not nearly as concerned about restraining the government at the front end of the process, when it is gathering evidence – for the costs of invaded rights then are to liberty rather than to accuracy".WEB, Farnsworth, Ward, Ward Farnsworth, Dissents against type, 1282072, 2009, April 4, 2009,

Death penalty

Stevens joined the majority in Gregg v. Georgia, {{ussc|428|153|1976}}, which overruled Furman v. Georgia, {{ussc|408|238|1972}} and again allowed the use of the death penalty in the United States. In later cases such as Thompson v. Oklahoma, {{ussc|487|815|1988}} and Atkins v. Virginia, {{ussc|536|304|2002}}, Stevens held that the Constitution forbids the use of the death penalty in certain circumstances. Stevens opposed using the death penalty on juvenile offenders; he dissented in Stanford v. Kentucky, {{ussc|492|361|1989}} and joined the Court's majority in Roper v. Simmons, {{ussc|543|551|2005}}, overturning Stanford. In Baze v. Rees, {{ussc|553|35|2008}}, Stevens voted with the majority in upholding Kentucky's method of lethal injection because he felt bound by stare decisis. However, he opined that "state-sanctioned killing is ... becoming more and more anachronistic" and agreed with former Justice Byron White's assertion that "the needless extinction of life with only marginal contributions to any discernible social or public purposes ... would be patently excessive" in violation of the Eighth Amendment (quoting from White's concurrence in Furman).Greenhouse, Linda (April 17, 2008), "Justices Uphold Lethal Injection in Kentucky Case", The New York Times, retrieved April 12, 2010.Stevens's concurrence in Baze Soon after his vote in Baze, Stevens told a Sixth Circuit conference that one of the drugs (pancuronium bromide) in the three-drug cocktail used by Kentucky to execute death row inmates is prohibited in Kentucky for euthanizing animals. He questioned whether Kentucky Derby second-place finisher Eight Belles died more humanely than those on death row.Slater, Dan (May 12, 2008), "Eight Belle’s Euthanasia: More Humane Than Capital Punishment?", The Wall Street Journal, Associated Press, retrieved April 12, 2010. He explained that his death penalty decisions were influenced, in part, by an increasing awareness through DNA testing of the fallibility of death sentences, and the fact that death-qualified juries come with a set of biases.Weiss, Debra Cassens (May 7, 2010)."Stevens Explains Death Penalty Stance, Bow Ties" {{webarchive|url=https://archive.is/20130116102722weblink |date=January 16, 2013 }}. ABA Journal. Stevens, at the time of his opinion in Baze, was one of four Justices (the others being Brennan, Marshall and Blackmun) who had concluded that post-Gregg capital punishment is unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment.Associated Press (April 6, 2008), Stevens declares opposition to death penalty. MSNBC. After his retirement, Stevens stated that his vote in Gregg was the only vote he regretted.NEWS,weblink Justice Stevens: An Open Mind On A Changed Court, Totenberg, Nina, Nina Totenberg, NPR, October 4, 2010, August 4, 2011,weblink August 4, 2011, no,

Other significant opinions

Chevron

Stevens authored the majority opinion in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., {{ussc|467|837|1984}}.Breyer, Stewart, Sunstein & Vermeule, Administrative Law & Regulatory Policy, p. 247. The opinion stands for how courts review administrative agencies' interpretations of their organic statutes. If the organic statute unambiguously expresses the will of Congress, the court enforces the legislature's intent. If the statute is unclear (and is thus thought to reflect a Congressional delegation of power to the agency to interpret the statute), and the agency interpretation has the force of law, courts defer to an agency's interpretation of the statute unless that interpretation is deemed to be "arbitrary, capricious, or manifestly contrary to the statute". This doctrine is now generally referred to as "Chevron deference" among legal practitioners.JOURNAL,weblink Who Says It's a Crime?: Chevron Deference to Agency Interpretations of Regulatory Statutes That Create Criminal Liability, Sanford N., Greenberg, February 26, 1996, University of Pittsburgh Law Review, 58, Unlike some other members of the court, Stevens was consistently willing to find organic statutes unambiguous and thus overturn agency interpretations of those statutes. (See his majority opinion in Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-Fonseca, {{ussc|480|421|1987}}, and his dissent in Young v. Community Nutrition Institute, {{ussc|476|974|1986}}.) Although Chevron has come to stand for the proposition of deference to agency interpretations, Stevens, the author of the opinion, was less willing to defer to agencies than the rest of his colleagues on the Court.

Crawford v. Marion County Election Board

Stevens wrote the lead opinion in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, a case where the Court upheld the right of states to require an official photo identification card to help ensure that only citizens vote. Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kennedy joined this opinion, and Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito agreed with them on the outcome. Edward B. Foley, an election law expert at Ohio State University, said the Stevens opinion might represent an effort to "depoliticize election law cases".Greenhouse, Linda."In a 6-to-3 Vote, Justices Uphold a Voter ID Law", New York Times, April 29, 2008. Stevens's vote in Crawford and his agreement with the Court's conservative majority in two other cases during the 2007–2008 term (Medellin v. Texas, {{ussc|552|491|2008}} and Baze v. Rees) has led University of Oklahoma law professor and former Stevens clerk Joseph Thai to wonder if Stevens is "tacking back a little bit toward the center".

Bush v. Gore

In Bush v. Gore, {{ussc|531|98|2000}}, Stevens wrote a scathing dissent on the Court's ruling to stay the recount of votes in Florida during the 2000 presidential election. He believed that the holding displayed "an unstated lack of confidence in the impartiality and capacity of the state judges who would make the critical decisions if the vote count were to proceed". He continued, "The endorsement of that position by the majority of this Court can only lend credence to the most cynical appraisal of the work of judges throughout the land. It is confidence in the men and women who administer the judicial system that is the true backbone of the rule of law. Time will one day heal the wound to that confidence that will be inflicted by today's decision. One thing, however, is certain. Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year's Presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation's confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law."

Second Amendment

Stevens wrote the primary dissenting opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller {{ussc|554|570|2008}}, a landmark case that amended the interpretation of the Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms. DC v. Heller struck down provisions of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 and held that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Justice Stevens' dissent was joined by Justices David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer; the majority opinion was written by Justice Antonin Scalia.Stevens stated that the court's judgment was "a strained and unpersuasive reading" which overturned longstanding precedent, and that the court had "bestowed a dramatic upheaval in the law".NEWS, Linda, Greenhouse, Linda Greenhouse, Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights,weblink The New York Times, June 27, 2008, March 27, 2018, Stevens also stated that the amendment was notable for the "omission of any statement of purpose related to the right to use firearms for hunting or personal self-defense" which was present in the Declarations of Rights of Pennsylvania and Vermont. The Stevens dissent seems to rest on four main points of disagreement: that the Founders would have made the individual right aspect of the Second Amendment express if that was what was intended; that the "militia" preamble and exact phrase "to keep and bear arms" demands the conclusion that the Second Amendment touches on state militia service only; that many lower courts' later "collective-right" reading of the Miller decision constitutes , which may only be overturned at great peril; and that the Court has not considered gun-control laws (e.g., the National Firearms Act) unconstitutional. The dissent concludes, "The Court would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons. ... I could not possibly conclude that the Framers made such a choice."On March 27, 2018, days after the March for Our Lives demonstrations in the wake of the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting, described by many media outlets as a possible tipping point for gun control legislation,NEWS,weblink 'We will be the last mass shooting': Florida students want to be tipping point in gun debate, Miller, Sarah, February 17, 2018, USA Today, March 26, 2018, NEWS,weblink The Fearless, Outraged Young Protesters at the March for Our Lives in Washington, D.C., Petrusich, Amanda, Peterson, Mark, March 24, 2018, The New Yorker, March 26, 2018, WEB,weblink Teachers Are Fighting for Gun Control After Parkland, Reilly, Katie, February 21, 2018, Time (magazine), Time, March 26, 2018, Stevens wrote an essay for The New York Times, stating that the demonstrators should be demanding the outright repeal of the Second Amendment:NEWS,weblink John Paul Stevens: Repeal the Second Amendment, Stevens, John Paul, The New York Times, March 27, 2018, March 27, 2018,

Books

In 2011, Stevens published a memoir entitled Five Chiefs: A Supreme Court Memoir, which detailed his legal career during the tenure of five of the Supreme Court's Chief Justices. In Five Chiefs, Stevens recounts his time as a law clerk during the tenure of Chief Justice Vinson; his experiences as a private attorney during the Warren era; and his experience while serving as an Associate Justice on the Burger, Rehnquist, and Roberts courts.John Paul Stevens, Five Chiefs: A Supreme Court Memoir (2011); Nina Totenberg, Stevens Chronicles 'Five Chiefs' Of The Supreme Court,
NPR, October 4, 2011.
In 2014, Stevens published Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution, where he proposed that six amendments should be added to the U.S. Constitution to address political gerrymandering, anti-commandeering, campaign finance reform, capital punishment, gun violence, and sovereign immunity.John Paul Stevens, Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution (2014); Cass R. Sunstein, The Refounding Father, N.Y. Rev. of Books, June 5, 2014.

Personal life

Stevens is a Protestant, and upon his retirement the Supreme Court had no Protestant members for the first time in its history.NEWS,weblink Justice Stevens, the Only Protestant on the Supreme Court, Liptak, Adam, 2010-04-10, The New York Times, 2017-11-10, en-US, 0362-4331, Nina Totenberg, "Supreme Court May Soon Lack Protestant Justices," NPR, Heard on Morning Edition, April 7, 2010, found at NPR website and transcript found at NPR website. Cited by Sarah Pulliam Bailey, "The Post-Protestant Supreme Court: Christians weigh in on whether it matters that the high court will likely lack Protestant representation," Christianity Today, April 10, 2010, found at Christianity Today website. Also cited by "Does the U.S. Supreme Court need another Protestant?" USA Today, April 9, 2010, found at USA Today website. All accessed April 10, 2010.Richard W. Garnett, "The Minority Court", The Wall Street Journal (April 17, 2010), W3. He is one of only two Supreme Court Justices to have been divorced while in office{{emdash}}the first was William O. Douglas.NEWS,weblink Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens Retiring, 2018-08-21, en,

In popular culture

Stevens was portrayed by the actor William Schallert in the film Recount. He was portrayed by David Grant Wright in two episodes of Boston Legal in which Alan Shore and Denny Crane appear before the Supreme Court.Stevens, his head at least, appears in Futurama S5 Episode 4, "A Taste of Freedom". He is brought out with other Supreme Court Justices during the case, Earth v. Zoidberg.According to an April 2009 article in the Wall Street Journal, Stevens "rendered an opinion on who wrote Shakespeare's plays," proclaiming himself an Oxfordian." That is, he believes the works ascribed to William Shakespeare actually were written by Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford.NEWS,weblink Justice Stevens Renders an Opinion on Who Wrote Shakespeare's Plays, Bravin, Jess, Wall Street Journal, April 18, 2009, As a result, he was appointed Oxfordian of the Year by the Shakespeare Oxford Society.{{Citation |url=http://shakespeareoxfordsociety.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/oxfordian-of-the-year-award-presented-to-justice-stevens/ |title=Oxfordian of the Year award presented to Justice Stevens |work=Shakespeare Oxford Society |date=November 24, 2009}} According to the article, Justices Scalia and Blackmun shared Stevens's belief.Stevens appeared in interviews in two episodes of Ken Burns's 2011 PBS documentary miniseries Prohibition, recalling his childhood in Chicago in the 1920s and 30s.WEB, Prohibition (2011),weblink Internet Movie Database, March 22, 2014, EPISODE, A Nation of Scofflaws, Prohibition, Prohibition (miniseries), Ken, Burns, PBS, October 3, 2011, EPISODE, A Nation of Hypocrites, Prohibition, Prohibition (miniseries), Ken, Burns, PBS, October 4, 2011, Stevens was at Wrigley Field for the 1932 World Series game at which Babe Ruth hit his "called shot" home run.Tom Verducci, "Timeless," Sports Illustrated, November 7, 2016, p. 36. He also attended Game 4 of the 2016 World Series, wearing a red bowtie with a Chicago Cubs jacket.WEB,weblink Justice John Paul Stevens at World Series game, MLB.com,

See also

{{colbegin}} {{colend}}

References

{{Reflist}}

Further reading

  • {{citation |last=Abraham |first=Henry J. |title=Justices and Presidents: A Political History of Appointments to the Supreme Court |edition=3rd |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=1992 |location=New York |isbn=0-19-506557-3}}
  • {{citation |last=Barnhart|first=Bill |last2=Schlickman |first2=Gene |title=John Paul Stevens: An Independent Life |publisher=Northern Illinois University Press |year=2010 |location=DeKalb |isbn=978-0-87580-419-4 }}
  • {{citation |last=Cushman |first=Clare |title=The Supreme Court Justices: Illustrated Biographies, 1789–1995 |edition=2nd |publisher=(Supreme Court Historical Society, Congressional Quarterly Books) |year=2001 |isbn=1-56802-126-7}}
  • {{citation |last=Frank |first=John P. |editor-last=Friedman |editor-first=Leon |editor2-last=Israel |editor2-first=Fred L. |title=The Justices of the United States Supreme Court: Their Lives and Major Opinions |publisher=Chelsea House Publishers |year=1995 |isbn=0-7910-1377-4}}
  • {{citation |editor-last=Hall |editor-first=Kermit L. |title=The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=1992 |location=New York |isbn=0-19-505835-6}}
  • {{citation |title=Illinois Justice: The Scandal of 1969 and the Rise of John Paul Stevens |first=Kenneth A. |last=Manaster |publisher=University of Chicago Press |location=Chicago |year=2001 |isbn=0-226-50243-0}}
  • {{citation |last=Martin |first=Fenton S. |author2=Goehlert, Robert U. |title=The U.S. Supreme Court: A Bibliography |publisher=Congressional Quarterly Books |year=1990 |location=Washington, D.C. |isbn=0-87187-554-3}}
  • BOOK, Five Chiefs, Stevens, John Paul, 2011, Little, Brown and Company, 978-0-316-19980-3,
  • BOOK, Six Amendments, Stevens, John Paul, 2014, Little, Brown and Company, 978-0-316-37372-2,
  • {{citation |last=Urofsky |first=Melvin I. |title=The Supreme Court Justices: A Biographical Dictionary |publisher=Garland Publishing |year=1994 |location=New York |isbn=0-8153-1176-1}}

External links

{{Wikisource author}} |years=1970–1975}}|years=1975–2010}}}}''|years=}}{{US Order of Precedence}}{{johnpaulstevensopinions}}{{SCOTUS Justices}}{{U.S. Supreme Court composition court lifespan|cj=Warren E. Burger|years=1969–1986}}{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1975–1981}}{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1981–1986}}{{U.S. Supreme Court composition CJ|CJ=Rehnquist}}{{U.S. Supreme Court composition court lifespan|cj=William Rehnquist|years=1986–2005}}{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1986–1987}}{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1988–1990}}{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1990–1991}}{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1991–1993}}{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1993–1994}}{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 1994–2005}}{{U.S. Supreme Court composition CJ|CJ=Roberts}}{{U.S. Supreme Court composition court lifespan|cj=John Roberts|years=2005–present}}{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 2005–2006}}{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 2006–2009}}{{U.S. Supreme Court composition 2009–2010}}{{Authority control}}

- content above as imported from Wikipedia
- "John Paul Stevens" does not exist on GetWiki (yet)
- time: 9:08pm EDT - Fri, May 24 2019
[ this remote article is provided by Wikipedia ]
LATEST EDITS [ see all ]
GETWIKI 09 MAY 2016
GETWIKI 18 OCT 2015
M.R.M. Parrott
Biographies
GETWIKI 20 AUG 2014
GETWIKI 19 AUG 2014
GETWIKI 18 AUG 2014
Wikinfo
Culture
CONNECT