p>Don’t let anyone tell you the court isn’t conservative enough. Stevens is characterized as the left side of the court, but he was once the center:
<
p>
…this old article by Cass Sunstein — who now works for the Obama — does a good job putting Stevens’ role in perspective.
In 1980, when I clerked at the Court, the justices were, roughly from left to right, Brennan, Thurgood Marshall, Harry Blackmun, Byron White, John Paul Stevens, Lewis Powell, Potter Stewart, Warren Burger, and William Rehnquist. Believe it or not, this Court was widely thought to be conservative. But think, just for a moment, about how much would have to change in order for the Court of 2007 to look like the supposedly conservative Court of 1980.
First we would have to chop off the Court’s right wing, removing Scalia and Thomas and replacing them with Marshall and Brennan. …
…
Here is another way to demonstrate the point. In 1980 Stevens often operated as the Court’s median member; in many cases he (along with Powell) was the Justice Kennedy of that era. But Stevens is frequently described as the most liberal member of the current Court. If he qualifies for that position, it is not because of any significant change in his own approach, but because of a massive shift in the Court’s center of gravity.
principally that I would definitely classify White to the right of Stevens. and I think most other observers would as well. I suspect Sunstein took a little poetic license in order to conveniently place Stevens at the exact center of the 1980 court. Nice rhetorical device, but inaccurate IMHO.
<
p>Nonetheless, he’s certainly correct that the Court is far more conservative now than it was in 1980. What he misses is the larger point that the very meaning of “conservative” as a political concept has changed dramatically since then. So, yes, the Court has moved far to the right; that is obvious. The more interesting question is whether the Court has moved more than, less than, or about the same as, the Republican party’s center of gravity.
jconwaysays
I would argue that Powell, Berger, and Stewart would be considerably left of Scalito-Thomas, and even left of Kennedy in some cases. Furthermore O’Connor who was widely lauded as a moderate when she left the Court, due to her liberal views on some social issues, was widely considered a Goldwater conservative back when she was appointed. Teddy Kennedy even considered having a fight over her, but relented because she was a woman and that would have opened up multiple cans of worms. Ginsberg whose nomination was killed over a scandal most would consider trivial nowadays, was also a dye in the wool libertarian and likely would have kept the courts precedents on civil liberties.
<
p>Reagan used to be pro-choice and pro-gay rights during his tenure as Governor of CA (he supported removing anti-sodomy laws and abortion rights for medical reasons-socially liberal positions in the 1960s). Many of his appointments came from the libertarian wing of conservatism and not the traditionalist wing. Stevens was a typical Rockefeller Republican appointed by a Rockefeller Republican. The fact that this what amounts to liberalism these days is quite telling. Marshall was probably the last authentic liberal on the court. So again here is hoping President Obama, rather than taking the politically safe path like he did replacing Souter, a tame moderate liberal with another, replaces Stevens with a pick that can move the court in a more progressive direction. This is especially true with the Citizens United ruling which could create the biggest battle b/t a CJ and a POTUS since FDR.
Patrick for Supreme Court Justice?
See GregR’s post for some previous discussion on this topic.
… Stevens.
<
p>Don’t let anyone tell you the court isn’t conservative enough. Stevens is characterized as the left side of the court, but he was once the center:
<
p>
He would be a real fiscal concervative on the court. Considering he cant spend any money
principally that I would definitely classify White to the right of Stevens. and I think most other observers would as well. I suspect Sunstein took a little poetic license in order to conveniently place Stevens at the exact center of the 1980 court. Nice rhetorical device, but inaccurate IMHO.
<
p>Nonetheless, he’s certainly correct that the Court is far more conservative now than it was in 1980. What he misses is the larger point that the very meaning of “conservative” as a political concept has changed dramatically since then. So, yes, the Court has moved far to the right; that is obvious. The more interesting question is whether the Court has moved more than, less than, or about the same as, the Republican party’s center of gravity.
I would argue that Powell, Berger, and Stewart would be considerably left of Scalito-Thomas, and even left of Kennedy in some cases. Furthermore O’Connor who was widely lauded as a moderate when she left the Court, due to her liberal views on some social issues, was widely considered a Goldwater conservative back when she was appointed. Teddy Kennedy even considered having a fight over her, but relented because she was a woman and that would have opened up multiple cans of worms. Ginsberg whose nomination was killed over a scandal most would consider trivial nowadays, was also a dye in the wool libertarian and likely would have kept the courts precedents on civil liberties.
<
p>Reagan used to be pro-choice and pro-gay rights during his tenure as Governor of CA (he supported removing anti-sodomy laws and abortion rights for medical reasons-socially liberal positions in the 1960s). Many of his appointments came from the libertarian wing of conservatism and not the traditionalist wing. Stevens was a typical Rockefeller Republican appointed by a Rockefeller Republican. The fact that this what amounts to liberalism these days is quite telling. Marshall was probably the last authentic liberal on the court. So again here is hoping President Obama, rather than taking the politically safe path like he did replacing Souter, a tame moderate liberal with another, replaces Stevens with a pick that can move the court in a more progressive direction. This is especially true with the Citizens United ruling which could create the biggest battle b/t a CJ and a POTUS since FDR.