Litigation

JAS: Justice Stevens ?One of Best Friends America?s Courts Ever Had?

By Charlie Hall

Bert Brandenburg, executive director of Justice at Stake, has issued the following statement on Justice John Paul Stevens’ retirement, as well as a biography of his life in the courts. A running summary of media reports, including speculation on the new Supreme Court vacancy, is in a separate Gavel Grab post below.

Statement on Justice John Paul Stevens

Among his many accomplishments, Justice John Paul Stevens was one of the best friends America?s courts ever had.  During his final decade, he stood up for the principle that all courts should be fair, impartial and free from special interests.

• This year, in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Court unleashed unlimited special-interest spending on federal and state elections.   In his dissent, he wrote, ?At a time when concerns about the conduct of judicial elections have reached a fever pitch ? the Court today unleashes the floodgates of corporate and union general treasury spending in these races.?
• In 2009, in Caperton v. Massey, Justice Stevens voted in the majority to ensure that judges must step aside in certain cases involving their campaign supporters.  At oral argument, he led questioning that helped produce a majority vote to insulate courts from special interest money.Citing $3 million spent by Don Blankenship, CEO of Massey Energy Co., to elect a West Virginia supreme court justice, Justice Stevens said: ?We have never confronted a case as extreme as this before. This fits the standard that Potter Stewart articulated [about obscenity] when he said, ?I know it when I see it.? ?Led in part by Justice Stevens? passionate concerns, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered the elected West Virginia justice to remove himself from a case involving Massey, in a landmark victory for fair, impartial courts.
• In 2002, in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, involving campaign speech by judicial election candidates, Justice Steven?s opinion captured the unique role of independent courts in our system of checks and balances:   ?There is a critical difference between the work of the judge and the work of other public officials. In a democracy, issues of policy are properly decided by majority vote; it is the business of legislators and executives to be popular. But in litigation, issues of law or fact should not be determined by popular vote; it is the business of judges to be indifferent to unpopularity.

By standing up for fair courts, and promoting the American way of judicial independence that Chief Justice Rehnquist called ?one of the crown jewels of our system of government,? Justice Stevens help strengthen the country that he spent his career serving.

You can find a biography of Justice Stevens at the Justice at Stake fact sheets page.

Full post as published by The Gavel on April 09, 2010 (boomark / email).