April 5th, 2010
04:02 PM ET
4 years ago

Names floated as Stevens weighs retirement

Justice John Paul Stevens is expected to announce by month's end whether he will retire.
Justice John Paul Stevens is expected to announce by month's end whether he will retire.

Washington (CNN) - Justice John Paul Stevens is expected to announce by month's end whether he will retire from the Supreme Court, sources close to him tell CNN. His departure after nearly 35 years on the bench would give President Obama another opportunity to shape the nation's highest court.

Stevens, who turns 90 on April 20, has told colleagues he wants to decide soon - for his own peace of mind - but also to give the White House time to select a replacement and for the Senate to confirm the nominee.

He was not on the bench for a brief public session Monday; the court will hold its next public session in two weeks.

Full story


Filed under: John Paul Stevens • Supreme Court
soundoff (35 Responses)
  1. No More Divided Government ... We Want Accountability After 8 Years ... That's Why Democrats Are In Power

    Here's the playbook to hold Congress for the Democrats.

    Select two highly qualified, young, liberals ... the 1st should be a woman, the 2nd a man. Present the 1st justice for confirmation. Layout the case and let the PARTY-OF-NO fight it.

    Meanwhile, advance Wall Street Reform, which the GOP will also fight. Pass this with an up or down vote. Voters will see that Democrats are the PARTY-OF- THE -PEOPLE.

    Come November, the public, even the "Tea Partiers" will seed that a vote for a Republican is a vote for GRIDLOCK.

    Because of their resistance to the Supreme Court Justice, the woman, they will alienate voters even more.

    This will preserve the Democratic majority in both houses and position the Democrats to re-elect the President in 2012 and increase their margins.

    IF THE DEMS don't get the job done, THEN fire them ... but give them a chance and then hold them accountable.

    April 5, 2010 05:14 pm at 5:14 pm |
  2. ib

    No doubt his replacement will be a far left looney tunes guy who cares nothing about the constitution if Obama is having to do anything with it. Obama is destroying the constitution; people wake up while there is still time.

    April 5, 2010 05:15 pm at 5:15 pm |
  3. leon levin

    Lets hope he can find another Stevens, so the Repugs can soak in their stew. Or maybe they would prefer a "Tea Partier". That would be right up the GOP's alley. Their losers anyway.

    April 5, 2010 05:16 pm at 5:16 pm |
  4. A. Smith, Oregon

    I strongly urge President Obama to select Elena Kagan to replace Justice Stevens.

    Elena Kagan, 48 - Few names have been floated as often as a potential Obama nominee as Kagan, the dean of the Harvard Law School - Obama's alma mater. Like Obama, she also taught at the University of Chicago. Kagan served in Clinton's White House as an associate counsel and domestic policy advisor. Clinton nominated her for a position on the prestigious U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, but Republicans stalled her approval. Kagan clerked for Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall.

    April 5, 2010 05:17 pm at 5:17 pm |
  5. Jo Jo

    Can someone please explain to me why our highest court system allows judges to practically die off before replacing them? Come on now, 90 years old? These guys are supposed to be making tough and life-changing decisions for our country and we allow them to be almost comatose? There needs to be a serious age cap. After a certain age, we all start losing memory (senior moments) but we think 90 year old judges are an exception? God help us!

    April 5, 2010 05:18 pm at 5:18 pm |
  6. frank

    Its time for a Progressive court. The GOP has ruined this country long enough. From the Bush election to the wire taps. To the illegal war.

    April 5, 2010 05:24 pm at 5:24 pm |
  7. Ron

    Sen. Jon Kyl, R-AZ, says, "I hope...he (Obama) does not nominate an overly ideological person." An overly ideological person to Republicans is anyone other than a died-in-the-wool right-wing conservative. They claimed Bush's two nominees were not ideological. They have turned out to be "activists" on the right. Yep, get ready. They will oppose anyone Obama appoints.

    April 5, 2010 05:28 pm at 5:28 pm |
  8. Albo58

    Just like the Souter-replacement, this President will nominate some far left judge of some ethic or sexual variety that will NOT be white or heterosexual to replace this far left judge...not a real surprise. Fortunately, we'll still have 5 competent members on the bench to define what is CONSTITUTIONAL and what is not!

    April 5, 2010 05:33 pm at 5:33 pm |
  9. a little sad

    Doug,lib jersey April 5th, 2010 4:34 pm ET

    "It will end up being an extremely evil person who is void of values, honesty, integrity, and decency, in other words a Democrat."

    **************

    You are a sad, sad, little man

    April 5, 2010 05:35 pm at 5:35 pm |
  10. BeverlyNC

    Thank goodness we have an intelligent President who will choose a nominee with common sense and concern for the law – rather than making court decisions based on their political party!

    The Republican justices are the idiots who just ruled corporations can give as much money to candidiates as they want with no accountablity. They are supposed to be protecting our Constitution and interpreting law for the best outcomes for the country. Instead these hacks have put our democracy in jeopardy by allowing corporations to buy elections.

    With the unqualified Roberts and Thomas and the nutjob Scalia, this is probably the worst Court of our lifetime.

    April 5, 2010 05:41 pm at 5:41 pm |
1 2