Judiciary Committee Chair Patrick Leahy released this statement in resposne to Justice John Paul Stevens' official retirement announcement:
When the Supreme Court recesses on Justice Stevens’ final day on the bench, it will mark the end of an extraordinary judicial career spanning four decades, including 35 years on our highest court.
The last Justice from "the Greatest Generation," John Paul Stevens first answered the call to service when he joined the Navy during World War II. Our nation called on him again years later, and he returned to public service as an appellate judge before accepting President Ford’s nomination to serve on the Supreme Court. He has since become one of the longest serving Justices on the Court. His confirmation was the first of a dozen Supreme Court nominations I have considered in my years in the Senate. As a young, freshman senator, it was a privilege to support his confirmation in 1975.
Justice Stevens’ unique and enduring perspective is irreplaceable; his stalwart adherence to the rule of law is unparalleled. The federal judiciary, and indeed the entire nation, will miss his principled jurisprudence. While it is with a heavy heart, I wish him the best in his retirement.
As we move forward with preparations for the second Supreme Court nomination of this Congress, I am reminded of the Vermont marble inscribed above the entrance of the Supreme Court which pledges "Equal Justice Under Law." I hope that Senators on both sides of the aisle will make this process a thoughtful and civil discourse. I expect President Obama to continue his practice of consulting with members on both sides of the aisle as he considers this important nomination. The decisions of the Supreme Court are often made by only five individuals, but they impact the daily lives of each and every American. All Senators should strive to fulfill their constitutional duty of advise and consent, and give fair and thorough consideration to Justice Stevens’ successor.
Given the current attitude of Republican Senators, Leahy's desire for thoughtful and civil discourse seems unlikely, particularly if Obama chooses to follow tradition, and nominate a someone in the liberal mode of Stevens to fill his seat. Earlier in the week, TPM's Christina Bellatoni outlined some of the possibilities. Those include Solicitor General Elena Kagan, D.C. Circuit Appeals Court Judge Merrick Garland, seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Diane Wood, as well as Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, the former governor of Arizona. In addition, Governors Jennifer Granholm and Deval Patrick have been mentioned.
Tradition would dictate that Obama select a liberal nominee to keep the current court balance. But another administration watcher, Marc Ambinder, thinks that Obama is not looking for a fight on this nomination.
Ideally, he's looking for someone who can persuade swinger (uh, swing-ideological justice) Anthony Kennedy to change his mind on a set of issues, someone whose qualifications are beyond approach, who doesn't have a lingering paper trail of outrageous (i.e., conventionally liberal) viewpoints, and yet someone he trusts can subtly steer the court to the left. The complication here is that Stevens is the conscience of the court's liberal wing, and space he occupies now is not a space that any nominee simply fills. So growth capacity -- the potential to grow into a Stevens -- will factor in, too.
Politically, the White House wants to find an unimpeachable nominee who the American people quickly accept. Let Republicans make the noise they do and will -- which may excite their own base but won't really do much more than that -- and get the nominee confirmed quickly, and without and fuss. Kagan, Wood and Garland fit the bill.
It's unlikely that Senate Republicans will allow another nominee by without a bigger fight than they gave Sotomayor. As offensive as some of their attacks were, they were tempered by the fact that most of them recognized that alienating Latino Americans more than they already have would be politically insane. They've long since given notice that they'll declare war on any "overly ideological person," as reiterated by Jon Kyl this weekend, and Lamar Alexander today, when he was the first out of the blocks to suggest a filibuster.
"Justice Stevens has had a long and impressive career. I hope President Obama will nominate his successor from the middle and not from the fringe. His nominee will be fairly and respectfully considered. The question is not whether the president’s nominee is politically ‘on my side,’ but whether he or she is well-qualified and has a record of being impartial. In truly extraordinary cases, I reserve the prerogative to vote no on confirmation or even to vote to deny an up-or-down vote."
And here's something interesting to ponder. With Stevens' retirement, "it is entirely possible that there will be no Protestant justices on the Court, for the first time ever."