Crossroads
January 21, 2010 12:40 PM

Justice Stevens Stumbles: A Step To Retirement?

By
Jan Crawford
Topics
Crossroads
(GETTY IMAGES/Mark Wilson)
Justice John Paul Stevens has left some clues he's planning to retire this year, shortly after he turns 90 years old. He's only hired one law clerk for next term, for example, and not the four that sitting justices typically hire every year.

But Stevens is unpredictable, and he's seemed as sharp as ever from the bench, so I thought maybe, just maybe, he would pull something out of his sleeve at the last minute and stick around for awhile.

Until today.

Stevens spent a good 20 minutes this morning reading a summary of his scathing dissent in the campaign finance case. And he showed his age.

The language in his written dissent was forceful. But it was striking to see him appear to stumble over words as he read it, to mispronounce words like "corruption" and "allegation," to seem to lose his place in his summary, to often hit the microphone with his hand or his papers.

Maybe it was just a bad day, and Lord knows we've all had those. And certainly it was the longest summary from the bench in some time. But it was so different from the John Paul Stevens we've come to know. He's the maverick justice who asks pointed questions from the bench and cleverly makes his points, sometimes with sly dry humor.

Today, he was different, and almost felt like relief when he finally got through his summary.

High Court Eases Campaign Spending Limits
Supreme Court Ruling Will Cause Major Upheaval in Campaigns
Obama Hammers Supreme Court Ruling

Add a Comment See all 38 Comments
by edarrell January 24, 2010 12:34 PM EST
At 89, stumbling, Stevens demonstrates more sense than 5 members of the Court at least.

Pretty bad when we worry about the health of Justice Stevens, but he's right on the issues. How about the five who voted against his opinion be forced to retire, too?
Reply to this comment
by sdh26234 January 24, 2010 7:49 AM EST
It is absolutely scandalous to have this old people on that court or far that matter in any court, until they really do not know what it is all about. Should they not be checked out thorougly from time to time by specialits, to find out if they are still mentally and physically in good condition and health? Come on folks, it is high time for so called Conservatives to push for a law that demands that regular examination of this creatures? Yes a law, unless they themselves soon take the initiative and demand it from each other. On the other hand, lets forever bury that idiocy of conservative versus liberal in our courts. Yes, Mr. President do you hear me? While I had no use for justice Souter, however I salute him for getting out that soon. I think the Founding Fathers are demanding that of this United States of America, from their very graves, right? And while I am at this issue, let me also strongly state that our present United States Congress, is actually a defacto dictatorship, for the fact that we now have professional politicians who some of them die in office. This is also something that the Founding Fathers are demanding from the politicians in the US Congress, to only stay a few years and than get the hell out; this is the best medicine to clean out that messy place indeed, that more and more resembles that of a pig pen. I am using that illustration as a former farmer boy and also, because the word pork is often spoken in that pen. I rest my case hoping that my comment my put some fire under Americans in general, and demand what they really deserve under the Contitution of this United States of America, nothing less, nothing more! Otherwise America will remain on the road to hell, like all previous Empires. "Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There never was a democracy that did not commit suicide". John Adams letter to John Taylor 15 April, 1814. I suggest that these words were just a forwarming, so that future Americans would be careful in its dealings in general, at home and abroad, to avoid the perils of previous Empires.
Reply to this comment
by redwilma January 24, 2010 12:32 AM EST
I love Justice Stevens and I really hate this article.
Reply to this comment
by erb0087 January 23, 2010 10:13 PM EST
Didn't Chief Justice John Roberts stumble and appear confused when he administered the Oath of Office to Barack Obama ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ve_R7BKIwU

If Justice Sevens had done that...
Reply to this comment
by FauxNews January 28, 2010 8:57 PM EST
Great comeback on this article erb.
by jeannettelj January 23, 2010 3:43 PM EST
We don't need any more Republican nominees to the Supreme Court. Of course, no matter WHO Obama nominates, if it comes to that, the Republicans will be against them. All they care about is who can give them the most bang for their buck!!
Reply to this comment
by jackp32 January 23, 2010 9:43 AM EST
Stevens has been over the hill for quite sometime. He needs to be removed from his position ASAP.
Reply to this comment
by MarkTheGreat January 22, 2010 12:51 PM EST
If a corporation doesn't have free speech rights, then how does the ACLU have free speech rights. After all, neither one is an individual. They are both groups of individuals.

Do you really want to let govt decide who gets free speech rights and who doesn't?
Reply to this comment
by engineer1503 January 23, 2010 2:27 PM EST
Corporations are not people. We had these laws because 100 years ago Morgan, Fink, Carnegie, Durant, Dupont, Rockerfeller, and others silently and blatently bought political offices.

Should J. Immelt decide tomorrow to back a Senator or 50 senators he has the full resources of GE to do his bidding and TV advertising. He could simply buy all the advertising (TV and Internet) and crowd out all opposing views, we would never know the difference.
by Roundup_Logan January 22, 2010 7:26 AM EST
Free speech is free speech - it is a protected right under our constitution. John Adams passed a law which hammered free speech and it didn't work out so swell for his administration. Everyone should read up on that one. This ruling from the Supreme Court is right on mark. What businesses fund with their own money is their own business. Supporting a political candidate and buying airtime from a tv or radio station to do so is not illegal in this country. If you do your own homework on each candidate, you'll know the truth anyway. The lesson is, don't let advertisers sway your emotions. Always seeks the truth.
Reply to this comment
by democracy1 January 22, 2010 8:40 AM EST
I am entirely in favor of defending Americans' free speech, but corporations are not people. They are not citizens. They do not have a right to vote and they can not be given unlimited power to influence elections.

How people can decry the influence of lobbyists and yet be in favor of this flies in the face of common sense.

I also foresee the possibility that corporations will not be held to the same level regarding libel and slander, since they have more than enough money to fight almost any lawsuit that comes their way, particularly if they are falsely attacking candidates with smaller warchests (i.e., the average citizen who wants to run for office to make a difference). Have we now virtually guaranteed that the only candidates that have a fighting chance are those who already have huge bank accounts of their own? The little guy cannot win against these behemoths.
by justsane-2009 January 23, 2010 1:03 PM EST
so you don't have any problem with foreign-owned corporations buying american elections?
by starleo146 January 21, 2010 7:58 PM EST
Tell me why should a ordinary citizen go vote anymore ? Democracy was removed and destroyed in the United States today after those corporate judges voted for cooperate money to enter the campaign as much and as long as they want. If anyone goes and votes after this ruling they are kidding themselves. Who sticks like glue with Big business sure are not the democrats so my country is not the way it should be anymore and we should vote all incumbents out republican and democrats or do not vote at all.
Reply to this comment
by Jacamina January 21, 2010 10:53 PM EST
This is good news for Conservatives, because Liberals were and still trying to overturn the SCOTUS' decision. This is a very GOOD day in America!
by MarkTheGreat January 22, 2010 12:57 PM EST
Big business doesn't stick with Democrats? That must explain why BigPharma and BigInsurance was fighting Obama tooth and nail to stop health care reform. Oh wait, they were both on the inside, helping to write the bill.
by FauxNews January 21, 2010 7:29 PM EST
He was upset over the decision which let Corporate America take over our elections. Now, Corporate America will start reporting every stutter, stumble, and sick day in order to push him out. I wonder, how many millions there are now budgeting to stack the Supreme Court in order to get rid of all those pesky environmental and consumer laws that cost them money?
Reply to this comment
by starleo146 January 21, 2010 8:02 PM EST
I see so many bad things this ruling will do it just makes me sick that judges have this right to overthrow elections as they wish not as the public wishes. we have no voice now or ever unless this is changed in some way
by MarkTheGreat January 22, 2010 12:58 PM EST
"Now, Corporate America will start reporting every stutter, stumble, and sick day in order to push him out."

Like they did with Bush?
See all 38 Comments
.

Follow Crossroads

Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook
  • Building You a Better Morning

  • CBS This Morning

    "CBS This Morning," anchored by Charlie Rose, Gayle King and Erica Hill, airs weekdays from 7 to 9 a.m. ET and at the same time in other time zones.
    Learn more...