Justice Stevens to retire (no surprise here)

Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens has announced he will be retiring. This really comes as no surprise. CNN tried to paint Stevens as a moderate. But let’s face it, there is a really easy litmus test, if they retire under a conservative – they’re a conservative and if they retire under a liberal, they’re a liberal.

So what does this mean for the gun rights community?

It does not really change the status quo or balance of the court. There is a slight chance it could weaken the left. Stevens wrote many dissents, and was often the leadership end of the left. If Stevens is replaced before McDonald is heard, we’d have a SCOTUS line-up featuring two new and rather young liberals. One of which does not strike me as all that bright (Sotomayor). Facing much more experienced and stronger individuals.

That said, one item about this greatly disturbs me. The mention of the possibility of appointing Janet Napolotino to the Supreme Court. Yes, the former governor of Arizona who is now head of Homeland Security. Yes, the one who pretty much declared conservatives and liberals a threat to security – and who is very anti-gun.

I am not too concerned at this point. Because I think there would be far too many objections for her to be viable. But if such proves to be a serious consideration, I will be sure to raise a ruckus. This is one woman who I deem to be an extremely dangerous threat to liberty.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/09/stevens.biography/index.html?hpt=T2

Advertisements
Published in: on April 10, 2010 at 5:56 am  Comments (4)  
Tags: , ,

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://nugun.wordpress.com/2010/04/10/justice-stevens-to-retire-no-surprise-here/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

4 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. Oh, man, are you ever right on Napolitano! God save us from that one. How about Eric Holder?

  2. “If Stevens is replaced before McDonald is heard”

    Er, wasn’t McDonald already heard last month? I’m pretty sure that any new Justice who comes in before it’s decided wouldn’t be able to participate in the decision.

  3. The opening arguments were made for McDonald. I am not sure with regards to SCOTUS policy on a case. What happens if a justice who is sitting on a case retires or dies. Does their replacement sit in their stead? Or does the case go on with one judge short – I do not know.

    The actual case hasn’t been argued. I believe that what was done was just to determine whether SCOTUS would hear and try the case.

  4. “The actual case hasn’t been argued. I believe that what was done was just to determine whether SCOTUS would hear and try the case.”

    Nope, that was the actual argument. All that’s left is the decision, which (like Heller was) is generally expected to be one of the last ones issued this term – sometime in June, I believe.

    Certorari (the decision to hear the case) was granted back in September, and briefs were filed in November, December, and January. Oral arguments are the last step before the Court actually makes the decision.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: