Stevens' was a brilliant man...his opinions weren't always ideologically pure, but he took his job seriously, and cared deeply about SCOTUS' impact on the nation. He can't be replaced.

The called shot was a great way to end an awesome interview

John Paul Stevens has to be the smartest justice in history

@emmarose4234

4 жыл бұрын

John Henderson, I know, right? He’s my favorite SCOTUS Justice. 💕

I respect all the justices. I profoundly disagree with the conservative wing of the court. But I do believe they're are genuine in their belief that they have a correct judicial philosophy.

I profoundly disagree with his views but I think his decisions were not politically motivated but based on what he believed was right and that you have to respect.

If Stevens' jurisprudence had been less idiosyncratic, more consistently liberal not only in policy outcomes but in process as well, he's be as celebrated a figure on the left as Scalia is the right. His idiosyncrasies were, however, always logical and often provocative. Consider his critique of levels of scrutiny; a fascinating, reasonable position rooted in both the Constitution and pragmatism, but divorced from the mainline liberal apparatus. Or his eloquent dissent in Fredericks, suggesting it's time for Americans to reconsider their drug laws. Great, great American.

Stevens dissenting 2008 opinion on the Court's decision to support the NRA's version of the second amendment is not cited often enough. It is surely one of the strongest arguments against this idiotic stance.

RIP.

I would love to live in a world where CBS didn't show a fuckn commercial for every video.

Un respetable ser Humano , hombres de este tipo es imposible de encontrar en el Sur del Bronx , May, 09/2016

And there it is. No worries - Franklin and Jefferson and Hamilton and Madison prepared us for this centuries ago.

@david030491 Agreed.

10:17 which mistake do I want to emphasize; you decide...? Citizens United was One. Considering the courts are in Disreputé an investigation of all mistakes of all judiciary's is in order. Suspending juris review? Suspended habeas corpus? Suspended jurisdiction rights? Over reach upon good governance? Over reach upon bad governance or rather lack thereof? Private purses steering the course and direction of the public purse has a lot more to do with silencing free speech than supporting it!? Liberty from tyrannical governments and tyrannical judiciary's means what again? Spilling of blood of tyrants to refresh the constitution from time to time? Renewing of rights and privileges for the innocent and not guilty? Who ripped the blindfold off of the lady of Liberty who holds the scales and balances the law?

Justice Stevens wrote many things, and does not fit easily on any simple ideological spectrum. He did make an apt remark about the Court itself: "Since 1970, every departing Supreme Court justice has been succeeded by someone well to the Right of that Justice., including myself." It appeared that the death of Scalia might break that streak, but no- it continues and I am sure Justice Kennedy's successor will be well to the Right of him. And that may be the most important thing that has happened to the court over the last 50 years. The "Liberals" of 2010 would have been the "Conservatives of 1970, in many ways.

@WMHJrDOL Each county has its own recount procedures, a fact which predated the 2000 election and which was never challenged in court before. Therefore, claiming discrepancies in procedutes caused "irreperable harm" was disengenuous and without merit. Differences in the standards for counting the ballots in which more than one hole was punched or partially punched could have been standardized. If this country really cared about democracy every vote in Florida would have been recounted.

@AngryLittleBirds I wouldn't argue against what you say so much if I personally didn't live in Broward County. I know that the corruption here and in the other 2 counties are beyond the scope of control or at least has been. Rules were established for the recount and when the time came people cried foul when the rules were applied. I've briefed this case and i must say your notion about democracy is fair and that's how it should be but when you can't trust that the voter is being treated

Based on this video the facts are represented in quite the watered down fashion. Minute 2:43, "recount wouldn't be fair becuz recount procedures..." disregards the fact that there were testimonials that exposed at least 3 separate instances of discrepant evaluation of the ballot. Bush v. Gore

Then why don't we outlaw money from unions as well as corporations. Most of important of all we should outlaw the American bar association and lawyers from giving money. They have the biggest conflict of interest, since they make their living from law. So let's outlaw money from corporations, unions and lawyers.

@maharal9

6 жыл бұрын

Citizens United (and the name itself is unfortunate) concerned the contributions of corporations, unions, and associations of all kinds. This is well known. The ABA avoids contributing to partisan fights but does lobby for positions their membership supports, so they are pretty bland propositions. In any case, its resources are tiny; less than one mili-Mercer.

Embarrassing how the 60 Minutes journalists -- especially the second wave -- play at some role, the measured tones and stentorian rhythms. And when Stevens replied re: Citizens United, Which error do you want to hear about? Pelly meekly replied, You choose. How about, All of them, please. As for the Babe, silly stuff. Many hitters point with their bat prior to getting set. It's part of the process of getting set at the plate for some. The question is, Did Ruth normally point?

@bernlin2000

5 жыл бұрын

In 2016, we saw that Citizens United was not much of a factor: Hillary greatly outspent Trump (who was mostly self-financed, and did not have much Super-PAC activity secretly working behind him, unlike Hillary Clinton) and still managed to lose the election (although win the popular vote).

His claim that there would have been no "irreparable injury" to allowing the recount to proceed is incorrect since counties were using inconsistent standards for whether a vote occurred.

Respond to this video... fairly what can you do?

I would hope (possibly vainly) that the conservative wing of the court are genuine in their beliefs and rulings. To me, however, I see too much conservative pandering to the cultural "low common denominator" in this country, and too little deviation from "rule by wealth". i.e.; the recent campaign finance ruling - the pet decision of the Chief Justice. Money has free speech protection? Lack of money has no protection? Not exactly correct judicial philosophy. Not even American.

Gerald Ford can't wait to deck him.

I am so glad you are a "retired" justice. We do not need old codgers like you trying to tread on our second amendment rights.

@anthonygarcia8373

2 жыл бұрын

Okay racist