Legal Commentary

Puff Piece on Justice Stevens

By David Bernstein

Some ?tough journalism? from the Times?s Adam Liptak.

We learn of Stevens?s ?plainspoken style,? his ?common sense? and ?moral clarity,? and that he is ?the leader of the court?s liberal wing.?  While in his early years on the Court ?his views often seemed idiosyncratic,? he has since ?emerged as a master tactician,? who uses the prerogatives of his seniority ?to great advantage,? displaying ?patience and skill.?  His death penalty opinions this term involved a ?carefully calibrated distinction.?

Liptak even manages to favorably cite a paragraph from Stevens?s Citizens United dissent that strikes me as a bizarre non sequitur:

Justice Stevens, who served in the Navy during World War II, reached back to those days to show the depth of his outrage at the majority?s conclusion that the government may not make legal distinctions based on whether a corporation or a person was doing the speaking.

?Such an assumption,? he wrote, ?would have accorded the propaganda broadcasts to our troops by ?Tokyo Rose? during World War II the same protection as speech by Allied commanders.?

Next time, perhaps the Times could just  get one of his Stevens?s former clerks to write a tribute to him on the op-ed pages.

Full post as published by The Volokh Conspiracy on January 26, 2010 (boomark / email).