Column: Obama has big shoes to fill on Supreme Court

By Jordan Stein

Published April 13, 2010

The U.S. Supreme Court will lose a great legal thinker when Justice John Paul Stevens leaves this summer. The man has helped shape our political climate by leading the court's opinions on issues, such as the death penalty, affirmative action, the Second Amendment and gay rights.

Although he's been called the leader of the "Liberal Supreme Court," he sometimes describes himself as a judicial conservative. The commitment to re-evaluating his past opinions is what keeps him a fresh, insightful justice.

But this isn't going to be a huge career profile of Stevens. I'm concerned about what's going to happen to the Supreme Court after he leaves. It was hard enough for President Barack Obama, who's pretty adored by the public and who also had a huge majority in the Senate, to appoint Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Whoever ends up replacing Stevens needs to have the ability to "lead" the liberal wing of the court with the deftness that he did.

The tenure of Steven's seat on the Supreme Court has seen some of the most tumultuous time in our political history. Sadly, with the growing polarization of our nation and the huge issues that will doubtlessly come up in the next 25 years, I want a justice that can even out some of the conservative bias of the other judges.

When it comes to new issues, such as electoral policy and privacy protection with new technology, or even old issues that constantly are under review, such as the First Amendment and federal jurisdiction, the Supreme Court will be as busy as ever in the coming years. Plenty of political thinkers have predicted the U.S. is facing some of the hardest times ever in the next few decades. So, in addition to good leaders and a legislature without its collective head in its collective butt, we need a Supreme Court that can keep this country focused on its original values.

Perhaps I speak about the issue too much in this column, but I think the biggest civil rights battle of our generation will be the gay rights movement. And because of the nature of these movements, the final battle to be won is recognition under the law by the Supreme Court.

That's why Stevens' retirement is a huge blow. His views on gay rights were groundbreaking in their time, and his absence on a court that hears cases about gay marriage and adoption rights is worrisome.

Several publications have made some short lists of potential replacements, but it's irritating that the only adjective given to any candidates are "pro-abortion" or "against abortion." Most of the public doesn't seem to realize Roe v. Wade is probably never going to be overturned, both because of its legal validity and a dedicated segment of the population that would never allow it. Nonetheless, be prepared to see every news outlet talking about each candidate's abortion stance endlessly.

Obama has given some vague and useless criteria he's looking for in a replacement. Infuriating traits such as "an independent mind, a record of excellence and integrity, a fierce dedication to the rule of law" are what will guide his search.

I'm sure Obama knows what a large task is ahead of him. Stevens has left huge shoes to fill, so I hope that Obama's recent habit of choosing fairly middle-of-the-road federal circuit judges can be left by the wayside.

Jordan Stein is a senior political science major. She can be reached at jesf25@mail.missouri.edu