Justice Stephen Breyer to retire from Supreme Court
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer is retiring after serving more than two decades on the nation’s highest court, Supreme Court and Biden administration sources tell NPR. Breyer is expected to make the announcement at the White House on Thursday.
Breyer — professorial, practical and moderately liberal — wrote many of the court’s legally important but less glamorous decisions and sought, behind the scenes, to build consensus for centrist decisions on a conservative court.
FAC NOTE: Justice Breyer joined Justice Ginsburg in the dissenting opinion in Smith v. Doe.
Normally, Dems and Repubs don’t impact us much since they both promote registries. (It is my opinion both parties are conservative, Repubs are obviously farther right but we have few true liberals in the USA.) But, where political alignment matters is in SCOTUS.
When RBG passed away, I wrote an article for SOSEN called “Ruth Bader Ginsburg and what her passing means for Registered Persons.” It is too long to copy-paste so I’ll just post the link, I hope folks read it because it is important. I have doubts Smith v Doe will be revisited but if it does, a 6-3 conservative supermajority is not going to be helpful to us. But that’s just my prognostication.
https://sosen.org/blog/2020/09/20/ruth-bader-ginsburg-and-what-her-passing-means-for-registered-persons.html
Please Remember, That Jurist Breyer Has Voted on 19 Very Important Cases Which Have Yet Be Fully Published by SCOTUS…
That Being Said, His Retirement Might Mean This……..
….That Roe v. Wade Will Prevail, which is Awesome…..Roe v. Wade is about the INTRINSIC RIGHT TO PRIVACY which is not Explicitly Stated in The US Constitution……Abortion was Used as an Application…
So Many People really FORGET About the True Meaning of Roe v. Wade!
Replace Him with a Black Female, Might Be Great Choice…But The Real Choice Should be a Great Jurist; absent their Skin Color!
It is a bit of a false assumption that conservative judges are tougher on crime than are liberals. The Does v Snyder decision has really produced little change in Michigan’s registry law. It has left the state free to simply write a new law any time the old one is deemed unconstitutional, and the new law will take years to challenge through the appellate process. Most importantly, as long as the federal law is held to be Constitutional, there is always that blueprint for states to follow. And that existing federal law is an additional punishment if you are subject to it. The idea that a public registry could ever be deemed a simple regulatory process is ridiculous, as any reasonable person knows.
#@%* LOL
I was just signing in to send that in. You beat me to it.
You never know though how a new judge will rule on us and out plight. I think both Dems and Repubs try an avoid hearing anything having to do with registered people.
Even though they are on for life, they still don’t want to be seen as going easy on sex offenders. How many times have they deferred a case back to the lower courts when it concerned us?
CherokeeJack
I saw on the local news about a poll done on lifetime appointments for the Supreme Court. 87% are against lifetime; while 13% are in favor. Hopefully the right case lands on the lap of Chief Justice Roberts and his precious Smith vs Doe overturned.
When lawmakers quickly pass ridiculous laws based on bathroom reading material’s research it deserves to be flushed down the toilet along with the other sewage. Enough is enough of these crappy laws based on crappy lies fueled by bogus research.
Brandon, I submitted something to FAC via email that was never posted (why, I don’t know) about Justice Sotomayor wrongly stating there are hundreds of thousands of children in hospitals with covid. Her numbers (and beliefs) are patently false as demonstrated by real statistics. This is really no different than the “frightening and high” rate of recidivism by RSOs that SCOTUS said long ago and has been since repeated in nearly every circuit of this country even though that has been debunked many times. Bottom line, unless and until these people are willing to correct themselves on the record when they are proven wrong, then there will never be any accountability because of lifetime appointments.
Just Sayin…
Very Well Said!
All ‘Feel Good Policies’ Just Brain Wash Jurisprudence!
Even in Garland’s Comments on the SORNA Updates, He Just Passed The Buck…Made More Excuses Not To Change Anything, Than Anything Else…No Politician or Judge Wants Touch These Cases!
-Because They Will Be Ostracized in Their Communities, Just Like US!
If you read my SOSEN article, political alignment in SCOTUS matters more than you realize. While it has not been 100%, the liberal wing of the Court sided with us on many occasions.
While there are benefits and drawbacks to every system, the fact that judges are not appointed frees them from the influence of the ignorant masses.
There has not been a lot of cases involving a person on the registry. But in most of those that do exist, the conservative justices have not been our allies. Even in the unanimous Packingham v NC case, the conservative justices Roberts, Alito, Roberts, and Thomas wrote a concurring opinion that states should be allowed to regulate activity on certain websites.
Another article I read on this topic shared that during the campaign Biden said he would nominate an African American woman if given the opportunity. A couple of names were listed. I’ll dig into the names later just for my own information, not like I have two cents to throw at it. Hopefully the right person gets the job to make things better not only for our community but the country as a whole.
Should campaign on asking why POTUS believes he has to discriminate to fulfill a campaign promise by choosing one ethnicity over others and one gender over the other. Is a Native American, Asian, or other ethnicity not good enough to be nominated regardless of gender? Does it have to be a female? By discriminating on this, he is no better than anyone who discriminates against PFRs daily using lack of information and intelligence when considering them for whatever needed to be considered.
As the country’s elected leader, he should know better than discriminate in picking people for positions and stick to merit based selections to set the example for all. Pick for their brains not where they or their ancestors hail from, skin color, or their DNA.
Woke-ism. They’d rather show how not “raaaaaaciiiiist” they are than to give the position to a truly qualified candidate.
Do you want a heart surgeon based on race/gender? Or one that knows what the hell they’re doing when they cut you open?
TS
Not saying I have an opinion on Biden, but he kind of painted himself into a corner. He promised if he got the chance to choose a new supreme court justice, he would elect a black women. In my opinion he did it to garner African American votes.
Regardless, if he does not do what he promised, he will for sure be in worse shape than he is, which is hard to imagine since they are saying almost no other president has had a lower rating in recent history.
@Cherokee Jack
Agree 100%
Any black woman who has reached a position on the federal bench is twice as qualified as any white guy in the same position. It’s the only way they can get there.
(h/t: @js_edit on Twitter)
Jacob, surely you jest. That’s akin to saying “hire a jew lawyer” because they had to work harder than everyone else.
Ok, an overstatement, but a perspective worth considering.
Some members on this forum are offended by the idea of a black woman justice, apparently.
One poster even suggested they’re not “truly” qualified and “don’t know what the hell they’re doing.”
@Jacob
Stats and citation on the qual statement or is that an opinion?
Just a personal perception I’m putting out there.
Is there a replacement in mind as far as FAC would suggest? We could then, as a group, make 800,000 suggestions for such an individual….