Lion of Liberalism: Former SCOTUS Justice John Paul Stevens dies at 99

Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, who lived here in Florida, died yesterday at the age of 99. Although he was Republican appointed, Stevens emerged as the Supreme Court’s leading liberal during his nearly 35 years on the SCOTUS bench.

In 2002’s ACLU v. Ashcroft, he wrote in a dissenting opinion that “[a]s a parent, grandparent, and great-grandparent”, he endorsed the legislative goal of protecting children from pornography “without reservation”: “As a judge, I must confess to a growing sense of unease when the interest in protecting children from prurient materials is invoked as a justification for using criminal regulation of speech as a substitute for, or a simple backup to, adult oversight of children’s viewing.”

We wonder how Stevens would rule on certain restrictions governing people required to register as sex offenders if he were still on the bench today.

NOTE: Since posting, several members alerted us that Stevens was a dissenting opinion in Smith v. Doe!!! Rest in Peace Justice Stevens!


Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

7 thoughts on “Lion of Liberalism: Former SCOTUS Justice John Paul Stevens dies at 99

  • July 18, 2019

    Stevens advocated repealing the 2nd Amendment. Now, as we see the harm of a sexually perverse government running genocide on so-called sex offender — we see the need more than ever for citizens to have weapons independent of government approval.

    Since so-called sex offenders will not be protected by public prosecutors or police in many cases, they need guns to protect themselves from opportunistic vigilantes. This should include concealed carry.

    Reply
    • July 18, 2019

      We don’t recommend that any felons possess firearms. Not unless the law changes.

      Reply
      • July 18, 2019

        AGREED 1000%

        Reply
  • July 17, 2019

    Stevens was also one of three Justices who dissented in Smith v. Doe.

    Reply
    • July 17, 2019

      This is also more reason to appreciate him.

      Reply
  • July 17, 2019

    If I’m not mistaken, Stevens wrote a dissenting opinion in Smith v. Doe, summarily stating the registry was indeed punishment and pointed out that he would not be convinced otherwise.

    Reply
    • July 17, 2019

      You are not mistaken, and I wish he can be alive to tell everybody ” I told you so ! ” when the day comes to overturn Smith for being punitive in its face.

      Reply

Comment Policy

  • PLEASE READ: Comments not adhering to this policy will be removed.
  • Be patient. All comments are moderated before they are published. This takes time.
  • Stay on topic. Comments and links should be relevant to this post.
  • *NEW* CLICK HERE if you have an off-topic comment or link.
  • Be respectful. Do not attack, abuse, or threaten. This includes cussing/yelling (ALL CAPS).
  • Cite. If requested, cite any bold or novel claims of fact or statistics, or your comment may be moderated.
  • *NEW* Be brief. If you have a comment of over 2,000 characters, please e-mail it to us for consideration as a member submission.
  • Reminder: Opinions and statements in comments are neither endorsed nor verified by FAC.
  • Moderation does not equal censorship. See this post for more information

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *