How Supreme Court Justices Decide When to Retire

It is crystal clear that Supreme Court justices try to time their retirements. There are two types of these justices. Some are party oriented and others are ideology oriented. Take Warren Burger for example. He has been considered a conservative, but he was by no means a Renquist conservative. He retired under a republican even though he made a handful of liberal rulings i.e. Roe v. Wade. Sandra Day O'Connor was a republican but made liberal rulings on the social issues during the 90s and her last six years in the 21st century. She was party oriented and retired under George W. Bush's tenure. Harry Blackmun however was a republican but a very reliable liberal vote. He was no doubt ideology oriented. Blackmun intentionally retired as soon as Bill Clinton took office ( 1 year, 4 months later). A careful reading of Blackmun's writing during Planned Parenthood vs. Casey ought to be enough to erase any doubt on the above assertion. The only event that may have discouraged Blackmun from retiring a year before was the retirement of Byran White. He on the other hand was party oriented. White was a reliable conservative vote on social issues. Being appointed by his friend John Kennedy and being the lone democrat on the bench at the time were probably important factors in his decision. After all, he was still alive more than eight years later.

There are some judges who retired under an unfriendly president in his point of view (ideologically speaking of course). Thurgood Marshal is an obvious example. He had absolute contempt for Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush (41st president). In fact he made a genuine effort to hold off retirement in time for a liberal democrat. He did jokingly say to the effect of, 'stuff me and continue to cast my votes' if he died under a republican president. His bad health precluded this goal. Retrospectively speaking, it was possible for him to save his seat since he died after Clinton took office, but a person's thinking and priorities doubtlessly changes when he/she is close to death. Moreover, he may not have known how long he had to live, and he had no way of knowing that the current president would be beaten 1.5 years later. It is hard to plot William Renquist since he died as chief justice and still would have died if John Kerry had won in 2004 (and would have thus name his successor). William Renquist may have chosen to retire in 2003 since the GOP retook control of congress if not for the controversial Bush v. Gore decision during the 2000 election.

There are many factors in a judge's decision to retire, but a well timed retirement is absolutely one of their goals. Other goals could clash with that objective, such as serving long enough to establish a legacy. The makeup of the senate is probably also a wild card. Lastly, retiring during a presidential election year is a no--no. Earl Warren (ideologically oriented) learned this lesson in 1968.

Jacob of WA 6:27AM February 15, 2009