John Paul Stevens: An Independent Life

John Paul Stevens: An Independent Life by Bill Barnhart and Gene Schlickman is a scholarly and well-researched book about one of the United States Supreme Court’s most memorable justices. To say a book is “scholarly and well-researched” can sometimes be the kiss of death for a book, but that is not the case here.

It is also a fun and interesting read about the story of a man who will go down as one of the most independent minded justices to have ever served on the Supreme Court.

This is the second book written by Barnhart and Schlickman, the first, a political biography, was Kerner: The Conflict of Intangible Rights. Kerner is not just a biography of a former governor of Illinois and a Federal judge; it is also an examination of Kerner’s conviction on Federal corruption charges that would have been overturned had Kerner not died in 1976.

John Paul Stevens: An Independent Life grabs your attention and interest throughout all 272 pages. We learn through this journey about the politics of Stevens’ nomination to the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. We are privy to the process of his nomination by President Richard Nixon, via Attorney General John Mitchell, and via Senator Charles Percy.

“For his part, Stevens moved onto the federal bench in Chicago, and later the U.S. Supreme Court, in much the same way the Picasso statue landed in Chicago’s Civic Center Plaza, His lack of political resume made him a mystery to litigants and law scholars. Like Picasso, he did little to clear up the matter.”

John Paul Stevens: An Independent Life is filled with this type of subtle humor and wit that serve to entertain the reader while educating and enlightening. It illuminates one big point: Had President Nixon known or suspected what type of Judge Stevens would become, Stevens’ nomination to the Seventh would not have occurred; he would have remained a lawyer at Rothschild, Stevens, Barry & Myers. He was not the type of justice Nixon supported, the so-called “strict constructionist” that Nixon often talked about in public speeches. Once his true colors became apparent, it did not take much for President Nixon to dismiss Stevens—as we learned from the Watergate tapes.

In 1969, Stevens was named to the Greenberg Commission, appointed by the Illinois Supreme Court, and he surprised the experts by taking this role and not sweeping scandal under the rug. Stevens forced two prominent justices—Ray Klingbiel and Roy J. Solfisburg Jr.—to resign from the Illinois Supreme Court. John Paul Stevens was named a Vice President of the Chicago Bar Association in 1970 and was gaining a reputation as an independent man.

The events that lead to Stevens’ nomination to the Seventh Circuit are fascinating, and the book provides such tidbits as to how baseball played a small, but significant role; how Stevens represented maverick major league baseball owner Charles O. Finley; how the political connections and contacts that Stevens made over the years garnered the attention of Senator Charles Percy, who is ultimately credited with Stevens’ nomination to the Seventh Circuit, and more.

The book also explores his five years on the Seventh Circuit. The time that Stevens spent on the Seventh did not give a hint to Stevens' judicial philosophy, nor could one easily classify or label Stevens’ decisions on that bench. This independence was helpful when it came time to be nominated to the nation’s highest court. In one significant case in particular, Groppi v. Leslie (1970), Stevens demonstrated his fierce independence. The case was about a Roman Catholic priest in Milwaukee, Father James Groppi, who was jailed for contempt and leading a parade of protestors to disrupt a legislative session. The case came before the Seventh Circuit and the case found against Groppi, but Justice Stevens would have none of it. Senator Percy had reminded Stevens years earlier that service on the Seventh was a stepping-stone to the United States Supreme Court. Stevens was convinced that a dissenting opinion in the case would kill any chance of nomination for the United States Supreme Court, but Stevens dissented nonetheless. “It was sort of my declaration of independence. I was free to go about my work.”

In November of 1975, Justice William O. Douglas resigned due to health reasons. He handed his resignation to his nemesis, Gerald Ford, who had risen to the highest office in the land, and who had attempted to impeach Douglas. After the resignation, Chief Justice Warren Burger encouraged President Ford to quickly nominate a new justice because of the court’s workload. Douglas had not been contributing much since his debilitating stroke the year before his resignation.

President Gerald R. Ford nominated Stevens to the United States Supreme Court. A significant footnote to American history is that Justice Stevens’ nomination was the last one not televised (the Judiciary Committee hearings) in December of 1975. We also learn that President Gerald R. Ford gives great credit in nominating Stevens to his young chief-of-staff, Donald Rumsfeld. Because the Watergate scandal and the resignation of President Nixon were fresh in the mind of the public, Rumsfeld argued that someone who “is impeccably honest and is first class in the legal profession” had to be nominated.

The last part of the book explores Stevens’ career on the United States Supreme Court.

We also get an intimate look at several memorable and emotional dissenting opinions. Perhaps Stevens will be best known for his dissenting opinion in Bush v. Gore (2000), whose decision Stevens called “a Federal assault on the Florida election procedures.” He went on to write that, “the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation’s confidence in the judge as the impartial guardian of the rule of law. I respectfully dissent.”

Another emotional dissent that Stevens delivered from the bench was in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2009), where Stevens railed against corporate money’s involvement in politics. This case was the first decision for Justice Sonia Maria Sotomayor, and she sided with Stevens. And the woman who would be Stevens’ successor, Elena Kagan, argued the case on behalf of the government for the Federal Election Commission. Stevens sided with Kagan.

John Paul Stevens: An Independent Life is the biography against which others will be measured. This is not just because it is the first, but is because it reveals high quality research and writing that is thorough, succinct, and captivating. The book is a compelling account of a truly balanced, highly esteemed, and independent judicial figure in American history.