” President Trump needs to pick a justice in his/he 40’s-50’s so that the position can outlast President Trump’s presidency and solidify a conservative court for the next 20 years.”
The problem with younger judges is they can turn left once appointed. John Paul Stevens was a conservative when appointed by Gerald Ford at age 55. He “evolved” into one of the more liberal justices.
Justice Kennedy, who was appointed by Ronald Reagan and joined the court at age 52 has been a swing vote on the court not a reliable conservative. The same held true with another Reagan pick Justice Sandra Day O’Conner who was appointed at age 51.
Justice Roberts, touted as a conservative when appointed by George W. Bush at age 50, has also not been a reliable conservative vote on the court.
History shows conservative judges often evolve into progressives. Harry Blackman of Roe v. Wade fame is a prime example. He was appointed by Richard Nixon at age 62 and served on the court for 24 years. Conservative Chief Justice Warren Berger recommended Blackman to President Nixon. By the time he retired Blackman was most liberal justice on the court.
History also shows liberals, once appointed, never evolve into conservatives while serving on the Supreme Court.
Life is a balancing act. There is no way to see into the future and ascertain how events will shape someone or to see into their hearts to understand how they will operate once nominated. I suggest it was not their age that was the deciding factor in these Justices.
Since President Trump’s Congress can decide by simple majority on his judicial appointment he will not need to pick someone middle of the road which I believe was the case in some of the Justices you reference. That should allow for the appointment of a sincerely conservative justice.
I do believe that Roberts was/is compromised by blackmail. Having been picked by a Republican is no guarantee of conservative purity. The other Justices that you mention were not picked for conservative viewpoints although Blackmun was described as a strict constructionist the committee seemed more interested in his stock portfolio than his decisions & writings.
Sandra Day O’Connor was nominated to the Supreme Court by President Reagan on August 19, 1981, thus fulfilling his 1980 campaign promise to appoint the first woman to the highest court in the United States. Review of the confirmation hearings suggests she was a moderate Republican when chosen and continued as one during her court tenure.
Kennedy’s nomination came after Reagan’s failed nominations of Robert Bork and Douglas Ginsburg. His decisions commented on during his confirmation addressed individual liberty and the right of a State to make mistakes (Bowers). Regan chose someone that both sides could approve as just & balanced not a staunch conservative.
President Nixon April 14 named Judge Blackmun, of the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, to fill the Supreme Court seat. The President’s first two nominees for that seat, Judges Haynsworth of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals and Carswell of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, both had been denied confirmation. The Senate refused Nov. 21, 1969, by a 45–55 vote, to confirm Haynsworth, and refused April 8, 45–51, to confirm Carswell.
https://library.cqpress.com/cqalmanac/document.php?id=cqal70-1292788
I looked into John Paul Stevens as well. That is an interesting tale. According to his overall S-C score he was Conservative, however in the 6 areas that are broken out his views before confirmation were decidedly left of midline.
Segal-Cover Score overall ideology 25
A Segal–Cover score is an attempt to measure the “perceived qualifications and ideology” of United States Supreme Court justices. The scores are created by analyzing pre-confirmation newspaper editorials regarding the nominations from The New York Times, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, and The Wall Street Journal.
Each nominee receives an ideology score that ranges from 0 to 100, with 0 being most conservative and 100 being most liberal. Case issue scores are derived from the Court’s own statements as to what the case is about and are taken from a public policy rather than legal standpoint. For more information, visit Wikipedia’s page on Segal and Cover.
civil rights 64
criminal procedure 66
economic cases 58
federal tax 59
federalism cases 56
first amendment 67
union cases 63
Comparing his score to Roberts and Scalia is instructive:
Roberts
Overall 12
civil rights 40
criminal procedure 28
economic cases 38
federal tax 85
federalism cases 68
first amendment 33
union cases 50
Scalia
Overall 0
civil rights 30
criminal procedure 27
economic cases 41
federal tax 69
federalism cases 51
first amendment 29
union cases 33