Stop me if you've heard this before: the next issue to go before the legislature is going to start a big, possibly bruising and long-lasting fight. Republicans have floated the possibility of a filibuster, asking for "fair" hearings and representation of the American people. Democrats are trying to avoid saying anything that will muddy the debate, while privately wishing they had any idea of what is going on at the White House.

Sound familiar? Well, the issue changed, much to the chagrin of anyone who had something lined up in Congress (energy, immigration, financial reform, etc.), back to the Supreme Court (SCOTUS).

On Friday, after much speculation, longtime Justice John Paul Stevens announced that he will retire from his seat, effective at the end of this session. He said that he does so in order to give time for a replacement to be appointed before the beginning of the next session.

You could almost feel the focus instantaneously shift from whatever else was going on, to this. Immediately, the appointment of a new justice took precedence. That is not to say that Congress is incapable of accomplishing more than one thing at a time, but we've seen no evidence of that so far.

Justice Stevens is what they call a "liberal lion". He is the far left of the court, though if you asked him, he'd say he hasn't always been. In fact, when he was appointed, Stevens was quite the moderate and he'll tell you that he didn't change, the court did.

This is a man from a different era. David Brooks just told the story about how Stevens was sitting in Wrigley Field when Babe Ruth called his shot. That was a long time ago folks. He turns 90 soon. He is one of the longest serving members in the history of the court, having now taken his seat in five decades.

(Side note about longevity: I heard last night that Phillies pitcher Jamie Moyer started his big league career in June 1986. Not only does that make his career one of few in history that have pitched in four decades, it makes his career older than me. Yeah.)

The questions will persist as to whether the president will nominate someone with a progressive background. Or will he look for someone outside of the establishment (the Yale, Harvard fraternity), as many see likely. No matter what, this will be long and drawn out. In the long run it will seriously test Congress. There are no less than three extremely important issues demanding time right now. Will they be brushed to the side by this one-thing-at-a-time legislature?

One thing can probably go without saying, but better be made clear: there will be no replacing John Paul Stevens. He is in remarkable shape for a 90 year old. He was confirmed 98-0 by the Senate. Thinking of the scope of decisions he has been apart of since being seated in 1975, he has had as much of an affect of on law today as anyone.

Now his retirement may, finally, be the thing that shapes the midterm elections in November.

--

Couple of other notess:

- Sadly, on Friday night, search and rescue teams in West Virginia found the bodies of the remaining four miners still missing in that deadly mine blast.

- In a somewhat surreal, and devastating accident (that I haven't really absorbed the scope of yet), the president of Poland, Lech Kaczynski, was killed in a plane crash Saturday morning, along with 96 other dignitaries. It really is hard to grasp the enormity of the situation, the death of the president of a country in a plane crash. Seems like the definition of sudden.

- God will no longer be able to watch "His team" through the hole in the roof of Texas Stadium. It was imploded this morning.

Have a great Sunday and God Bless.