Irreverent nicknames for Supreme Court Justices

All right, let’s have a little fun and a few laughs. I know this is irreverent and disrespectful, but I have little respect for any of the Justices. I know the stuffed shirts, and Supreme Court idolaters will not be pleased, but there must be a few people out there with a sense of sarcastic humor.

The Justices already have in-court nicknames, but let’s have some fun and make up some new ones.

CJ John, “Rehnquist II,” Roberts (or “the Charmer”)

Clarence “19th Century” Thomas (or “Big Mouth”)

Antonin, “The Originalist,” Scalia (or “the Professor,” “the Scourge” [of oral argument])

Samuel, “Attila,” Alito.

Stephen “the Huckster” Breyer

Sonya,“Wise Latina,” Sotomayor

Elena, “Ivory Tower,” Kagan

Ruth Bader, Sourpuss” Ginsburg, and finally, my favorite Justice

Anthony “The trapeze artist” Kennedy (or “How much am I bid”)

We certainly can’t let Stevens get by even though he has retired:

John Paul “way past retirement” Stevens.

Stevens--the greatest Justice? LOL

Justice Stevens is the "greatest Justice"—so writes one former clerk (see link at bottom)


Now that Stevens has announced his retirement, praise will be flowing further from former clerks, friends, patronage recipients, many on the left, and various sycophants. The most over-the-top praise is in the link. The author excluded CJ’s so as to avoid the obvious error of ranking Stevens above Marshall and Warren. But, Stevens has some black marks which make him unworthy of such adolescent adulation. His greatest and most unforgivable sin was voting against the First Amendment in the flag-burning case (Eichman). Stevens lets his personal patriotism trump fundamental First Amendment principles. A case in which my candidate for the non CJ award, (at least for the 20th Century) Brennan, voted in favor First Amendment principles.
Although he has supported 4th Amend. values (e.g. Richards v. Wisc.,1997; Groh v. Ramirez, 2004) ) and the exclusionary rule, Stevens has too often. IMHO, voted in favor of the government in 4th Amendment cases, (e.g., U.S. v. Ross, 1982; Md. v. Garrison, 1987; Ill v. Caballes, 2005) He’s obviously not as destructive to those values as Scalia, but his support has not been as consistent as was Brennans.
His dissent in U.S. v. Lopez was one of the most unprofessional I’ve seen. His dissent in Heller was sloppily researched and written.
Stevens greater than Brennan? Than Brandeis? Than Holmes? Than John Marshall Harlan? Than Joseph Story? I could go on, but you get the picture. They all have their warts, but Stevens “greater?” In your dreams. Gimme a break! Although not as bad as some on the Court, Stevens was, too often, a knee-jerk liberal. Fortunately, he was countered by knee-jerk conservatives.

http://www.scotusblog.com/2010/06/the-greatest-justice/