Justice Stevens was a powerful voice of reason and principle on the Court for 35 years. He often articulated distinctive approaches to legal problems. I did not know him, but feel as if I have been in dialogue with him for years because his views and written opinions are perennially the subject of classroom conversation. Let me offer just a few examples, because the full list would be long, indeed. In the area of statutory interpretation, he wrote the famous Chevron opinion and sparred for years with Justice Scalia about the value of legislative history. In constitutional law, he challenged the conventional approach to equal protection; he wrote utterly piercing dissents in many cases, including Bush v. Gore, Parents Involved v. Seattle School District, and DC v. Heller; and his dissent in Bowers v. Hardwick, the 1986 case that upheld the constitutionality of criminal sodomy bans, became the explicit basis for Justice Kennedy’s later landmark opinion in Lawrence v. Texas, overruling Bowers. 

In his later years as a justice and in his writings since retiring, he expressed increasing concern about the direction the Court was taking and became an unmistakable voice of conscience about the vital role of courts and law in a democracy. Justice Stevens’  contributions were exceptional and they will long be remembered.

Jane S. Schacter is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law at Stanford Law School. Her scholarship focuses on statutory interpretation and legislative process, constitutional law, and sexual orientation law.