Supreme Court Justice David Souter is likely to retire at the end of the current session next month.

Over his nineteen years on the Court he has evolved from being a conservative vote on criminal justice issues to being a moderate vote on such issues. In particular as a moral leader of the Court he has been a strong voice for fair trials under the Sixth and Eighth Amendments.

He was appointed by George H. W. Bush with the hope that he would join the conservative wing of the court. The hope was not totally unrealistic. As Joseph D. Grano, Distinguished Professor of Law at Wayne State University has pointed out his record on New Hampshire state courts was generally fairly conservative and he rarely voted in favor of criminal defendants.

While never an ideologue and always a pragmatist over the years his votes have evolved to the point where he often votes with the more moderate wing of the Court of criminal justice issues. This is brought out in a comprehensive law review article by Scott P. Johnson, a political scientist at Frostburg State University in the Pierce Law Review. Between Souter’s appointment to the bench in 1991 and 1997 he voted against criminal defendants in the majority of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment cases and in 45 per cent of the Eight Amendment cases. But after 1997 he voted with defendants in over 60 per cent of the Fourth Amendment cases and over 70 per cent of the Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendment cases.

But in any case he is not an ideologue voting either for or against criminal defendants. He is a strong believer in precedent and his votes and he puts considerable time into research and writing his decisions. His decisions are well reasoned and he is rarely open to much criticism from either the left or the right. His voice of reason will be missed on the court.