Artemus Ward 
Deciding to Leave 
The Politics of Retirement from the United States Supreme Court

List of Illustrations and Tables

Preface

1. The Politics of Departure in the U.S. Supreme Court

Departure in Comparative Perspective
Departure Politics in Historical Context
Overview

2. 1789–1800: Traveling Postboys

Indisposition and the Early Supreme Court
Disagreeable Tours
Conclusion

3. 1801–1868: Crippled Courts

Army of Judges
Imminent Danger of Sudden Death
Needy and Half-Paid Men
Abridgement of Tenure, Facility of Removal, or Some Other Modification
If Mr. Clay Had Been Elected
Overview

4. 1869–1896: Old Imbeciles on the Bench

Dangerous in its Operation
1869 Retirement Act
The Disputed Election of 1876
The Evarts Act
Conclusion

5. 1897–1936: Old Fools and Young Spirits

The Field Effect
Evarts Act Redux
Increased Caseloads
Conclusion

6. 1937–1954: Senior Status

A War with a Fool at the Top
1937 Retirement Act
Untimely Deaths
Conclusion

7. 1954–1970: The Limits of Power

1954 Retirement Act
Cantankerous Fellows
An Extraconstitutional Arrangement
Conclusion

8. 1971–1999: Appointed for Life

He Ought to Get Off the Court Too
Old and Coming Apart
Conclusion

9. 2000–Present: A Self-Inflicted Wound

The Disputed Election of 2000
That’s For Me to Know and You to Find Out
Conclusion

10. Conclusion: Imaginary Danger?

Ability and Inability
The Rule of 100
Lightening the Burden
Mandatory Retirement
Conclusion

Appendix A

Letter from Byron White to Warren Burger, Oct. 20, 1975

Appendix B

Letter from Warren E. Burger, William J. Brennan, Jr., Potter Stewart, Byron R. White, Thurgood Marshall, Harry A. Blackmun, Lewis F. Powell, and William H. Rehnquist to William O. Douglas, December 22, 1975

Appendix C

Letter from John Paul Stevens to William H. Rehnquist, October 28, 1988

Notes

Bibliography

Index