Perhaps the interpretations of Justice Stevens' intentions are, to paraphrase a famous quote, an exaggeration. But his turning 90 in 2010 would seem to be good enough a reason to take the prospect very seriously.

Most of the debate over his replacement will no doubt swirl around the usual hot button social issues. But I hope that the economic ones will not be pushed too far aside, since they will have an impact on the social welfare of everyone.

One section in the wiki article suggests that Stevens sided consistently with the federal government in cases concerning the Commerce Clause which gives the federal government rights to .

He also co-wrote an opinion that affirmed the government's method of taxing tips in a case concerning a San Francisco restaurant. Cases like this could be very important in determining how such things as health insurance reform will be paid for since such employees are effectively self-employed and in the USA often do not have health insurance. Health care reform was not a big issue then but may now require renewed emphasis.