Talk:David Souter

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the David Souter article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 30 days

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

University of Oxford Low‑importance

	University of Oxford portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States courts and judges High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States courts and judges, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States federal courts, courthouses, and United States federal judges on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United States courts and judgesWikipedia:WikiProject United States courts and judgesTemplate:WikiProject United States courts and judgesUnited States courts and judges
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: New Hampshire Mid‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	New Hampshire portal This article is supported by WikiProject New Hampshire (assessed as High-importance).

Post-retirement

Comments Souter made about the importance of civic education in 2012 gained some attention again in 2016. Possibly warrants a short mention in the article.[1] --Knope7 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 31 December 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]

I think not? "have been circulating on the internet" hardly seems encyclopedic, and the overarching subject matter might also fail WP:NPOV. Also, I think such a thing would not belong in a new section called "Post-retirement." Incidently, I had been thinking it had been some time since Justice Souter sat on the First Circuit, but looking I see that he has sat from January to March these last 4 years. The First Circuit hasn't published a regular calendar for Jan. 2017 yet, merely a special single sitting of 9 consolidated cases for one hour on Wednesday, so I don't think it would even be fair to say there was any change in pattern yet. jhawkinson (talk) 06:04, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't proposing a new section for the actual article, I was merely thinking of his activities after the Supeme Court as post-retirement activities.. Surely the fact that he still makes public speaking appearances is worth a mention, even if the 2012 talk which NPR and Rarchel Maddow found to be prescient is not a fit for this article. Knope7 (talk) 06:17, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on David Souter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:16, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retire

I am not so in us politics but i am very surprised about the date he gone?? was his party not very very angry about this? they lost one seat for more or less no reason? special if he thought about going out long before? sounds to me for a absolut no go to lose a seat in suprem court for such a small reason like "he did not want to leave 2 persons same year".Shlomo34 (talk) 12:26, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notable decisions

Currently listed: Only two cases, one of which he was in the minority, and the other a divided majority/group opinion. These are also both hot-button political issues. There must be a broader selection of notable decisions by David Souter? 2601:181:C381:6C80:511F:6DDA:9A68:A008 (talk) 03:16, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely this article should be expanded. Having written about the jurisprudence of other U.S. Supreme Court justices, I can say from experience it's not easy. I recommend editors making suggestions for cases or sources, if not just writing chunks of an expanded jurisprudence section. Knope7 (talk) 03:33, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

post-2020 by designation sittings

@Steve Lux, Jr.: In here you reverted my recent edit, noting "not necessary to report on something that did not occur." That's a true statement, but the test is not necessity but rather appropriateness. Here, it's appropriate to explain that the most recent year is not consistent with the general trend (for reasons of recency bias, and that trends end by ending), and there is also reason to think Souter may no longer be sitting on cases ("retired Justice David H. Souter did not hire a clerk for OT 2020 — and presumably won’t be hiring clerks for future terms as well." https://abovethelaw.com/2020/07/supreme-court-clerk-hiring-watch-a-term-like-no-other/). For those reasons, I'll restore the the language noting his lack of 2021 panels absent compelling justification. jhawkinson (talk) 18:09, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also: it's clearly incorrect to have reverted the {{Update after|2021|03|...}} which leaves the article claiming it needs an update. jhawkinson (talk) 18:22, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're right- evidently I was reading the change incorrectly and presumed it unnecessary. My apologies! Steve Lux, Jr. (talk) 19:39, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]