The big news this morning is that Justice Stevens has made official what everyone pretty much knew since he only hired one clerk for the coming term: he is going to retire. One detail we didn't know until today is that his retirement is effective at the end of the term, not upon confirmation of a successor. The creation of a vacancy makes completion of the process more urgent.

Will the successor be better for enforcement of the criminal law than Stevens has been in recent years? Possibly, but not too likely. Will the successor be much worse? I very much doubt that the Administration wants to take on the battle of nominating someone with a clear pro-criminal record. The possibility of major GOP gains in the Senate this fall, a remote chance of change of control, and the fact that this Administration considers politics more important than judicial activism all weigh against such a move. A nominee who is a solid lefty but has little or no criminal law paper trail is the greatest danger.