A recent New York Times article brought to my attention the fact that retired justices keep offices in or near the Supreme Court building:
Do retired justices linger at their old haunts and lobby their former colleagues at the cafeteria? I suppose it’s comparable to taxpayers paying for for Clinton’s office in Harlem, or Papa Bush’s office in Texas, but at least their new offices aren’t located in the White House.
What exactly are retired justices doing at the Supreme Court?
Wouldn’t that be analogous to the status of professors emiritus?
Most federal courthouses make room for retired judges so that they can hear cases if they wish. On the federal bench, retired judges hear about 15% of all cases, so there is a pretty long tradition of this.
The Supreme Court is different in that retired justices do not hear cases. However, it hardly means they just go off and fish. As an example, Justice Byron White chaired the Commission on Structural Alternatives for the Federal Courts of Appeals after his retirement from the Court.
I had the same association when reading the thread title. My guess is that judge, unlike other professions, isn’t simply a job you quit upon retirement forever. Very much like professors, justices are involved in jurisprudence, the scientific approach to law, and deal with the advanecment of law. They don’t necessarily cease to do so when they retire.
I consider it a courtesy properly and respectfully extended to former Justices. I don’t have a problem with it.
When William O. Douglas begrudgingly resigned in the mid-1970s due to his advanced age and deteriorating mind, though, he still wanted to hear cases. A colleague (I forget who - might’ve been Brennan) had to remind him that having chambers there didn’t mean he was still a member of the Court. Got a little awkward, according to Bob Woodward’s book The Brethren.
Retired justices may still sit by designation on the U.S. courts of appeals, however. Lewis Powell heard cases as a panelist for the Fourth Circuit in his native Richmond, Va. for several years after resigning from the Supreme Court. He authored a decision in a case I was involved in. When our side won, we were pretty sure the Supreme Court wouldn’t grant cert. to overturn a decision written by their beloved ol’ Lewis.
It’s a good place to have your subscription to *Enormous Jugs * magazine sent so that wifey doesn’t find out about it.
I suspect that this won’t be a problem for Justice O’Connor (ret.).
Lower federal judges have several options when they retire. Assuming they have enough service (at least 15 years of service at age 65 or 10 years at age 70), federal judges may take “senior status”. At that point, they can flat out retire, in which case they get a judicial pension of their full salary at the time of retirement. Alternatively, they can still continue to serve as a judge, and if they do so with at least a quarter of the caseload of an active judge, they will get a full salary plus annual pay increases. The logic of the full salary judicial pensions is that since the judges are appointed for life, they should be encouraged to retire or semi-retire when they can’t handle a full caseload to allow younger judges to be appointed to fill their posts. Senior judges shoulder a significant portion of the federal judicial business, and the federal courts would be overwhelmed without their work.
Retired Supreme Court justices may, if they wish, continue to do judicial work, though not on the Supreme Court itself, wherever they are designated by the Chief Justice (who will take their wishes into consideration when appointing them). They commonly sit as visiting judges on Court of Appeals panels. If she wanted, I’m sure that Justice O’Connor could conduct trials on the District Court in Arizona. This would be in addition to any teaching, writing, court administration and other work retired justices may choose to do.
I believe after Potter Stewart retired, he had his subscriptions of that magazine sent to his office at the Supreme Court, just so he could know it when he saw it.
Good explanation, Billdo, re: senior status. One U.S. district court judge I know insists you’d have to be an idiot not to take senior status. He points to a study showing that federal judges who take s.s. and continue to hear cases live about five years longer, on average, than judges who completely retire.
Always remember that corrilation does not equal cause. A judge in poor health is probably less likely to take SS than a more vital specimen. Still, people do tend to waste away if they lack anything to do with thier days.
Such DIRTY minds! Just so you’ll know, I was referring to a magazine catering to pottery enthusiasts who enjoy crafting items on a scale larger than usual. 
What do you mean dirty minds? I was merely concluding that, unless she and the court have suddenly gotten WAY more progressive that I have heard about, it was unlikely that she’d have a wifey at home to hide her pottery magazines from.
That’s the most brilliant Supreme Court joke that I’ve ever seen.