In the United States order of precedence, Associate Justices of the Supreme Court are explicitly ranked in order of appointment, but the ranking of retired justices doesn’t seem to be specified. Will retiring Justice Stevens rank ahead of (earlier appointment) or behind (later retirement) O’Connor & Souter?.
— M. Woods.
Dear Mr. Woods:
Justice Stevens will be first.
Precedence lists around Washington do include how to order some former officials: butthey don’t include how to order former associate justices. When lists DO state how to rank ‘formers” they all use the same approach …
Former Presidents of the United States by earliest assumption of office.
Ambassadors of foreign nations by date of presentation of credentials …
Senators by length of service … (which is the same as earliest assumption of office)
Former cabinet members by seniority of assuming office
Retired (armed service officers) by date of rank
So standard protocol is to order ‘formers’ by the earliest assumption of office — not by total length of service or most recent date of retirement:
Stevens appointed 1975
O’Connor appointed 1981
Souter appointed 1990
– Robert Hickey www.formsofaddress.info
Leave a Reply