he wrote a scathing dissent in "bush v. gore," criticizing the court's decision that stopped the florida recount saying the decision would damage the court he wrote: stevens notified the white house in a letter this morning. sources say the leading contenders to replace him are elena kagan, former dean of harvard law school and the "courant" solicitor general. diane wood, a chicago federal appeals court judge. and make garland, a federal appeals court judge in washington, d.c. who is considered more moderate on criminal issues. the president hopes his choice to be a lasting legacy, just like john paul stevens. but one thing his choice won't have that justice stevens had is a quick confirmation. justice stevens was confirmed a mere 19 days after he was nominated and the vote was 98-0. katie? >> couric: jan, the president's choice, if he or she is confirmed, is unlikely to change the makeup of the court as you mentioned. having said that, is there a front-runner right now? >> well, katie, if the white house doesn't want a fight--

bush v. gore arrangements in durham obviously which was first formed during the bush and administration and obama the arrangements of this debate cousin durham. what are they and what gave rise to them and how are they manifested in today's political climate? >> it is a contagion virus. bush the arrangement centum and obama the frenchman syndrome i define as pathological hatred of the president posing as patriotism and it's important to understand the inner played between the extremes because neither side is immune and in the bush years we saw people, some protesters not a lot but definitely there and some very prominent ones comparing president bush to hitler. and this wasn't placards and protests. one of the things lady to yell in the book there's a surprising line of nobel prize winners comparing bush to hitler and the bush administration to fascists. they didn't get a lot of condemnation. politics follows the line of action. one of the things severin interviews someone at a protest killing oba

when bush v. gore came up, then-senator biden and i wrote to chief justice rehnquist urging that the court allow that monumental case to be televised so the public could see it, considering the very limited number of people who could gain access. when i went over to the court that day, being one of the few who could gain access to the court, the block was surrounded with television cameras, so much public interest, but the cameras couldn't go inside. that day, the supreme court, with the chief justice's order, did change practice and allowed a transcript, an audio transcript to release -- be released immediately thereafter. i believe congress has the authority, should it choose to do so, to direct the supreme court to permit its proceedings to be televised. the supreme court in a series of cases says that the public has a right to know what is going on inside the courtroom, and that was the case which involved newspapers. well, in an electronic era when the public gets so much of its information via te

in justice steven's dissent in bush v. goreing the president to president bush, justice stevens wrote, quote, although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year's presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear, it's the nation's confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law. in 2004 justice stevens wrote the majority decision that prisoners being held at guantanamo had the right to challenge their imprisonment. justice stevens is credited with bringing justice kennedy on board in a 5-4 vote that gave the epa the authority to regulate carbon ee medications. when the supreme court ruled in 2007 that schools couldn't promote integration by considering a child's race when they assigned students to schools, justice stevens dissented from that case. in that case, the majority cited brown v. board of education. the 1955 case that ended legal school segregation. they cited that in the majority. in his dissent, justice stevens called that a cruel irony. j

in 2000, he led the dissenters in "bush v. gore," the five-to- four decision that sealed george w. bush's election as president. and later, stevens won support from justices anthony kennedy and the now-retired sandra day o'connor-- the court's swing voters-- to rein in key bush administration policies. in 2006, he wrote the majority opinion in "hamdan v. rumsfeld," holding that using military commissions to try terror suspects at guantanamo bay was unconstitutional. stevens was asked in 2007 what his legacy might be. >> i suppose on the basis of the opinions i've written. there's an awful lot of them. they'll have to pick and choose between them. but you leave... you leave your record on what you've had to say over the years. >> woodruff: today's resignation now gives president obama his second high-court nomination. the chairman of the senate judiciary committee, democrat patrick leahy, appealed today for civility in the coming confirmation fight. he said, "i hope both sides of the aisle will make this process a thoughtful and civil discourse." senate republican leader mitch mcconn

so political scientists after bush v gore which is considered the death nell to supreme court independenceand integrity, you know, it took a year or two for opinions to go back to where they were about the court. so i think relative to other political institutions, the court is actually doing pretty well. >> rose: thank you. pleasure to have you on the program, swramal greene is a professor at columbia university where he teaches constitutional law. a graduate of yale law school. we turn now to latin america which has long been called the continent of the future and by many measures it seems the future may be now. brazil has a booming commodities market. colombia has posted record economic growth rates. and chile is on the brink of first world status. despite these significant stride, latin america remains in many places crippled by poverty and crime. secretary of state hillary clinton recently visited mexico city where she met with leaders to revise a war on drug strategy. >> we know that the demand for drugs drives much of this i lissity trade. that guns purchased in the united states as

he wrote the lead dissent in bush v. gore, a decision that rangels him to this day. >> and you asked justice stevens, in your tenure have you changed or has the court changed? how did he answer the question? >> he said the court had changed. he said the court had moved to the right and he had stayed in the same place. i think there is something to support that view. there are certainly areas of the law where the court has changed. i also think he has changed. he was a really uncharacteristically bitter dissenter in january of this year when the court decided its citizens united case. the case that said corporations have first amendment rights essentially equal to that of human beings. that level of bitterness was not something we are used to seeing from justice stevens and i think was indicative of the fact that he really feels out of sorts with the court majority at this point. >> let's bring in john king of john king usa. as i mentioned at the top here, not unexpected. >> not unexpected. a fascinating challenge for the pres