“Sandra Day O’Connor Interviews John Paul Stevens”

O'Connor: Do you think that over the years you were here, your approach to cases changed at all? Or your view of the law? Did you see changes in your own reaction to the law in the cases we heard? Stevens: Well, yes, because it is a learning experience. I think nobody knows all the answers when he or she joins the court. You gradually learn about different areas of the law. And you learn through the briefs and arguments of your associates. So it's a continuing learning experience. It's a lot of fun ... one of the most interesting things anyone can do.

O'Connor: I feel the same way about it. Much is done at the time a new justice is nominated to try to see what the justice is going to do. But in fact, is it your experience that the nominee himself or herself doesn't know what they're going to do? Stevens: Absolutely, absolutely.

O'Connor: The nominee hasn't addressed all those issues. Stevens: You haven't read the briefs. All sorts of questions may come out differently after you study [them]. No, I think it is a terrible mistake in the confirmations to expect the nominee to know all the answers, because you just don't know them at the time.

O'Connor: During your years on the court, according to the press, some thought that you drifted "to the left," whatever that means. Have you read that about your jurisprudence? Stevens: I've read that over and over again, and the only thing I would say about that is, I've been asked this a lot and thought about it a lot, and, with one exception,