Changes

Bush had received assurances that Souter would be a conservative from his Chief of Staff, [[John Sununu]], who had appointed Souter to the [[New Hampshire]] Supreme Court years earlier. Thus, Bush hoped to disarm liberal Senators who might oppose an obviously [[conservative]] nominee, as they had done just three years earlier with [[Robert Bork]]. But almost immediately it was apparent to some [[conservatives]] that Souter was not pro-life, as he had served as a director on a hospital that performed [[abortions]].  [[Liberals]] seemed to know that they had won.  Even though he was grilled to define his view on abortion, Souter didn't take the bait and he was confirmed by a vote of 90-9 by the [[U.S. Senate]], with several [[conservatives]] voting against him.  

Bush had received assurances that Souter would be a conservative from his Chief of Staff, [[John Sununu]], who had appointed Souter to the [[New Hampshire]] Supreme Court years earlier. Thus, Bush hoped to disarm liberal Senators who might oppose an obviously [[conservative]] nominee, as they had done just three years earlier with [[Robert Bork]]. But almost immediately it was apparent to some [[conservatives]] that Souter was not pro-life, as he had served as a director on a hospital that performed [[abortions]].  [[Liberals]] seemed to know that they had won.  Even though he was grilled to define his view on abortion, Souter didn't take the bait and he was confirmed by a vote of 90-9 by the [[U.S. Senate]], with several [[conservatives]] voting against him.  

Souter went on to align himself firmly with the more liberal bloc on the Court, leading to [[conservative]] anger at President Bush for this calculated blunder.  Souter's style is noticeably non-legal, as when he opened one opinion with an unusually non-legal description of "[[mens rea]]":<ref>''Clark v. Arizona'', 126 S. Ct. 2709, 2716 (2006) (emphasis added).</ref>

Souter went on to align himself firmly with the more liberal bloc on the Court, leading to [[conservative]] anger at President Bush for this calculated blunder.  Souter's style is noticeably non-legal, as when he opened one opinion with an unusually non-legal description of "[[mens rea]]":<ref>''Clark v. Arizona'', 126 S. Ct. 2709, 2716 (2006) (emphasis added).</ref>, saying, "whether Arizona violates due process in restricting consideration of defense evidence of mental illness and incapacity to its bearing on a claim of insanity, thus eliminating its significance directly on the issue of '''the mental element of the crime charged (known in legal shorthand as the mens rea, or guilty mind)'''".

:whether Arizona violates due process in restricting consideration of defense evidence of mental illness and incapacity to its bearing on a claim of insanity, thus eliminating its significance directly on the issue of '''the mental element of the crime charged (known in legal shorthand as the mens rea, or guilty mind)'''

On May 1 2009, Souter sent his official notice of resignation to President [[Barack Hussein Obama]].<ref>{{cite web|publisher=Scribd|url=http://www.scribd.com/doc/14839021/Souters-Letter|format=html/pdf|language=English|date=May 1 2009|accessdate=May 2 2009|author=Justice David Souter|work=The Supreme Court of the United States}}</ref>

== Timeline of Souter's shift from [[conservative]] to [[liberal]] ==

== Timeline of Souter's shift from [[conservative]] to [[liberal]] ==