An article in yesterday’s Washington Post initially placed a quote of mine in a context that gave a mistaken impression about the “implicit bet” that I think that and have been making. I believe that their decisions not to retire at the end of the Court’s past two terms reflect an assessment that they could later still be replaced by someone ideologically similar. I don’t believe that their failure to announce a retirement during this post-election lame-duck period reflects such an assessment. I am grateful that the quote has been tweaked to make that clear.