text:
John Paul Stevens

John Paul Stevens (April 20, 1920 – July 16, 2019) was an American lawyer and jurist who served as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1975 to 2010. At the time of his retirement, he was the second-oldest justice in the history of the U.S. Supreme Court and the third-longest-serving justice. At the time of his death in 2019 at age 99, he was the longest-lived Supreme Court justice ever. His long tenure saw him write for the Court on most issues of American law, including civil liberties, the death penalty, government action, and intellectual property. Despite being a registered Republican who throughout his life identified as a conservative, Stevens was considered to have been on the liberal side of the Court at the time of his retirement.

Born in Chicago, Stevens served in the United States Navy during World War II and graduated from Northwestern University School of Law. After clerking for Justice Wiley Rutledge, he co-founded a law firm in Chicago, focusing on antitrust law. In 1970, President Richard Nixon appointed Stevens to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Five years later, President Gerald Ford successfully nominated Stevens to the Supreme Court to fill the vacancy caused by the retirement of Justice William O. Douglas. He became the senior associate justice after the retirement of Harry Blackmun in 1994. After the death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Stevens briefly acted in the capacity of Chief Justice before the appointment of John Roberts. Stevens retired in 2010 during the administration of President Barack Obama and was succeeded by Elena Kagan.

Stevens's majority opinions in landmark cases include Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Apprendi v. New Jersey, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., Kelo v. City of New London, Gonzales v. Raich, U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, and Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency. Stevens is also known for his dissents in Texas v. Johnson, Bush v. Gore, Bethel v. Fraser, District of Columbia v. Heller, Printz v. United States, and Citizens United v. FEC.

Early life and education (1920–1947)
Stevens was born on April 20, 1920, in Hyde Park, Chicago, Illinois, to a wealthy family. His paternal grandfather had formed an insurance company and held real estate in Chicago, and his granduncle owned the Chas A. Stevens department store. His father, Ernest James Stevens (1884–1972), was a lawyer who later became an hotelier, owning two hotels: the La Salle and the Stevens Hotel. The family lost ownership of the hotels during the Great Depression, and Stevens's father, grandfather, and an uncle were charged with embezzlement; the Illinois Supreme Court later overturned the conviction, criticizing the prosecution. His mother, Elizabeth Street Stevens (1881–1979), was a high school English teacher. Two of his three older brothers also became lawyers.

A lifelong Chicago Cubs fan, Stevens was 12 when he attended the 1932 World Series between the Yankees and the Cubs in Chicago's Wrigley Field, in which Babe Ruth allegedly called his shot. Stevens later recalled: "Ruth did point to the center-field scoreboard. And he did hit the ball out of the park after he pointed with his bat, so it really happened." He also had the opportunity to meet several notable people of the era, including the famed aviators Amelia Earhart and Charles Lindbergh, the latter of whom gave him a caged dove as a gift.

The family lived in Hyde Park, and Stevens attended the University of Chicago Laboratory Schools where he graduated in 1937. He later attended the University of Chicago, where he majored in English, was inducted into Phi Beta Kappa, and graduated with highest honors in 1941. While in college, Stevens also became a member of the Psi Upsilon fraternity.

He began work on his master's degree in English at the university in 1941 but soon decided to join the United States Navy. He enlisted on December 6, 1941, one day before the attack on Pearl Harbor, and served as an intelligence officer in the Pacific Theater from 1942 to 1945. Stevens was awarded a Bronze Star for his service in the codebreaking team whose work led to the downing of Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto's plane in 1943 (Operation Vengeance).

Stevens married Elizabeth Jane Shereen in June 1942. Divorcing her in 1979, he married Maryan Mulholland Simon that December; that marriage lasted until Simon's death in 2015 following complications from hip surgery. He had four children: John Joseph (who died of cancer in 1996), Kathryn (who died in 2018), Elizabeth, and Susan.

With the end of World War II, Stevens returned to Illinois, intending to return to his studies in English, but was persuaded by his brother Richard, who was a lawyer, to attend law school. Stevens enrolled in the Northwestern University School of Law in 1945, with the G.I. Bill paying most of his tuition. Stevens graduated in 1947 ranked first in his class with a J.D. magna cum laude, having earned the highest GPA in the school's history.

Legal career, 1947–1970
After receiving high recommendations from several Northwestern faculty members, Stevens served as a law clerk to Supreme Court justice Wiley Rutledge during the 1947–48 term.

Following his clerkship, Stevens returned to Chicago and joined the law firm of Poppenhusen, Johnston, Thompson & Raymond (now Jenner & Block). Stevens was admitted to the bar in 1949. He determined that he would not stay long at the Poppenhusen firm after being docked his pay for the day he took off to travel to Springfield to swear his oath of admission. During his time at the firm, Stevens began his practice in antitrust law.

In 1951, he returned to Washington, DC, to serve as associate counsel to the Subcommittee on the Study of Monopoly Power of the Judiciary Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives. During this time, the subcommittee worked on several highly publicized investigations in many industries, most notably Major League Baseball.

In 1952, Stevens returned to Chicago and, together with two other young lawyers with whom he had worked at Poppenhusen, Johnston, Thompson & Raymond, formed his own law firm: Rothschild, Stevens, Barry & Myers. It soon developed into a successful practice, with Stevens continuing to focus on antitrust cases. His growing expertise in antitrust law led to an invitation to teach the "Competition and Monopoly" course at the University of Chicago Law School, and from 1953 to 1955, he was a member of the Attorney General's National Committee to Study Antitrust Laws. At the same time, Stevens was making a name for himself as a first-rate antitrust litigator and was involved in a number of trials. He was widely regarded by colleagues as an extraordinarily capable and impressive lawyer with a fantastic memory and analytical ability, and authored a number of influential works on antitrust law.

In 1969, the Greenberg Commission, appointed by the Illinois Supreme Court to investigate Sherman Skolnick's corruption allegations leveled at former chief justice Ray Klingbiel and then-current chief justice Roy Solfisburg, named Stevens as its counsel, meaning that he essentially served as the commission's special prosecutor. The commission was widely thought to be a whitewash, but Stevens proved them wrong by vigorously prosecuting the justices, forcing them from office in the end. As a result of the prominence he gained during the Greenberg Commission, Stevens became the second vice president of the Chicago Bar Association in 1970.

Judicial career, 1970–2010
Stevens's role in the Greenberg Commission catapulted him to prominence and was largely responsible for President Richard Nixon's decision to appoint Stevens as a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in 1970. His nomination was put forth by a former University of Chicago classmate, Illinois Senator Charles H. Percy.

On November 28, 1975, President Gerald Ford nominated Stevens as an associate justice of the United States Supreme Court, to a seat vacated by William O. Douglas. Again, it was Percy who suggested Stevens; the nomination was also strongly supported by Attorney General Edward Levi, former president of the University of Chicago. He was sworn into office December 19, 1975, after being confirmed 98–0 by the U.S. Senate two days before.

When Harry Blackmun retired in 1994, Stevens became the senior associate justice and thus assumed the administrative duties of the Court whenever the post of Chief Justice of the United States was vacant or the chief justice was unable to perform his duties. Stevens performed the duties of chief justice in September 2005, between the death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist and the swearing-in of his replacement, John Roberts, and presided over oral arguments on a number of occasions when the chief justice was ill or recused. Also in September 2005, Stevens was honored with a symposium by Fordham Law School for his 30 years on the Supreme Court, and President Ford wrote a letter stating his continued pride in appointing him.

In a 2005 speech, Stevens stressed the importance of "learning on the job"; for example, during his tenure on the Court, Stevens changed his views on affirmative action (which he initially opposed), as well as on other issues. President Ford praised Stevens in 2005: "He is serving his nation well, with dignity, intellect and without partisan political concerns."

Additionally, he participated actively in questioning during oral arguments. Stevens was elected a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2008. That same year he was elected to the American Philosophical Society.

On January 20, 2009, Stevens administered the oath of office to Vice President Joe Biden at Biden's request. It is customary for the vice president to be inaugurated by the person of their choice.

On April 9, 2010, Stevens announced his intention to retire from the Supreme Court; he subsequently retired on June 29 of that year. Stevens said that his decision to retire from the Court was initially triggered when he stumbled on several sentences when delivering his oral dissent in the 2010 landmark case Citizens United v. FEC. Stevens said "I took that as a warning sign that maybe I've been around longer than I should."

Tenure and age
Stevens retired on June 29, 2010, as the third-longest-serving justice in the history of the Supreme Court with 34 years and six months of service and just three days short of tying the tenure of the second-longest serving justice in history, Stephen Johnson Field, who had retired on December 1, 1897. The longest-serving justice is Stevens's immediate predecessor, Justice William O. Douglas, who served 36$1/2$ years and retired on November 12, 1975. He was the last sitting Supreme Court justice to serve on the Burger Court.

Stevens was also the second-oldest justice, at age 90 years and two months at retirement, behind Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. who retired at the age of 90 years and 10 months on January 12, 1932. On July 23, 2015, Stevens became the longest-lived retired justice, surpassing Stanley Forman Reed who died at age 95 years and 93 days on April 2, 1980.

On June 26, 2015, Stevens attended the Court's announcement of the opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges, in which the Court ruled 5–4 that recognition of same-sex marriage is protected under the Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment.

Political affiliation
When he was appointed to the Supreme Court, Stevens was a registered Republican. In September 2007, he was a sitting Justice when he was asked if he still considered himself a Republican. Stevens replied, "That's the kind of issue I shouldn't comment on, either in private or in public." Stevens was generally considered to be one of the last-surviving Rockefeller Republicans.

Abner Mikva, a close friend, said that as a judge, Stevens refused to discuss politics. "He was more particular about it than a lot of them," Mikva stated.

In October 2018, Stevens said that Brett Kavanaugh's performance during his confirmation hearings should disqualify him from serving on the Supreme Court, citing the potential for political bias. Kavanaugh was nominated by Republican president Donald Trump.

Shortly before Stevens' death in 2019, he said he was "not a fan" of Donald Trump, and when asked about Trump's effect on the country, he stated "I don't think it's been favorable."

Judicial philosophy
On the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Stevens had a moderately conservative record. Early in his tenure on the Supreme Court, Stevens had a relatively moderate voting record. He voted to reinstate capital punishment in the United States and opposed race-based admissions programs, such as the program at issue in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke,. However, on the more conservative Rehnquist Court, Stevens joined the more liberal justices on issues such as abortion rights, gay rights and federalism. His Segal–Cover score, a measure of the perceived liberalism/conservatism of Court members when they joined the Court, places him squarely on the conservative side of the Court. However, a 2003 statistical analysis of Supreme Court voting patterns found Stevens the most liberal member of the Court. President Ford expressed no regrets about Stevens's drift toward liberalism, writing in a 2005 letter to USA Today, "Justice Stevens has made me, and our fellow citizens, proud of my three decade old decision to appoint him to the Supreme Court."

Stevens's jurisprudence has usually been characterized as idiosyncratic. Stevens, unlike most justices, reviewed petitions for certiorari within his chambers instead of having his law clerks participate as part of the cert pool and usually wrote the first drafts of his opinions himself; when asked to explain why, he said: "I'm the one hired to do the job." He further explained that he continued to learn about cases and legal theories as he drafted his opinions and re-evaluates his positions on cases while writing.

He was not an originalist (such as Antonin Scalia) nor a pragmatist (such as Justice Stephen Breyer), nor did he pronounce himself a cautious liberal (such as Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg). He was considered part of the liberal bloc of the Court starting in the mid-1980s, and was dubbed the "chief justice of the liberal Supreme Court", though he publicly called himself a judicial conservative in 2007.

In Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center,, Stevens argued against the Supreme Court's famous "strict scrutiny" doctrine for laws involving "suspect classifications", putting forth the view that all classifications should be evaluated using the "rational basis" test as to whether they could have been enacted by an "impartial legislature". In Burnham v. Superior Court of California,, Stevens demonstrated his independence with a characteristically pithy concurrence.

Stevens was once an impassioned critic of affirmative action; in addition to the 1978 decision in Bakke, he dissented in the case of Fullilove v. Klutznick,, which upheld a minority set-aside program. He shifted his position over the years and voted to uphold the affirmative action program at the University of Michigan Law School challenged in Grutter v. Bollinger,.

Stevens wrote the majority opinion in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld in 2006, in which he held that certain military commissions had been improperly constituted. He also wrote a lengthy dissenting opinion in Citizens United v. FEC, arguing the majority should not make a decision so broad that it would overturn precedents set in three previous Supreme Court cases. When reviewing his career at the Supreme Court in his 2019 book, The Making of a Justice: Reflections on My First 94 Years, Stevens lamented being unable to persuade his colleagues against the decision in Citizens United, which he described as "a disaster for our election law."

Freedom of speech
Stevens's views on obscenity under the First Amendment changed over the years. He was initially quite critical of constitutional protection for obscenity, rejecting a challenge to Detroit zoning ordinances that barred adult theaters in designated areas in Young v. American Mini Theatres,, ("[E]ven though we recognize that the First Amendment will not tolerate the total suppression of erotic materials that have some arguably artistic value, it is manifest that society's interest in protecting this type of expression is of a wholly different, and lesser, magnitude than the interest in untrammeled political debate"), but later in his tenure adhered firmly to a libertarian free speech approach on obscenity issues, voting to strike down a federal law regulating online obscene content considered "harmful to minors" in ACLU v. Ashcroft,. In his dissenting opinion, Stevens argued that, while "[a]s a parent, grandparent, and great-grandparent", he endorsed the legislative goal of protecting children from pornography "without reservation", "[a]s a judge, I must confess to a growing sense of unease when the interest in protecting children from prurient materials is invoked as a justification for using criminal regulation of speech as a substitute for, or a simple backup to, adult oversight of children's viewing."

Perhaps the most personal and unusual feature of his jurisprudence was his continual referencing of World War II in his opinions. For example, Stevens, a World War II veteran, was visibly angered by William Kunstler's flippant defense of flag-burning in oral argument in Texas v. Johnson, and voted to uphold a prohibition on flag-burning against a First Amendment argument. Stevens wrote, "The ideas of liberty and equality have been an irresistible force in motivating leaders like Patrick Henry, Susan B. Anthony, and Abraham Lincoln, schoolteachers like Nathan Hale and Booker T. Washington, the Philippine Scouts who fought at Bataan, and the soldiers who scaled the bluff at Omaha Beach. If those ideas are worth fighting for—and our history demonstrates that they are—it cannot be true that the flag that uniquely symbolizes their power is not itself worthy of protection from unnecessary desecration."

Stevens generally supported students' right to free speech in public schools. He wrote sharply-worded dissents in Bethel v. Fraser, and Morse v. Frederick,, two decisions that restricted students' freedom of speech. However, he joined the Court's ruling on Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, which upheld a principal's censorship of a student newspaper.

Establishment Clause
In Wallace v. Jaffree,, striking down an Alabama statute mandating a minute of silence in public schools "for meditation or silent prayer", Stevens wrote the opinion for a majority that included justices William Brennan, Thurgood Marshall, Harry Blackmun, and Lewis Powell. He affirmed that the Establishment Clause is binding on the States via the Fourteenth Amendment, and that: "Just as the right to speak and the right to refrain from speaking are complementary components of a broader concept of individual freedom of mind, so also the individual's freedom to choose his own creed is the counterpart of his right to refrain from accepting the creed of the majority. At one time, it was thought that this right merely proscribed the preference of one Christian sect over another, but would not require equal respect for the conscience of the infidel, the atheist, or the adherent of a non-Christian faith such as Islam or Judaism. But when the underlying principle has been examined in the crucible of litigation, the Court has unambiguously concluded that the individual freedom of conscience protected by the First Amendment embraces the right to select any religious faith or none at all."

Stevens wrote a dissent in Van Orden v. Perry,, in which he was joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg; he argued that the ten commandments displayed in the Texas Capitol grounds transmitted the message: "This State endorses the divine code of the 'Judeo-Christian' God." The Establishment Clause, he wrote, "at the very least ... has created a strong presumption against the display of religious symbols on public property", and that it "demands religious neutrality—Government may not exercise preference for one religious faith over another". This includes a prohibition against enacting laws or imposing requirements that aid all religions as against unbelievers, or aid religions that are based on a belief in the existence of God against those founded on different principles.

Commerce clause and states' rights
When interpreting the Interstate Commerce Clause, Stevens consistently sided with the federal government. He dissented in United States v. Lopez, and United States v. Morrison,, two prominent cases in which the Rehnquist court changed direction by holding that Congress had exceeded its constitutional power under the Commerce Clause. He then authored Gonzales v. Raich,, which permits the federal government to arrest, prosecute, and imprison patients who use medical marijuana regardless of whether such use is legally permissible under state law.

Fourth Amendment
Stevens had a generally libertarian voting record on the Fourth Amendment, which deals with search and seizure. Stevens authored the majority opinion in Arizona v. Gant, which held that "police may search a vehicle incident to a recent occupant's arrest only if the arrestee is within reaching distance of the compartment at the time of the search or it is reasonable to believe the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest." He dissented in New Jersey v. T. L. O., and Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton,, both involving searches in schools. He was a dissenter in Oliver v. United States,, a case relating to the open-fields doctrine. However, in United States v. Montoya De Hernandez,, he sided with the government, and he was the author of United States v. Ross, , which permits the police to search closed containers found in the course of searching a vehicle. He also authored the dissent in Kyllo v. United States,, which held that the use of thermal imaging requires a warrant.

In a 2009 paper, Ward Farnsworth argued that Stevens's "dissents against type" (in Stevens's case, votes in dissent in favor of the government's position and against the accused, such as the one in Kyllo) suggest that while Stevens "[believed] strongly in laying out resources for the sake of accuracy and opportunities to protest an unfair trial, [he is] not nearly as concerned about restraining the government at the front end of the process, when it is gathering evidence—for the costs of invaded rights then are to liberty rather than to accuracy".

Death penalty
Stevens joined the majority in Gregg v. Georgia,, which overruled Furman v. Georgia, and again allowed the use of the death penalty in the United States. In later cases such as Thompson v. Oklahoma, and Atkins v. Virginia,, Stevens held that the Constitution forbids the use of the death penalty in certain circumstances. Stevens opposed using the death penalty on juvenile offenders; he dissented in Stanford v. Kentucky, and joined the Court's majority in Roper v. Simmons,, overturning Stanford. In Baze v. Rees,, Stevens voted with the majority in upholding Kentucky's method of lethal injection, because he felt bound by stare decisis. However, he opined that "state-sanctioned killing is ... becoming more and more anachronistic" and agreed with former justice Byron White's assertion that "the needless extinction of life with only marginal contributions to any discernible social or public purposes ... would be patently excessive", in violation of the Eighth Amendment (quoting from White's concurrence in Furman). Soon after his vote in Baze, Stevens told a Sixth Circuit conference that one of the drugs (pancuronium bromide) in the three-drug cocktail used by Kentucky to execute death row inmates is prohibited in Kentucky for euthanizing animals. He questioned whether Kentucky Derby second-place finisher Eight Belles died more humanely than those on death row. He explained that his death penalty decisions were influenced, in part, by an increasing awareness through DNA testing of the fallibility of death sentences, and the fact that death-qualified juries come with a set of biases. Stevens, at the time of his opinion in Baze, was one of four justices—the others being Brennan, Marshall, and Blackmun—who had concluded that post-Gregg capital punishment is unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment. After his retirement, Stevens stated that his vote in Gregg was the only vote he regretted.

Chevron
Stevens authored the majority opinion in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.,. The opinion stands for how courts review administrative agencies' interpretations of their organic statutes. If the organic statute unambiguously expresses the will of Congress, the court enforces the legislature's intent. If the statute is unclear (and is thus thought to reflect a Congressional delegation of power to the agency to interpret the statute), and the agency interpretation has the force of law, courts defer to an agency's interpretation of the statute unless that interpretation is deemed to be "arbitrary, capricious, or manifestly contrary to the statute". This doctrine is now generally referred to as "Chevron deference" among legal practitioners.

Unlike some other members of the Court, Stevens was consistently willing to find organic statutes unambiguous and thus overturn agency interpretations of those statutes. (See his majority opinion in Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-Fonseca,, and his dissent in Young v. Community Nutrition Institute, .) Although Chevron has come to stand for the proposition of deference to agency interpretations, Stevens, the author of the opinion, was less willing to defer to agencies than the rest of his colleagues on the Court.

Crawford v. Marion County Election Board
Stevens wrote the lead opinion in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, a case where the Court upheld the right of states to require an official photo identification card to help ensure that only citizens vote. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy joined this opinion, and justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito agreed with them on the outcome. Edward B. Foley, an election law expert at Ohio State University, said the Stevens opinion might represent an effort to "depoliticize election law cases." Stevens's vote in Crawford and his agreement with the Court's conservative majority in two other cases during the 2007–2008 term (Medellin v. Texas, and Baze v. Rees) led University of Oklahoma law professor and former Stevens clerk Joseph Thai to wonder if Stevens was "tacking back a little bit toward the center."

Despite his vote in Crawford, Stevens expressed disagreement with Shelby County v. Holder, a case that struck down preclearance requirements of the Voting Rights Act.

Bush v. Gore
In Bush v. Gore,, Stevens wrote a scathing dissent on the Court's ruling to stay the recount of votes in Florida during the 2000 presidential election. He believed that the holding displayed "an unstated lack of confidence in the impartiality and capacity of the state judges who would make the critical decisions if the vote count were to proceed". He continued, "The endorsement of that position by the majority of this Court can only lend credence to the most cynical appraisal of the work of judges throughout the land. It is confidence in the men and women who administer the judicial system that is the true backbone of the rule of law. Time will one day heal the wound to that confidence that will be inflicted by today's decision. One thing, however, is certain. 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 is the Nation's confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law."

Second Amendment
Stevens wrote the primary dissenting opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller, a landmark case which addressed the interpretation of the Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms. Heller struck down provisions of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 and held that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. His dissent was joined by justices David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer; the majority opinion was written by Justice Antonin Scalia.

Stevens stated that the Court's judgment was "a strained and unpersuasive reading" which overturned longstanding precedent, and that the Court had "bestowed a dramatic upheaval in the law." Stevens also stated that the amendment was notable for the "omission of any statement of purpose related to the right to use firearms for hunting or personal self-defense" which was present in the Declarations of Rights of Pennsylvania and Vermont. Stevens' dissent seems to rest on four main points of disagreement: that the Founders would have made the individual right aspect of the Second Amendment express if that was what was intended; that the "militia" preamble and exact phrase "to keep and bear arms" demands the conclusion that the Second Amendment touches on state militia service only; that many lower courts' later "collective-right" reading of the Miller decision constitutes stare decisis, which may only be overturned at great peril; and that the Court has not considered gun-control laws (e.g., the National Firearms Act) unconstitutional. The dissent concludes, "The Court would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons. ... I could not possibly conclude that the Framers made such a choice."

On March 27, 2018, days after the March for Our Lives demonstrations in the wake of the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting, described by many media outlets as a possible tipping point for gun control legislation,  Stevens wrote an essay for The New York Times, stating that the demonstrators should be demanding the outright repeal of the Second Amendment. He wrote:

"Concern that a national standing army might pose a threat to the security of the separate states led to the adoption of that amendment, which provides that 'a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.' Today that concern is a relic of the 18th century."

Books
In 2011, Stevens published a memoir entitled Five Chiefs: A Supreme Court Memoir, which detailed his legal career during the tenure of five of the Supreme Court's chief justices. In Five Chiefs, Stevens recounts his time as a law clerk during the tenure of Chief Justice Vinson; his experiences as a private attorney during the Warren era; and his experience while serving as an associate justice on the Burger, Rehnquist, and Roberts Courts.

In 2014, Stevens published Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution, where he proposed that six amendments should be added to the U.S. Constitution to address political gerrymandering, anti-commandeering, campaign finance reform, capital punishment, gun violence, and sovereign immunity.

In 2019, at age 99 and shortly before his death, Stevens published The Making of a Justice: Reflections on My First 94 Years.

Personal life
Stevens married Elizabeth Sheeren in 1942. He was on the high court when the couple divorced thirty-seven years later in 1979. Later that same year, he married Maryan Simon; they remained married until her death in 2015. Stevens had four children, two of whom predeceased him. Stevens was a Protestant, and upon his retirement, the Supreme Court had no Protestant members for the first time in its history. He was one of only two Supreme Court justices who divorced while on the Court—the first was William O. Douglas, whom he coincidentally succeeded as an associate justice. Stevens was also an avid bridge player and belonged to the Pompano Duplicate Bridge Club Florida.

Death
On July 16, 2019, Stevens died at the age of 99 at a hospital in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, from complications of a stroke. He received hospice care and was with his two surviving children, Elizabeth and Susan, when he died.

He lay in repose at the Supreme Court on July 22, 2019 before a planned burial at Arlington National Cemetery the following day. The service was attended by all the justices on the court, as well as retired justices Anthony Kennedy and David Souter. President Donald Trump ordered flags to fly at half-staff as a mark of respect on Tuesday, July 23, until sundown.

In popular culture
Stevens was portrayed by the actor William Schallert in the 2008 film Recount. He was portrayed by David Grant Wright in two episodes of Boston Legal in which Alan Shore and Denny Crane appear before the Supreme Court. Stevens appeared in interviews in two episodes of Ken Burns's 2011 PBS documentary miniseries Prohibition, recalling his childhood in Chicago in the 1920s and 30s.

According to an April 2009 article in The Wall Street Journal, Stevens "rendered an opinion on who wrote Shakespeare's plays," proclaiming himself an Oxfordian. That is, he believes the works ascribed to William Shakespeare actually were written by Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford. As a result, he was appointed Oxfordian of the Year by the Shakespeare Oxford Society. According to the article, Antonin Scalia and Harry Blackmun shared Stevens's belief.

Stevens was 12 years old when he was at Wrigley Field for the 1932 World Series game at which Babe Ruth hit his "called shot" home run. Eighty-four years later, he attended Game 4 of the 2016 World Series, also at Wrigley Field, wearing a red bowtie with a Chicago Cubs jacket.

title: John Paul Stevens


text:
Approval

Approval may refer to:

 * Approval rating, a polling term which reflects the approval of a particular person or program
 * Approval voting, a voting system
 * Approval proofer, an output device used in Prepress proofing
 * Approved drug, formal government approval of a medication for sale
 * Social approval, the positive appraisal and acceptance of a person by a social group

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Approval


text:
Electronic Privacy Information Center

The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) is an independent nonprofit research center established in 1994 to protect privacy, freedom of expression, and democratic values in the information age. Based in Washington, D.C., their mission is to "secure the fundamental right to privacy in the digital age for all people through advocacy, research, and litigation." EPIC believes that privacy is a fundamental right, the internet belongs to people who use it, and there's a responsible way to use technology.

EPIC pursues a wide range of civil liberties, consumer protection, and human rights issues. EPIC has pursued several successful consumer privacy complaints with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) concerning Snapchat (faulty privacy technology), WhatsApp (privacy policy after acquisition by Facebook), Facebook (changes in user privacy settings), Google (roll-out of Google Buzz), Microsoft (Hailstorm log-in), and Choicepoint (sale of personal information to identity thieves). EPIC has also prevailed in significant Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) cases against the CIA, the DHS, the Department of Education, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the National Security Agency (NSA), the ODNI, and the Transportation Security Administration. EPIC has also filed many amicus curiae briefs on law and technology, including Riley v. California (2014), which concerne cell phone privacy. They have also litigated important privacy cases, including EPIC v. DHS (D.C. Cir. 2011), which led to the removal of the x-ray body scanners in US airports, and EPIC v. NSA (D.C. Cir. 2014), which led to the release of the NSA's formerly secret cybersecurity authority. Additionally, EPIC challenged the NSA's domestic surveillance program in a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court. In re EPIC, (U.S. 2013) after the release of the "Verizon Order" in June 2013. One of EPIC's current cases concerns the obligation of the Federal Aviation Administration to establish privacy regulations prior to the deployment of commercial drones in the United States.

EPIC works closely with a distinguished advisory board, who have expertise in law, technology and public policy.

EPIC Open Government project
The EPIC Open Government Project is one of the nation's leading government transparency programs. Combining decades of expertise in the Freedom of Information Act with experienced litigation attorneys, EPIC obtains important government records to promote accountability and safeguard civil liberties.

The EPIC Open Government Project pursues four distinct program activities. First, the project actively pursues secret government documents through the FOIA. Second, the EPIC Open Government Project recommends improvements to agency rulemakings concerning transparency, privacy, and civil liberties. Third, EPIC trains law school students on utilizing the FOIA to promote open government. Fourth, EPIC participates in coalitions with other government transparency organizations. EPIC's extensive press outreach and popular website allow EPIC to make FOIA documents widely available to the press and the public.

Public Voice project
The Public Voice coalition was established in 1996 by EPIC to promote public participation in decisions concerning the future of the Internet. The Public Voice has pursued issues ranging from privacy and freedom of expression to consumer protection and Internet governance. Through international conferences, reports and funding for travel the Public Voice project seeks to increase the presence of NGOs at meetings across the globe. In cooperation with the OECD, UNESCO, and other international organizations, the Public Voice project brings civil society leaders face to face with government officials for constructive engagement about current policy issues. Public Voice events have been held in Buenos Aires, Cancun, Cape Town, Dubai, Hong Kong, Honolulu, Kuala Lumpur, Madrid, Ottawa, Paris, Seoul, Washington, and Wroclaw.

The Public Voice project is made possible, in part, by support from the Ford Foundation, the Markle Foundation, the Open Society Institute, and EPIC. The Public Voice has provided support for several organizations, including the Center for International Media Action, CPSR, EDRi, People for Internet Responsibility, Privacy International, CPSR-Peru, and the TransAtlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD).

The Public Voice helped establish the Civil Society Information Society Advisory Council (CSISAC) which is the "voice of civil society" at the OECD. CSISAC's mission is set out in the Seoul Declaration adopted at the OECD Ministerial Meeting in Seoul, 2008. CSISAC contributes to the OECD's work on Digital Economy Policy and promotes the exchange of information between the OECD and civil society. The OECD provides civil society participants with substantial empirical analysis that enable informed policy assessments; CSISAC provides the OECD with the essential perspectives of experts and NGOs leaders. CSISAC strengthens the relationship between civil society and the OECD and promotes better-informed and more widely accepted policies for the IT sector.

"There is an increasing recognition that we must involve all stakeholders including the voice of civil society. The Public Voice meeting and its contributions to the Forum have been constructive and positive."—OECD Under Secretary General

EPIC Amicus project
The EPIC Amicus Project seeks to promote privacy and government oversight by filing "friend of the court" briefs in federal and state courts. The EPIC Amicus Program is one of the most prolific appellate advocacy programs in the United States, filing almost 100 amicus briefs on emerging privacy and civil liberties issues, including more than 20 briefs for the US Supreme Court. The EPIC Project brings together experts in the fields of law, technology, and privacy policy with a team of in-house litigators to identify and file in cutting edge privacy cases. EPIC's amicus briefs have been cited by judges and justices in significant Fourth Amendment, consumer privacy, communications privacy, medical privacy, workplace privacy, and open government cases. EPIC continues to expand the scope of the Amicus Program, including arguing cases before the New Jersey Supreme Court, the New Mexico Supreme Court, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. EPIC's amicus participation has also been requested by judges in both federal and state cases. And EPIC attorneys frequently speak at judicial conferences, both in the United States and around the world, about emerging privacy issues and the role of the judiciary.

EPIC AI & Human Rights project
The EPIC Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) and Human Rights Project advocates for the adoption of transparent, equitable, and commonsense development of AI policy and regulations. EPIC pursues this goal through a combination of public education, direct legislative advocacy, freedom of information requests, comments to decision-makers at the state, federal, and international levels, and more.

EPIC Consumer Privacy project
The EPIC Consumer Privacy Project advocates for the rights of consumers and Internet users, and works to protect consumers' personal information and autonomy in the digital marketplace. EPIC promotes the implementation and enforcement of Fair Information Practices and the enactment of the Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights, so that consumers do not have to choose between engaging in modern society and retaining their right to privacy.

EPIC Surveillance Oversight project
EPIC's Project on Surveillance Oversight focuses public attention on merging technologies used to conduct domestic surveillance. As federal Judge Chutkan explained in a case brought by EPIC, "There can be little dispute that the general public has a genuine, tangible interest in a system designed to store and manipulate significant quantities of its own biometric data, particularly given the great numbers of people from whom such data will be gathered."

EPIC's Project on Surveillance Oversight looks also at drone surveillance, social media monitoring, police body-worn cameras, passenger profiling, vehicle tracking and cyber-surveillance. The Project pursues several activities to inform the public and to advocate for better privacy protections. EPIC uses FOIA to obtain documents about government surveillance programs. EPIC also files comments with federal agencies, leads coalition advocacy efforts, and testifies before state and federal legislatures for better privacy protections. EPIC has filed numerous amicus briefs in important court cases that address surveillance issues.

EPIC Administrative Law project
Through the Administrative Law Project, EPIC aims to compel federal agencies to adopt practices that safeguard privacy and promote transparency. EPIC has pursued this mission through extensive comments to agencies, and subsequent lawsuits in instances where agencies fail to adopt EPIC's recommendations. Over the last twenty years, EPIC has successfully advocated for individual privacy rights in agency rulemaking proceedings. EPIC has also successfully sued the government to force an agency to conduct a public rulemaking as required under the APA.

Publications and web sites
EPIC maintains and publishes its monthly newsletter, the EPIC Alert.

EPIC also publishes several books on privacy and open government, including Privacy in the Modern Age: The Search for Solutions, Privacy Law Sourcebook, Privacy and Human Rights, Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws, Filters and Freedom, The Public Voice WSIS Sourcebook, and The Consumer Law Sourcebook.

EPIC maintains web sites for the Privacy Coalition, the Public Voice coalition, and the National Committee for Voting Integrity.

EPIC Champion of Freedom Award
EPIC established the Champions of Freedom Award in 2004 to recognize individuals and organizations that have helped safeguard the right of privacy, promote open government, and protect democratic values with courage and integrity.

EPIC Champions of Freedom

 * Alondra Nelson (2023)
 * Attorney General Phil Weiser (2023)
 * Holly Jacobs (2023)
 * Attorney General Karl Racine (2022)
 * Congresswoman Yvette Clarke (2022)
 * John M. Abowd (2022)
 * Joseph Cox, Motherboard (2021)
 * The Markup (2021)
 * Ambassador Stavros Lambrinidis (2020)
 * Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (2020)
 * Senator Steve Daines (2020)
 * Senator Richard Blumenthal (2019)
 * Representative Jan Schakowsky (2019)
 * Secretary Matthew Dunlap (2018)
 * Secretary Alex Padilla (2018)
 * Garry Kasparov (2017)
 * Judge Patricia Wald (2017)
 * Hon. Nancy Gertner (2016)
 * Richard Clarke (2015)
 * Tim Cook (2015)
 * AG Kamala Harris (2015)
 * Rep. Justin Amash (2014)
 * Edward Snowden (2014)
 * The Guardian (2014)
 * Sen. Rand Paul (2013)
 * Sen. Ron Wyden (2013)
 * Martha Mendoza (2013)
 * Sen. Al Franken (2012)
 * Judge Alex Kozinski (2012)
 * Dana Priest & William Arkin, “Top Secret America” (2012)
 * Susie Castillo (2011)
 * Rep. Jason Chaffetz (2011)
 * Rep. Rush Holt (2011)
 * WSJ, “What They Know” (2011)
 * Rep. Joe Barton (2010)
 * Pamela Jones Harbour (2010)
 * Rose Foundation (2010)
 * Pamela Samuelson (2010)
 * D.J. Caruso (2009)
 * Addison Fischer (2009)
 * Rep. Ed Markey (2009)
 * Paul M. Smith (2009)
 * Sen. Patrick Leahy (2004)

EPIC Lifetime Achievement Awardees

 * Sherry Turkle (2022)
 * Shoshana Zuboff (2021)
 * David J. Farber (2020)
 * Joi Ito (2019)
 * Peter G. Neumann (2018)
 * Ron Rivest (2017)
 * Christopher Wolf (2016)
 * Bruce Schneier (2015)
 * Anita L. Allen (2014)
 * Hon. David Flaherty (2013)
 * Whitfield Diffie (2012)
 * Willis Ware (2012)

EPIC International Privacy Champions

 * Johnny Ryan (2023)
 * Beeban Kidron (2023)
 * Forbrukerrådet (2022)
 * Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (2020)
 * Shyam Divan (2020)
 * Giovanni Buttarelli, European Data Protection Supervisor (2019)
 * Joe McNamee, European Digital Rights Initiative (2019)
 * Gus Hosein, Privacy International (2018)
 * Professor Artemi Rallo (2018)
 * Alexander Dix, Chair, IWGDPT (2017)
 * Viviane Reding, Member, European Parliament (2016)
 * Peter Hustinx, European Data Protection Supervisor (2015)
 * Jan Philipp Albrecht, Member, European Parliament (2014)
 * Max Schrems, Europe v. Facebook (2013)
 * Jennifer Stoddart, Privacy Commissioner of Canada (2012)
 * Sophie in ’t Veld, Member, European Parliament (2011)
 * Justice Michael Kirby, High Court of Australia (2010)
 * Prof. Stefano Rodotà, Italian Data Protection Authority (2009)

EPIC Privacy Champions

 * Safiya Noble (2022)
 * Joy Buolamwini (2021)
 * Brandi Collins-Dexter (2020)
 * Sophie Richardson (2019)
 * Stephanie Perrin (2018)
 * Carrie Goldberg (2017)
 * Ashkan Soltani (2016)
 * Susan Linn, Campaign for Commercial Free Childhood (2015)
 * Philip Zimmerman, Silent Circle (2015)
 * Evan Hendricks, Privacy Times (2014)
 * Susan Grant, Consumer Federation of America (2013)
 * Christopher Soghoian (2012)
 * Jeff Chester, Center for Digital Democracy (2011)
 * Beth Givens, Privacy Rights Clearinghouse (2010)

title: Electronic Privacy Information Center


text:
Reconfigurable computing

Reconfigurable computing is a computer architecture combining some of the flexibility of software with the high performance of hardware by processing with flexible hardware platforms like field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs). The principal difference when compared to using ordinary microprocessors is the ability to add custom computational blocks using FPGAs. On the other hand, the main difference from custom hardware, i.e. application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs) is the possibility to adapt the hardware during runtime by "loading" a new circuit on the reconfigurable fabric, thus providing new computational blocks without the need to manufacture and add new chips to the existing system.

History
The concept of reconfigurable computing has existed since the 1960s, when Gerald Estrin's paper proposed the concept of a computer made of a standard processor and an array of "reconfigurable" hardware. The main processor would control the behavior of the reconfigurable hardware. The latter would then be tailored to perform a specific task, such as image processing or pattern matching, as quickly as a dedicated piece of hardware. Once the task was done, the hardware could be adjusted to do some other task. This resulted in a hybrid computer structure combining the flexibility of software with the speed of hardware.

In the 1980s and 1990s there was a renaissance in this area of research with many proposed reconfigurable architectures developed in industry and academia, such as: Copacobana, Matrix, GARP, Elixent, NGEN, Polyp, MereGen, PACT XPP, Silicon Hive, Montium, Pleiades, Morphosys, and PiCoGA. Such designs were feasible due to the constant progress of silicon technology that let complex designs be implemented on one chip. Some of these massively parallel reconfigurable computers were built primarily for special subdomains such as molecular evolution, neural or image processing. The world's first commercial reconfigurable computer, the Algotronix CHS2X4, was completed in 1991. It was not a commercial success, but was promising enough that Xilinx (the inventor of the Field-Programmable Gate Array, FPGA) bought the technology and hired the Algotronix staff. Later machines enabled first demonstrations of scientific principles, such as the spontaneous spatial self-organisation of genetic coding with MereGen.

Tredennick's Classification
The fundamental model of the reconfigurable computing machine paradigm, the data-stream-based anti machine is well illustrated by the differences to other machine paradigms that were introduced earlier, as shown by Nick Tredennick's following classification scheme of computing paradigms (see "Table 1: Nick Tredennick's Paradigm Classification Scheme").

Hartenstein's Xputer
Computer scientist Reiner Hartenstein describes reconfigurable computing in terms of an anti-machine that, according to him, represents a fundamental paradigm shift away from the more conventional von Neumann machine. Hartenstein calls it Reconfigurable Computing Paradox, that software-to-configware (software-to-FPGA) migration results in reported speed-up factors of up to more than four orders of magnitude, as well as a reduction in electricity consumption by up to almost four orders of magnitude—although the technological parameters of FPGAs are behind the Gordon Moore curve by about four orders of magnitude, and the clock frequency is substantially lower than that of microprocessors. This paradox is partly explained by the Von Neumann syndrome.

High-performance computing
High-Performance Reconfigurable Computing (HPRC) is a computer architecture combining reconfigurable computing-based accelerators like field-programmable gate array with CPUs or multi-core processors.

The increase of logic in an FPGA has enabled larger and more complex algorithms to be programmed into the FPGA. The attachment of such an FPGA to a modern CPU over a high speed bus, like PCI express, has enabled the configurable logic to act more like a coprocessor rather than a peripheral. This has brought reconfigurable computing into the high-performance computing sphere.

Furthermore, by replicating an algorithm on an FPGA or the use of a multiplicity of FPGAs has enabled reconfigurable SIMD systems to be produced where several computational devices can concurrently operate on different data, which is highly parallel computing.

This heterogeneous systems technique is used in computing research and especially in supercomputing. A 2008 paper reported speed-up factors of more than 4 orders of magnitude and energy saving factors by up to almost 4 orders of magnitude. Some supercomputer firms offer heterogeneous processing blocks including FPGAs as accelerators. One research area is the twin-paradigm programming tool flow productivity obtained for such heterogeneous systems.

The US National Science Foundation has a center for high-performance reconfigurable computing (CHREC). In April 2011 the fourth Many-core and Reconfigurable Supercomputing Conference was held in Europe.

Commercial high-performance reconfigurable computing systems are beginning to emerge with the announcement of IBM integrating FPGAs with its IBM Power microprocessors.

Partial re-configuration
Partial re-configuration is the process of changing a portion of reconfigurable hardware circuitry while the other portion keeps its former configuration. Field programmable gate arrays are often used as a support to partial reconfiguration.

Electronic hardware, like software, can be designed modularly, by creating subcomponents and then higher-level components to instantiate them. In many cases it is useful to be able to swap out one or several of these subcomponents while the FPGA is still operating.

Normally, reconfiguring an FPGA requires it to be held in reset while an external controller reloads a design onto it. Partial reconfiguration allows for critical parts of the design to continue operating while a controller either on the FPGA or off of it loads a partial design into a reconfigurable module. Partial reconfiguration also can be used to save space for multiple designs by only storing the partial designs that change between designs.

A common example for when partial reconfiguration would be useful is the case of a communication device. If the device is controlling multiple connections, some of which require encryption, it would be useful to be able to load different encryption cores without bringing the whole controller down.

Partial reconfiguration is not supported on all FPGAs. A special software flow with emphasis on modular design is required. Typically the design modules are built along well defined boundaries inside the FPGA that require the design to be specially mapped to the internal hardware.

From the functionality of the design, partial reconfiguration can be divided into two groups:
 * dynamic partial reconfiguration, also known as an active partial reconfiguration - permits to change the part of the device while the rest of an FPGA is still running;
 * static partial reconfiguration - the device is not active during the reconfiguration process. While the partial data is sent into the FPGA, the rest of the device is stopped (in the shutdown mode) and brought up after the configuration is completed.

Computer emulation
With the advent of affordable FPGA boards, students' and hobbyists' projects seek to recreate vintage computers or implement more novel architectures. Such projects are built with reconfigurable hardware (FPGAs), and some devices support emulation of multiple vintage computers using a single reconfigurable hardware (C-One).

COPACOBANA
A fully FPGA-based computer is the COPACOBANA, the Cost Optimized Codebreaker and Analyzer and its successor RIVYERA. A spin-off company SciEngines GmbH of the COPACOBANA-Project of the Universities of Bochum and Kiel in Germany continues the development of fully FPGA-based computers.

Mitrionics
Mitrionics has developed a SDK that enables software written using a single assignment language to be compiled and executed on FPGA-based computers. The Mitrion-C software language and Mitrion processor enable software developers to write and execute applications on FPGA-based computers in the same manner as with other computing technologies, such as graphical processing units ("GPUs"), cell-based processors, parallel processing units ("PPUs"), multi-core CPUs, and traditional single-core CPU clusters. (out of business)

National Instruments
National Instruments have developed a hybrid embedded computing system called CompactRIO. It consists of reconfigurable chassis housing the user-programmable FPGA, hot swappable I/O modules, real-time controller for deterministic communication and processing, and graphical LabVIEW software for rapid RT and FPGA programming.

Xilinx
Xilinx has developed two styles of partial reconfiguration of FPGA devices: module-based and difference-based. Module-based partial reconfiguration permits to reconfigure distinct modular parts of the design, while difference-based partial reconfiguration can be used when a small change is made to a design.

Intel
Intel supports partial reconfiguration of their FPGA devices on 28 nm devices such as Stratix V, and on the 20 nm Arria 10 devices. The Intel FPGA partial reconfiguration flow for Arria 10 is based on the hierarchical design methodology in the Quartus Prime Pro software where users create physical partitions of the FPGA that can be reconfigured at runtime while the remainder of the design continues to operate. The Quartus Prime Pro software also support hierarchical partial reconfiguration and simulation of partial reconfiguration.

Classification of systems
As an emerging field, classifications of reconfigurable architectures are still being developed and refined as new architectures are developed; no unifying taxonomy has been suggested to date. However, several recurring parameters can be used to classify these systems.

Granularity
The granularity of the reconfigurable logic is defined as the size of the smallest functional unit (configurable logic block, CLB) that is addressed by the mapping tools. High granularity, which can also be known as fine-grained, often implies a greater flexibility when implementing algorithms into the hardware. However, there is a penalty associated with this in terms of increased power, area and delay due to greater quantity of routing required per computation. Fine-grained architectures work at the bit-level manipulation level; whilst coarse grained processing elements (reconfigurable datapath unit, rDPU) are better optimised for standard data path applications. One of the drawbacks of coarse grained architectures are that they tend to lose some of their utilisation and performance if they need to perform smaller computations than their granularity provides, for example for a one bit add on a four bit wide functional unit would waste three bits. This problem can be solved by having a coarse grain array (reconfigurable datapath array, rDPA) and a FPGA on the same chip.

Coarse-grained architectures (rDPA) are intended for the implementation for algorithms needing word-width data paths (rDPU). As their functional blocks are optimized for large computations and typically comprise word wide arithmetic logic units (ALU), they will perform these computations more quickly and with more power efficiency than a set of interconnected smaller functional units; this is due to the connecting wires being shorter, resulting in less wire capacitance and hence faster and lower power designs. A potential undesirable consequence of having larger computational blocks is that when the size of operands may not match the algorithm an inefficient utilisation of resources can result. Often the type of applications to be run are known in advance allowing the logic, memory and routing resources to be tailored to enhance the performance of the device whilst still providing a certain level of flexibility for future adaptation. Examples of this are domain specific arrays aimed at gaining better performance in terms of power, area, throughput than their more generic finer grained FPGA cousins by reducing their flexibility.

Rate of reconfiguration
Configuration of these reconfigurable systems can happen at deployment time, between execution phases or during execution. In a typical reconfigurable system, a bit stream is used to program the device at deployment time. Fine grained systems by their own nature require greater configuration time than more coarse-grained architectures due to more elements needing to be addressed and programmed. Therefore, more coarse-grained architectures gain from potential lower energy requirements, as less information is transferred and utilised. Intuitively, the slower the rate of reconfiguration the smaller the power consumption as the associated energy cost of reconfiguration are amortised over a longer period of time. Partial re-configuration aims to allow part of the device to be reprogrammed while another part is still performing active computation. Partial re-configuration allows smaller reconfigurable bit streams thus not wasting energy on transmitting redundant information in the bit stream. Compression of the bit stream is possible but careful analysis is to be carried out to ensure that the energy saved by using smaller bit streams is not outweighed by the computation needed to decompress the data.

Host coupling
Often the reconfigurable array is used as a processing accelerator attached to a host processor. The level of coupling determines the type of data transfers, latency, power, throughput and overheads involved when utilising the reconfigurable logic. Some of the most intuitive designs use a peripheral bus to provide a coprocessor like arrangement for the reconfigurable array. However, there have also been implementations where the reconfigurable fabric is much closer to the processor, some are even implemented into the data path, utilising the processor registers. The job of the host processor is to perform the control functions, configure the logic, schedule data and to provide external interfacing.

Routing/interconnects
The flexibility in reconfigurable devices mainly comes from their routing interconnect. One style of interconnect made popular by FPGAs vendors, Xilinx and Altera are the island style layout, where blocks are arranged in an array with vertical and horizontal routing. A layout with inadequate routing may suffer from poor flexibility and resource utilisation, therefore providing limited performance. If too much interconnect is provided this requires more transistors than necessary and thus more silicon area, longer wires and more power consumption.

Challenges for operating systems
One of the key challenges for reconfigurable computing is to enable higher design productivity and provide an easier way to use reconfigurable computing systems for users that are unfamiliar with the underlying concepts. One way of doing this is to provide standardization and abstraction, usually supported and enforced by an operating system.

One of the major tasks of an operating system is to hide the hardware and present programs (and their programmers) with nice, clean, elegant, and consistent abstractions to work with instead. In other words, the two main tasks of an operating system are abstraction and resource management.

Abstraction is a powerful mechanism to handle complex and different (hardware) tasks in a well-defined and common manner. One of the most elementary OS abstractions is a process. A process is a running application that has the perception (provided by the OS) that it is running on its own on the underlying virtual hardware. This can be relaxed by the concept of threads, allowing different tasks to run concurrently on this virtual hardware to exploit task level parallelism. To allow different processes and threads to coordinate their work, communication and synchronization methods have to be provided by the OS.

In addition to abstraction, resource management of the underlying hardware components is necessary because the virtual computers provided to the processes and threads by the operating system need to share available physical resources (processors, memory, and devices) spatially and temporarily.

title: Reconfigurable computing


text:
Riverdale (Archie Comics)

Riverdale is a fictional town in the United States where most of the characters live and appear in Archie Comics. Conflicting details on its geographic location have been given over the years. It is located near the fictional town of Greendale, home of Sabrina the Teenage Witch comic book series. In the television series Riverdale, it is located near Greendale related to the television series Chilling Adventures of Sabrina.

Overview
Riverdale is the setting of the stories in the Archie Comics universe. It is usually depicted as a medium-sized town (possibly a suburb of a bigger city), with all the usual amenities of shopping malls, restaurants, and parks. In the first Archie stories in the 1940s, it was identified as Riverdale, New York, a real neighborhood in The Bronx. In Jackpot Comics #5 (Spring 1942), a story written by Bob Montana has the gang going on a river trip. One panel says "...the good ship 'Peter Stuyvesant' settles into the Hudson, as Riverdale High clambers aboard for a happy trip to Bear Mountain." Riverdale has been shown to have beaches, lakes, rivers, deserts, farmland, woodland, mountains, plains, a transit system, and four distinct seasons with changes in climate.

Archie Comics publisher John L. Goldwater and initial Archie artist Bob Montana differed on the inspiration for Riverdale, with Goldwater saying it was based on his hometown of Hiawatha, Kansas, and Montana saying the town's high school was based on his own in Haverhill, Massachusetts, where as in the comics a replica of Auguste Rodin's famous statue The Thinker stands.

In one issue of Archie and Jughead Digest, when one of the readers asked in a letter, "Where is Riverdale located?", the editor replied, "Riverdale is more of a state of mind than an actual physical location. It could be anywhere that kind people live and just have fun, like Archie and his friends. It could be in the Midwest, or along the Eastern Seaboard, or even a town in Canada, Mexico, or England."

Riverdale High School
Riverdale High School is the local educational institution of Riverdale where Archie and his friends attend the 11th grade. Its school colors are blue and gold, and its school newspaper is the Blue and Gold.

Only a few of Riverdale High's staff appear regularly in the comics; these include the school principal Mr. Weatherbee, homeroom teacher Miss Grundy, chemistry teacher Mr. Flutesnoot, history teacher Miss Haggly, physical education teachers Coach Kleats and Coach Clayton, cafeteria cook Miss Beazley, custodian Mr. Svenson, secretary Miss Phlips, and superintendent of schools Mr. Hassle.

in the TV show, the staff frequently shown/mentioned in Riverdale are Mr. Weatherbee (principal), Miss Grundy (former, deceased music teacher), Coach Clayton (football coach) and Mr. Svenson (caretaker)

In the five-issue miniseries Faculty Funnies (cover-dated June 1989 – May 1990) by writer George Gladir and penciler Stan Goldberg, faculty members Mr. Weatherbee, Mr. Flutesnoot, Miss Grundy and Coach Clayton secretly become the superhero team the Awesome Foursome after a lab accident involving Archie's science project. They lose their powers after putting out a chemical fire.

The series Archie at Riverdale High ran 113 issues (August 1972 – February 1987). This was followed by Riverdale High, which ran six issues (August–June 1990). After a brief hiatus, it was retitled Archie's Riverdale High and then canceled with issue #8 (August–October 1991).

Places
Places in Riverdale besides the high school include the following:
 * Pop Tate's Chocklit Shoppe, the soda shop frequented by the teenaged cast.
 * Pickens Park, the community park named for the fictional Civil War hero General Pickens.
 * The Lodge Mansion, the large and luxurious home of wealthy Veronica Lodge and her parents.
 * Homes of other members of the gang, including the Andrews residence, Jones residence and Cooper residence.
 * Dilton Doiley's science lab, a home-based setup where Dilton invents and conducts experiments.
 * Chuck Clayton's studio, where Chuck draws his cartoons at home.
 * The beach, where Archie and the gang spend much of their time in the summer.
 * The Riverdale Mall, a source of shopping and entertainment, particularly for the girls.
 * The Blossom Mansion, the larger and luxurious home where wealthy Cheryl Blossom and her family live.
 * Riverdale High, where all the teens go to school, and where all the dances and some parties are hosted, like homecoming.

Nearby towns
Some nearby towns include Greendale and Midvale. Greendale is the home of Sabrina, the Teenage Witch, who once lived in Riverdale but eventually moved. Characters who appear in Josie and the Pussycats come from Midvale.

Riverdale High School's main scholastic and athletic rival is Central High School, located in another nearby community. Central High seems to consist of nothing but villainous types. The males are generally thuggish, conniving brutes, and the females are usually lecherous, scheming vamps. In most of their encounters, Central students seldom compete without using unsportsmanlike conduct, if not out-and-out cheating. The coaches and teachers often are not only aware of this skullduggery, but encourage it. In most cases, Central's team colors are bright red and silver-white.

In the fourth season of the iconic show, Stonewall Prep is heavily mentioned as one of the nearby rival schools. Student often dress in rabbit memorabilia and carry fake looking axes to intimidate unwanted newcomers. In a rather charming episode, Betty and Jughead have relations in Jughead's dorm during the winter months. As Jughead courageously ventures outside their cozy abode to buy them an extravagant meal of vending machine memorabilia, he is nearly attacked by one of these bunny loving students.

Pembrooke Academy is a private school attended by siblings Cheryl and Jason Blossom and their snobbish friends Bunny and Cedric. They look down on Riverdale students as "townies" and will not (except for the Blossom twins) willingly associate with them. Other schools that have been featured as Riverdale rival schools include Hadley High and Southside High. In one comic, a letter sent to Riverdale has "U." where the state should be, and a ZIP code of 10543 (which in real life is Mamaroneck, New York, the home of Michael Silberkleit, an Archie Comics editor).

Related media

 * In the pilot of the 2017 series Riverdale, the town is described as being located in "Rockland County." Only one county in the US has that name, Rockland County, New York, close to Archie Comics' headquarters in Pelham, New York. Whereas the real Rockland County has a heavily suburban character and is only about 40 miles from New York City, the TV version of Riverdale is much more isolated, is not home to anyone who regularly commutes to New York, and features several plots that depend on the town being located close to the Canadian border. This suggests that the fictional Rockland County on the show is not the same as its real-life counterpart and is instead in far Upstate New York.

Cultural references

 * In The Simpsons episode "Sideshow Bob Roberts" (Episode 2F02), several Archie Comics characters, including Archie Andrews, Reggie Mantle, Moose Mason and Jughead Jones have a cameo. The episode also features a copy of Archie Comics.
 * In "Marge the Lumberjill" (Episode ZABF02) from the same series, Springfield Elementary students perform dramatic scenes that they write themselves, based on TV shows and YouTube, including one from Riverdale.

title: Riverdale (Archie Comics)


text:
Phosphoric acid

Phosphoric acid (orthophosphoric acid, monophosphoric acid or phosphoric(V) acid) is a colorless, odorless phosphorus-containing solid, and inorganic compound with the chemical formula H3PO4. It is commonly encountered as an 85% aqueous solution, which is a colourless, odourless, and non-volatile syrupy liquid. It is a major industrial chemical, being a component of many fertilizers.

The compound is an acid. Removal of all three H+ ions gives the phosphate ion PO4(3−). Removal of one or two protons gives dihydrogen phosphate ion H2PO4−, and the hydrogen phosphate ion HPO4(2−), respectively. Phosphoric acid forms esters, called organophosphates.

The name "orthophosphoric acid" can be used to distinguish this specific acid from other "phosphoric acids", such as pyrophosphoric acid. Nevertheless, the term "phosphoric acid" often means this specific compound; and that is the current IUPAC nomenclature.

Production
Phosphoric acid is produced industrially by one of two routes, wet processes and dry.

Wet process
In the wet process, a phosphate-containing mineral such as calcium hydroxyapatite and fluorapatite are treated with sulfuric acid.
 * Ca5(PO4)3OH + 5 H2SO4 → 3 H3PO4 + 5 CaSO4 + H2O
 * Ca5(PO4)3F + 5 H2SO4 → 3 H3PO4 + 5 CaSO4 + HF

Calcium sulfate (gypsum, CaSO4) is a by-product, which is removed as phosphogypsum. The hydrogen fluoride (HF) gas is streamed into a wet (water) scrubber producing hydrofluoric acid. In both cases the phosphoric acid solution usually contains 23–33% P2O5 (32–46% H3PO4). It may be concentrated to produce commercial- or merchant-grade phosphoric acid, which contains about 54–62% P2O5 (75–85% H3PO4). Further removal of water yields superphosphoric acid with a P2O5 concentration above 70% (corresponding to nearly 100% H3PO4). The phosphoric acid from both processes may be further purified by removing compounds of arsenic and other potentially toxic impurities.

Dry process
To produce food-grade phosphoric acid, phosphate ore is first reduced with coke in an electric arc furnace, to give elemental phosphorus. This process is also known as the thermal process or the electric furnace process. Silica is also added, resulting in the production of calcium silicate slag. Elemental phosphorus is distilled out of the furnace and burned with air to produce high-purity phosphorus pentoxide, which is dissolved in water to make phosphoric acid. The thermal process produces phosphoric acid with a very high concentration of P2O5 (about 85%) and a low level of impurities.

However, this process is more expensive and energy-intensive than the wet process, which produces phosphoric acid with a lower concentration of P2O5 (about 26-52%) and a higher level of impurities. The wet process is the most common method of producing phosphoric acid for fertilizer use.

Purification
Phosphoric acids produced from phosphate rock or thermal processes often requires purification. A common purification methods is liquid-liquid extraction, which involves the separation of phosphoric acids from water and other impurities using organic solvents, such as tributyl phosphate (TBP), methyl isobutyl ketone (MIBK), or n-octanol. Nanofiltration involves the use of a premodified nanofiltration membrane, which is functionalized by a deposit of a high molecular weight polycationic polymer of polyethyleneimines. Nanofiltration has been shown to significantly reduce the concentrations of various impurities, including cadmium, aluminum, iron, and rare earth elements. The laboratory and industrial pilot scale results showed that this process allows the production of food-grade phosphoric acid.

Fractional crystallization can achieve highest purities typically used for semiconductor applications. Usually a static crystallizer is used. A static crystallizer uses vertical plates, which are suspended in the molten feed and which are alternatingly cooled and heated by a heat transfer medium. The process begins with the slow cooling of the heat transfer medium below the freezing point of the stagnant melt. This cooling causes a layer of crystals to grow on the plates. Impurities are rejected from the growing crystals and are concentrated in the remaining melt. After the desired fraction has been crystallized, the remaining melt is drained from the crystallizer. The purer crystalline layer remains adhered to the plates. In a subsequent step, the plates are heated again to liquify the crystals and the purified phosphoric acid drained into the product vessel. The crystallizer is filled with feed again and the next cooling cycle is started.

Acidic properties
In aqueous solution phosphoric acid behaves as a triprotic acid.
 * H3PO4 ⇌ H2PO4- + H+, pKa1 = 2.14
 * H2PO4- ⇌ HPO4(2-) + H+, pKa2 = 7.20
 * HPO4(2-) ⇌ PO4(3-) + H+, pKa3 = 12.37

The difference between successive pKa values is sufficiently large so that salts of either monohydrogen phosphate, HPO4(2-) or dihydrogen phosphate, H2PO4-, can be prepared from a solution of phosphoric acid by adjusting the pH to be mid-way between the respective pKa values.

Aqueous solutions
Aqueous solutions up to 62.5% H3PO4 are eutectic, exhibiting freezing-point depression as low as -85°C. When the concentration of acid rises above 62.5% the freezing-point increases, reaching 21°C by 85% H3PO4 (w/w; the monohydrate). Beyond this the phase diagram becomes complicated, with significant local maxima and minima. For this reason phosphoric acid is rarely sold above 85%, as beyond this adding or removing small amounts moisture risks the entire mass freezing solid, which would be a major problem on a large scale. A local maximum at 91.6% which corresponds to the hemihydrate 2H3PO4•H2O, freezing at 29.32°C. There is a second smaller eutectic depression at a concentration of 94.75% with a freezing point of 23.5°C. At higher concentrations the freezing point rapidly increases. Concentrated phosphoric acid tends to supercool before crystallization occurs, and may be relatively resistant to crystallisation even when stored below the freezing point.

Self condensation
Phosphoric acid is commercially available as aqueous solutions of various concentrations, not usually exceeding 85%. If concentrated further it undergoes slow self-condensation, forming an equilibrium with pyrophosphoric acid:

 * 2 H3PO4 <-> H2O  +  H4P2O7

Even at 90% concentration the amount of pyrophosphoric acid present is negligible, but beyond 95% it starts to increase, reaching 15% at what would have otherwise been 100% orthophosphoric acid.

As the concentration is increased higher acids are formed, culminating in the formation of polyphosphoric acids. It is not possible to fully dehydrate phosphoric acid to phosphorus pentoxide, instead the polyphosphoric acid becomes increasingly polymeric and viscous. Due to the self-condensation, pure orthophosphoric acid can only be obtained by a careful fractional freezing/melting process.

Uses
The dominant use of phosphoric acid is for fertilizers, consuming approximately 90% of production.

Food-grade phosphoric acid (additive E338 ) is used to acidify foods and beverages such as various colas and jams, providing a tangy or sour taste. The phosphoric acid also serves as a preservative. Soft drinks containing phosphoric acid, which would include Coca-Cola, are sometimes called phosphate sodas or phosphates. Phosphoric acid in soft drinks has the potential to cause dental erosion. Phosphoric acid also has the potential to contribute to the formation of kidney stones, especially in those who have had kidney stones previously.

Specific applications of phosphoric acid include: Phosphoric acid may also be used for chemical polishing (etching) of metals like aluminium or for passivation of steel products in a process called phosphatization.
 * in anti-rust treatment by phosphate conversion coating or passivation
 * to prevent iron oxidation by means of the Parkerization process
 * as an external standard for phosphorus-31 nuclear magnetic resonance
 * in phosphoric acid fuel cells
 * in activated carbon production
 * in compound semiconductor processing, to etch Indium gallium arsenide selectively with respect to indium phosphide
 * in microfabrication to etch silicon nitride selectively with respect to silicon dioxide
 * in microfabrication to etch aluminium
 * as a pH adjuster in cosmetics and skin-care products
 * as a sanitizing agent in the dairy, food, and brewing industries

Safety
Phosphoric acid is not a strong acid. However, at moderate concentrations phosphoric acid solutions are irritating to the skin. Contact with concentrated solutions can cause severe skin burns and permanent eye damage.

A link has been shown between long-term regular cola intake and osteoporosis in later middle age in women (but not men).

title: Phosphoric acid


text:
Operant conditioning chamber

An operant conditioning chamber (also known as a Skinner box) is a laboratory apparatus used to study animal behavior. The operant conditioning chamber was created by B. F. Skinner while he was a graduate student at Harvard University. The chamber can be used to study both operant conditioning and classical conditioning.

Skinner created the operant conditioning chamber as a variation of the puzzle box originally created by Edward Thorndike. While Skinner's early studies were done using rats, he later moved on to study pigeons. The operant conditioning chamber may be used to observe or manipulate behaviour. An animal is placed in the box where it must learn to activate levers or respond to light or sound stimuli for reward. The reward may be food or the removal of noxious stimuli such as a loud alarm. The chamber is used to test specific hypotheses in a controlled setting.

Name
Skinner was noted to have expressed his distaste for becoming an eponym. It is believed that Clark Hull and his Yale students coined the expression "Skinner box". Skinner stated he did not use the term himself, and went so far as to ask Howard Hunt to use "lever box" instead of "Skinner box" in a published document.

History
In 1898, American psychologist, Edward Thorndike proposed the 'law of effect', which formed the basis of operant conditioning. Thorndike conducted experiments to discover how cats learn new behaviors. His work involved monitoring cats as they attempted to escape from puzzle boxes. The puzzle box trapped the animals until they moved a lever or performed an action which triggered their release. Thorndike ran several trials and recorded the time it took for them to perform the actions necessary to escape. He discovered that the cats seemed to learn from a trial-and-error process rather than insightful inspections of their environment. The animals learned that their actions led to an effect, and the type of effect influenced whether the behavior would be repeated. Thorndike's 'law of effect' contained the core elements of what would become known as operant conditioning. B. F. Skinner expanded upon Thorndike's existing work. Skinner theorized that if a behavior is followed by a reward, that behavior is more likely to be repeated, but added that if it is followed by some sort of punishment, it is less likely to be repeated. He introduced the word reinforcement into Thorndike's law of effect. Through his experiments, Skinner discovered the law of operant learning which included extinction, punishment and generalization.

Skinner designed the operant conditioning chamber to allow for specific hypothesis testing and behavioural observation. He wanted to create a way to observe animals in a more controlled setting as observation of behaviour in nature can be unpredictable.

Purpose
An operant conditioning chamber allows researchers to study animal behaviour and response to conditioning. They do this by teaching an animal to perform certain actions (like pressing a lever) in response to specific stimuli. When the correct action is performed the animal receives positive reinforcement in the form of food or other reward. In some cases, the chamber may deliver positive punishment to discourage incorrect responses. For example, researchers have tested certain invertebrates' reaction to operant conditioning using a "heat box". This box has two walls used for manipulation; one wall can undergo temperature change while the other cannot. As soon as the invertebrate crosses over to the side which can undergo temperature change, the researcher will increase the temperature. Eventually, the invertebrate will be conditioned to stay on the side that does not undergo a temperature change. After conditioning, even when the temperature is turned to its lowest setting, the invertebrate will avoid that side of the box.

Skinner's pigeon studies involved a series of levers. When the lever was pressed, the pigeon would receive a food reward. This was made more complex as researchers studied animal learning behaviours. A pigeon would be placed in the conditioning chamber and another one would be placed in an adjacent box separated by a plexiglass wall. The pigeon in the chamber would learn to press the lever to receive food as the other pigeon watched. The pigeons would then be switched, and researchers would observe them for signs of cultural learning.

Structure
The outside shell of an operant conditioning chamber is a large box big enough to easily accommodate the animal being used as a subject. Commonly used animals include rodents (usually lab rats), pigeons, and primates. The chamber is often sound-proof and light-proof to avoid distracting stimuli.

Operant conditioning chambers have at least one response mechanism that can automatically detect the occurrence of a behavioral response or action (i.e., pecking, pressing, pushing, etc.). This may be a lever or series of lights which the animal will respond to in the presence of stimulus. Typical mechanisms for primates and rats are response levers; if the subject presses the lever, the opposite end closes a switch that is monitored by a computer or other programmed device. Typical mechanisms for pigeons and other birds are response keys with a switch that closes if the bird pecks at the key with sufficient force. The other minimal requirement of an operant conditioning chamber is that it has a means of delivering a primary reinforcer such as a food reward.A simple configuration, such as one response mechanism and one feeder, may be used to investigate a variety of psychological phenomena. Modern operant conditioning chambers may have multiple mechanisms, such as several response levers, two or more feeders, and a variety of devices capable of generating different stimuli including lights, sounds, music, figures, and drawings. Some configurations use an LCD panel for the computer generation of a variety of visual stimuli or a set of LED lights to create patterns they wish to be replicated.

Some operant conditioning chambers can also have electrified nets or floors so that shocks can be given to the animals as a positive punishment or lights of different colors that give information about when the food is available as a positive reinforcement.

Research impact
Operant conditioning chambers have become common in a variety of research disciplines especially in animal learning. The chambers design allows for easy monitoring of the animal and provides a space to manipulate certain behaviours. This controlled environment may allow for research and experimentation which cannot be performed in the field.

There are a variety of applications for operant conditioning. For instance, shaping the behavior of a child is influenced by the compliments, comments, approval, and disapproval of one's behavior. An important factor of operant conditioning is its ability to explain learning in real-life situations. From an early age, parents nurture their children's behavior by using reward and praise following an achievement (crawling or taking a first step) which reinforces such behavior. When a child misbehaves, punishment in the form of verbal discouragement or the removal of privileges are used to discourage them from repeating their actions.

Skinner's studies on animals and their behaviour laid the framework needed for similar studies on human subjects. Based on his work, developmental psychologists were able to study the effect of positive and negative reinforcement. Skinner found that the environment influenced behaviour and when that environment is manipulated, behaviour will change. From this, developmental psychologists proposed theories on operant learning in children. This research was applied to education and the treatment of illness in young children. Skinner's theory of operant conditioning played a key role in helping psychologists understand how behavior is learned. It explains why reinforcement can be used so effectively in the learning process, and how schedules of reinforcement can affect the outcome of conditioning.

Commercial applications
Slot machines, online games, and dating apps are examples where sophisticated operant schedules of reinforcement are used to reinforce certain behaviors.

Gamification, the technique of using game design elements in non-game contexts, has also been described as using operant conditioning and other behaviorist techniques to encourage desired user behaviors.

title: Operant conditioning chamber


text:
Hiram Lodge

Hiram P. Lodge is a fictional character in the Archie Comics series. He is the father of protagonist Veronica Lodge and the richest man in Riverdale. Known for spoiling Veronica and his wife (Hermione Lodge), he is a successful businessman who has presided as Riverdale's most prominent industrialist. Lodge is the owner and CEO of his own multi-billion dollar conglomerate, Lodge Industries.

The family name was inspired by the Lodges, a Massachusetts Brahmin political family that previously commissioned a mural from Archie Comics creator Bob Montana.

Hiram is portrayed by Mark Consuelos in the television series Riverdale and Katy Keene.

History
Mr. Lodge has an ongoing feud with Archie Andrews, and disapproves of Archie dating Veronica. Hiram tries to avoid Archie because whenever he visits the Lodge mansion, something goes wrong, such as Archie accidentally breaking something valuable or injuring him. He allows the pair to continue dating, as deep down he knows Archie treats Veronica well. In multiple stories, Archie saves Mr. Lodge from thieves, blackmailers, and underhanded business rivals, causing Hiram to begin to accept Archie. On one occasion, he asks Archie and Jughead to act like they are his sons to secure a business deal with clients from a culture where people do not respect a person without sons. Taking advantage, the teens drive away in Lodge's new car and boss around Veronica and Smithers. A typhoon breaks out when the clients attempt to leave, and a tree breaks and is about to fall on them until Archie and Jughead save the day. This enables Lodge to secure the deal, and, in his joy, he says, "You did great, sons!", much to Veronica and Smithers' chagrin.

Hiram Lodge is a multimillionaire, but in one story, Veronica claims that his "Daddy has billions." This is likely due to the extreme rise of wealth in the real world since the introduction of the Archie Comics, which means that Hiram would have to be a billionaire to maintain the pretense that he is one of the richest men in the world. In the comics, this is explicated by the take-over of the Blossom corporation, owned by Cheryl Blossom's father.

Lodge is usually portrayed as successful and wealthy businessman, rather than a financier or banker, who is frequently involved in international business ventures. He has a keen eye for unusual business opportunities that others overlook. In one story, a rival businessman thought he had outmaneuvered Mr. Lodge by selling him a garbage dump for $2,000, yet Lodge easily retorted that he had covered the dump with artificial snow and turned it into a ski resort, which made him realize a windfall profit of over $2 million USD in its initial year of operation. He is usually portrayed as a successful businessman, rather than strictly as a banker, financier, or investor, who is frequently involved in international business dealings and transactions across the world. Lodge has a keen eye and entrepreneurial knack for spotting unusual business and investment opportunities that others overlook. The stories about his childhood are contradictory as some suggest he was born into old money and is descended from the founders of Riverdale, while others state that he built his fortune from that of his in-laws. Lodge had also served in the Army at some point in his life.

Although political matters in the Archie comics are rarely mentioned, one story-line hinted that Hiram was a conservative. In the storyline, the Archie had been shrunken and was forced to use a paper airplane to fly to the other side of the room. When it was suggested that they lean to the left, Veronica quipped that her dad hated anyone who leaned to the left.

Note: In some 'Archie' stories dating from the 1960s, he is referred to as J. P. Lodge, and in his first appearance in Pep Comics #31, he is referred to as Burton K. Lodge. One story gives his name as Mark.

Despite his old age, he remains physically fit and healthy, which in one story, Lodge attributes his strong physicall fitness in having successfully chased Archie away.

Animation

 * Hiram appears sporadically in Archie's Weird Mysteries (1999–2000), voiced by John Michael Lee. His dislike of Archie is notably toned down, as they don't interact much on-screen. In the episode "Teen Out of Time", it is revealed that Mr. Lodge was the one who gave Pop Tate a bank loan to open his diner.
 * Hiram appears briefly in the direct-to-video film, The Archies in JugMan (2002), with Lee reprising his role. Notably, his wife appears in the film too despite not being present in the TV series.

Live action

 * Hiram appears in the 1990 television film, Archie: To Riverdale and Back Again, portrayed by James Noble. He is the main antagonist and anti-hero who wants to evict Pop Tate from his soda shop, under the pretext of expanding Reggie Mantle's gym. Just like in the comic books, he doesn't want Veronica dating Archie, as he finds them incompatible, and seeing his daughter flirt with him only emboldens him to go through with his plans.
 * Hiram appears as a major antagonist on the CW series Riverdale, portrayed by Mark Consuelos. The pilot episode establishes that he is in New York City on trial for fraud and embezzlement, leading Hermione and Veronica to move to Riverdale to escape his notoriety. He and Fred Andrews were rivals in school, as Hiram stole Hermione from Fred and later married her. Hermione continues to help Hiram run his business and criminal empire from behind bars. In the second season, Hiram is released and returns to Riverdale, establishing himself as a threatening and powerful presence in the town. Just like the comic books and animated series, he hates Archie and doesn't want him to date Veronica. In the fourth season, he reveals he was born Jaime Luna but changed his name due to the bad reputation of the Luna family. In the fifth season episode "Chapter Eighty-Eight: Citizen Lodge", he tells Reggie Mantle about his father Javier Luna, who moved to Riverdale to work in palladium mines but ended up shining shoes. Hiram got tired of living in poverty and went to work for the gangster Vittorio "Vito" Alto, eventually taking over Vito's business when Vito disappeared.
 * Consuelos reprises the role in the episode "Chapter Thirteen: Come Together" from the first season of Katy Keene, a spin-off of Riverdale.

title: Hiram Lodge


text:
Betty and Veronica

Betty and Veronica (also known as Archie's Girls Betty and Veronica) is an ongoing comic book series published by Archie Comics focusing on "best frenemies" Betty Cooper and Veronica Lodge. Betty first appeared in Pep Comics #22 while Veronica made her debut a few months later, in Pep Comics #26, as an immediate rival to Betty for Archie's affections. Together the pair form the female part of the classic love triangle which has become a staple of the comic series since 1942.

Archie's Girls Betty and Veronica was first published in March 1950 and comprised 347 issues when it ended in April 1987. The run additionally included eight annuals published from 1953 to 1980. A new Betty and Veronica series launched with a #1 in June 1987. This volume ended in late 2015 with 278 issues (625 overall issues if you count volume one). Stories from previous issues of Betty and Veronica have been reprinted in Archie Comics Digest size digest series starring the two.

Betty and Veronica, a new series taking place in their rebooted New Riverdale (Archie comics) universe, debuted in September 2016. The series was written and drawn by Adam Hughes.

Significant issues

 * In issue #4, artist Dan DeCarlo did his first work for Archie, beginning a fifty-year career with the publishing house.
 * Issue #118 (October 1965) featured the first appearance of Betty's superheroine alter ego, Superteen, a spoof on the popular superhero comics at the time.
 * Issue #320 (October 1982) featured the first appearance of Cheryl Blossom, a redhead from Pembroke who competed with Betty and Veronica for Archie's affection.

Stories
Stories center around the daily life in Riverdale, which includes school, sports, part-time jobs, and romance. Most stories usually feature the two young women as they fight for Archie's affections. On occasion, stories will delve into more serious subjects such as divorce or cheating.

In 2007, a new realistic look for the characters was experimented with but reverted to their traditional appearances in 2008.

At New York Comic Con in 2013, Archie Comics announced that Betty and Veronica would leave Riverdale in Farewell, Betty and Veronica written by Michael Uslan with art by Dan Parent, and that two new female characters would replace them. The six-issue arc, titled Farewell to Betty and Veronica, was published from November 2014 to August 2015 through issues #272-277.

Story
Betty and Veronica was relaunched in 2016 as one of the New Riverdale titles. The series focuses on Pops’ Chocklit Shoppe being taken over by a huge coffee company owned by Veronica's father. Betty and Veronica take opposing viewpoints over the issue.

title: Betty and Veronica