Regional Oral History Office University of California The Bancroft Library Berkeley, California Carl D. Lawson THE LAW CLERKS OF CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN: CARL D. LAWSON Interviews conducted by Laura McCreery in 2004 Copyright © 2015 by The Regents of the University of California Since 1954 the Regional Oral History Office has been interviewing leading participants in or well-placed witnesses to major events in the development of Northern California, the West, and the nation. Oral History is a method of collecting historical information through tape-recorded interviews between a narrator with firsthand knowledge of historically significant events and a well-informed interviewer, with the goal of preserving substantive additions to the historical record. The tape recording is transcribed, lightly edited for continuity and clarity, and reviewed by the interviewee. The corrected manuscript is bound with photographs and illustrative materials and placed in The Bancroft Library at the University of California, Berkeley, and in other research collections for scholarly use. Because it is primary material, oral history is not intended to present the final, verified, or complete narrative of events. It is a spoken account, offered by the interviewee in response to questioning, and as such it is reflective, partisan, deeply involved, and irreplaceable. ********************************* All uses of this manuscript are covered by a legal agreement between The Regents of the University of California and Carl D. Lawson dated December 17, 2004. The manuscript is thereby made available for research purposes. All literary rights in the manuscript, including the right to publish, are reserved to The Bancroft Library of the University of California, Berkeley. Excerpts up to 1000 words from this interview may be quoted for publication without seeking permission as long as the use is non-commercial and properly cited. Requests for permission to quote for publication should be addressed to The Bancroft Library, Head of Public Services, Mail Code 6000, University of California, Berkeley, 94720-6000, and should follow instructions available online at http://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ROHO/collections/cite.html It is recommended that this oral history be cited as follows: Carl D. Lawson “THE LAW CLERKS OF CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN: CARL D. LAWSON” conducted by Laura McCreery in 2004 Regional Oral History Office, The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley, 2015. iii Table of Contents—Carl D. Lawson Interview 1: December 17, 2004 Audio File 1 1 Family Background — Early Education —Attending Harvard College — Attending Stanford Law School — Early Interest in Antitrust Law— Selected for clerkship at the Supreme Court — Clerking for Justice Stanley Forman Reed — Clerking for the Chief Justice — Relationships with other clerks — Recommendation of cert — The Chief Justice as a leadership figure — The Civil Rights Act and the Escobedo Case — The Chief Justice and California — The Miranda decision — Justice Thomas Campbell Clark — Relationship with other justices — Confidentiality — The Von’s Grocery Case — Oral arguments — Memos, opinions, and the Chief — Mrs. Margaret McHugh — Saturday lunches: Sports and politics — Personality of the Chief Justice — Role of the Supreme Court — Judicial activism — Later careers: antitrust law and the FCC — Relationship with the Chief Justice in later years [End of Interview] 1 Interview 1: December 17, 2004 Begin Audio File 1 McCreery: Tape one, on December 17, 2004. This is Laura McCreery speaking, and on this tape I’m interviewing Carl D. Lawson, at his home in Washington, D.C. We’re going to be talking today, for the oral history project Law Clerks of Chief Justice Earl Warren. Mr. Lawson, would you start us off by stating your date of birth and talking a little about where you were born? 01-00:00:37 Lawson: July 20, 1938. I was born in Boise, Idaho. McCreery: Could you say a little about your family circumstance at that time, in the waning Depression years? 01-00:00:49 Lawson: Well, I think the circumstance was that they didn’t have much money. I was the sixth of six. My mother was forty when I was born. My oldest siblings were teenagers. One daughter had died before I was born, and then there was a nine-year-old, and then this huge gap. Since the older siblings had married early, in some ways it was like being an only child; but then in other ways, not. McCreery: Say a little about your early schooling, if you would. 01-00:01:33 Lawson: Ah. Well, I went to the public schools in Boise, from first grade through high school. At that time, they didn’t have a public kindergarten. I don’t think they had it until the seventies. Even then, it was controversial. Some people considered it sort of a frill. McCreery: Okay. Well, I wonder, what were your own interests as a youngster? 01-00:01:56 Lawson: I had a great interest in history. Politics. I followed elections and all that sort of thing from—. Well, I certainly have very vivid memories of [Dwight D.] Eisenhower’s election. So I was very interested in history and politics, and not that interested in the math-science end of things. McCreery: Okay. Well, I see from your bio that you left Idaho and went off to Harvard College. Tell me how that came about. 01-00:02:38 Lawson: Well, I applied and got a scholarship. I think Harvard sent somebody out to Boise to recruit, which most of the Eastern schools would not have been doing at that point. Harvard had a lot more scholarship money than most schools. They’ve always had a big emphasis on geographic diversity. Or at least I think since the 1920s or so. So they were actively trying to get people from distant places, and Idaho was pretty distant. 2 McCreery: That must’ve been quite a change for you. 01-00:03:23 Lawson: Yes. Yes, it was, in some ways, like a foreign exchange. Massachusetts was a very different place from Idaho, and probably still is. McCreery: What did you study at Harvard? 01-00:03:37 Lawson: Government. McCreery: Did you have a particular thing in mind that you wanted to do? Were you interested in the law yet, at that time? 01-00:03:47 Lawson: No, I think when I started college, I thought I wanted to be a journalist. I’d been the editor of the school paper. At some point along the line, I decided maybe going to law school was—. Well, it seemed like everybody was going—if not immediately, later—to graduate school of some kind; that it was just sort of expected. I don’t think that would’ve been my expectation when I started. Well, in some ways, it was sort of a prep school for graduate schools. That it was just an expected thing, that you would do something. A lot of people did academic—. I think at that point, colleges were expanding rapidly and there were jobs in the academic world. So I think there were a lot of people scattered around in various universities, teaching various things. McCreery: Well, I note that you crossed the country again, to attend Stanford Law School. 01-00:04:53 Lawson: Yes. I got the acceptance after a March blizzard in Cambridge. I thought, why not? McCreery: Sounded pretty good, at that time of year. 01-00:05:03 Lawson: Yes, yes. Most law schools had these very dignified brochures with a great cover or something; but Stanford would have pictures of the campus and the sunshine and the tile roofs. McCreery: Perhaps the sun was their main recruiting tool. 01-00:05:23 Lawson: Yes, yes. They were not subtle about it. McCreery: Well, what did you find when you got to Stanford? How was it? 01-00:05:29 Lawson: I liked law school a great deal. Probably more than I enjoyed practicing law. 3 McCreery: Was that a surprise to you? 01-00:05:38 Lawson: Somewhat, yes. I think you don’t really know until you’re into it, what it’s like. Yes, I found it much more stimulating than I had expected. I had been on the debate team in college. Debate is a good preparation for law school, because the thought processes are similar, I think. McCreery: Yeah. Could you say something about the faculty at that time, and who might’ve been influential to you there, if anyone? 01-00:06:17 Lawson: Well, I don’t know if anyone was more influential than others. I think Ed [Edwin] Zimmerman had probably a great deal to do with my getting the clerkship. He was teaching antitrust and securities regulation. A short time later, he was a Deputy Assistant Attorney General for antitrust, and then went with Covington [Covington and Burling]; he didn’t go back to teaching. Let’s see. Phil Neal was teaching the first half of constitutional law, before he became dean at Chicago. He was very interesting. McCreery: How so? 01-00:07:02 Lawson: Well, his manner. You only knew that if he was smiling, that the answer was probably wrong. It was very difficult to figure out what he was really conveying. McCreery: Well, I wonder if you developed particular interests in the law while you were still a student. 01-00:07:34 Lawson: Well, antitrust, I think, was always an interest, yes. McCreery: You did, of course, continue to work in that area. 01-00:07:40 Lawson: I did a seminar in that, and then I did some antitrust work in private practice, and then I worked for the Antitrust Division [of the Justice Department] for about five and a half years, in the seventies.