^ Felix Frankfurter, Arthur

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

^ Felix Frankfurter, Arthur THE SUPREME COURT HISTORICAL SOCIETY VOLUME xm NUMBER 4,1992 Society Plans Lecture Series onthe Court's FiveJewishJustices Five-PartSeriesCo-sponsoredbyJewish HistoricalSocietyofGreaterWashin^on The Society is pleased to over half a century remained both a protagonist of modem announce that plans are American liberalism and an embodiment of its ideal." being finalized for a lecture The program will consist of five separate lectures, each series concerning the five concerning an individual Justice. The lectureswill be given by Jewish Justices who have outstandingscholarswho have devoted much oftheircareers to served on the Supreme Court. study of these individuals. Lectures will be given in the The Society will co-sponsor SupremeCourt Chamber,the RestoredSupremeCourtChamber these five eventswiththeJewish in the Capitol Building and the Senate Caucus Room in the Historical Society of Greater 5 Russell Building. All three rooms have historical significance to Washington. Sheldon S.Cohen, g the Court. The Court sat in what is now the Restored Supreme ofthe firm ofMorgan, Lewis & t Court Chamberofthe Capitolprior to the Civil War. The &nate Bockius is serving as ad hoc | CaucusRoomhasbeen thesiteformostoftherecentconfirmation chairman of the organizing 5 hearings forSupreme Court nominees. The SupremeCourt has committee for the series and is S been meeting in its current Chamber since 1935. O assistingwithplanningandfund- | The tentative schedule for the lectures is as follows: raising. ° The Court's last Jewish Justice, Abe Examining the lives and Fortas, will he examined ina talk by March 4, 1993 careers of some of the most Professor Bruce Murphy, of Penn Lecture on Louis Brandeis by Prof. Melvin Urofslg'. Pro fascinating and memorable State University. fessor Urofsky is a professor ofHistoiy at Virginia Common individuals to have served on the Supreme Court, the serieswill wealth University. His published works include Big Steeland focus upon thecareersofLouis the Wilson Administration (1969), the \>nze-\nnningAmerican ^ FelixBrandeis,Frankfurter,Benjamin Cardozo,Arthur --con tin uedon pagesix Goldbergand Abe Fortas.The subject matter of the series includes complex and rich 3niHemoriam personalities such as Louis D. Brandeiswho "inventedsavings It iswith great sadness that we report the death of long bank life insurance and the time QuarterlyEdiiorand SocietyFirstVicePresident,Alice preferential union shop, Louise O'Donnell. becameknown as the 'People's Miss O'Donnell's association with the Supreme Court, Attorney,' and altered American the Society,and the federaljudicial systemas a wholewasa jurisprudence as a lawyer and long-standing one. Sheservedon AssociateJusticeTom C. Supreme Court Justice." Clark's staff from 1949-1967, and before that on his staff Another lecture will deal with whenhe was AttorneyGeneral from 1945-1949. Felix Frankfurter, referred to During hertenurewith Justice Clark shecompleted her as "brilliant,mde, warmhearted, law degree atGeorge Washington UniversityinWashington, 'ThcCourt'sfirstjcwishjustice,Louis self-important, charming, D.C. and she was admitted to the Supreme Court Bar in D. Brandeis, will be the subject of a , t„ii,1 » ,lecture , ^byProfessor \Melvin - ITUrofekyr 1., brusque,." V-' talkative,i- i-. but never -continnedonpagefour of the University of Richmond. borillg. PcllX FfBllkfurtcr fOF A Letter From the President sively to that aspect of the Court's duties. Circuit riding was great people; and to bestow upon themunexampled prosper- attacks on the latter fromthe circuitbench, and hispassionate provided for by the JudiciaryAct of1789,which established three ity"(119). Jeremiads are included in thisvolume. Butwhatcomes through circuits (composed respectively of New England, the middle What is even more interesting is the aristocratic gjoss the here ishow much the otherjustices sharedhisviews-how all of most critical funding states, and the southern states) and required the Justices to hold Justicesputontheirrepresentative duties-agloss thatplaces them them operated on the conservative premises of the English need during the two sessions of the circuit courteach year. Until 1793,twoJustices 'quarely within the deferential political culture of the late eigh common law tradition. dlP^'^-years is, were required to sit with the federal district judge in each district teenthcentury. WhenJusticePatersoncomments on thehospital Take forexample Ellsworth's charges to the grand juryfor without doubt, the (state) oftheir assignedcircuit;after that date onlyonejusticewas ityand generosityofthe"gentlemen ofCharleston," (142) orwhen the district ofNewYork, April 1,1797, inwhich helashes out required. Circuit assignments varied throughout the decade, Iredell describes to his wife the "small but genteel society" the in pulpit rhetoric against the "hateful influence of those •• ^ Project of the which meant that justices from northern states often had to ride "pleasing civilities" ofPortsmouth, New Hampshire (45), ofbeing elements of disorganization, &tenetsof impiety," the"spirit ^A 7 Supreme Court of the middleor the southemcircuitsandjusticeswhosehomeswere entertained bythe governorof Maryland (178), weare reminded of party which poisons the source of public confidence, and A In^^l fhe United States, in the South sometimes worked the middle or New England ofthe factthat thejusticesbelongedto the political and social elite palsies the hand of the administration;" and that which un 1789-1800. It circuits. oftheir respective states.That noblesse oblige wasalive andwell leashes foreign influence, the "destroying angel of republics" probable, in light of Thedocuments in this volume, most ofwhich are now available among theJustices issuggestedby theirAnglicized wigs androbes. ( 159). Justice Gushing got soheated upinRichmond, Novem '^j the for the first time, include the personal correspondence of the Even moreto the pointwas the didactic, oftenpatronizing, tone ber 23, 1798, that he called on "AN ANGEL OF DELIVER- stantialmembership justices dealing with circuit duties and their charges to circuit of their jurycharges. The justices on circuit were in fact more ANGE;" in the person of George Washington, to rescue the grandjuries arrangedby circuit and year.Jury responses to the directly in touch with the people than either of the political republic. In fact, the justice cast himself in the same heaven years that many charges are reprinted when available asareothercontemporary branches of the national government, and like the itinerant appointed role. Armed with true law he would rescue "liberty ^^Hj^^^HL—^^HL—J^^HallH our members are reactions to the charges and to the circuitjudges themselves.The evangelicals of an earlier agethey rarelymisseda chanceto teach and property,""virtueand piety,"extirpate"allcombinations Leon siivennan unfamiliarwith the editors provide brief, but useful introductory essays preceding and preach. Thus we hear Justice Paterson in hischarge of April of foreign influenceand intrigue, of internal anarchy discord, Project. Since it is eachyearofthecircuit, whichkeepthereaderabreast ofpersonnel 2,1795, to the grand jury for the district of New Jersey declare: misrepresentation, calumny and falsehood, operating from the Society's single largest research endeavor, I think it appro changes ontheCourt,statutorychanges affectingthe circuits, and POLITIGAL, ambitious and selfish purposes;" and subdue priate to better familiarize those members who are not well the shifting political scene. Appendices include several undated The best and most effectual method of "allimpious attemptto root out of men'sminds every trace of informed of its history and objectives with some detail about circuit charges ofJustice Paterson, congressional legislation down preventing the commission of crimes is to Christian andnatural religion:" On hishit listwere"democratic this worthwhile program. to 1800 dealing with the circuits, and a circuit calendar that render the system of education as general societies," thelicentious press, andthose (debtors who argued The Project has been under the direction of Dr. Maeva includes attendanceinformation aswell asthe places anddatesof and perfectas possible The mind, without against paying British debts) who declared anunprovoked war Marcus since its inception in 1977. It is co-sponsored by the court sessions as assigned by statute. A bibliography of works literature or science, is in a rude and dark upon property" and whose evil ways have caused untold Supreme Court andtheSociety, andour costs are underwritten consulted and an extensive indexadd to the accessibility of the state, and incapable of high or useful exer suffering to"widows andorphans" across the land. Opponents by substantial annual grants from the National Historic Publi materials. tions ... (11). To act well our parts in society, oftheJayTreatywerealsodesignated public enemies (305-6). cations and Record Commission (NHPRC) and the William Several importantthemesemergefrom thesedocuments, the ^ wemustknow thetrueinterest ofthecommu- Gushing wenton in thisveinsolongthat he promptedonewag Nelson Cromwell Foundation, as well as some otheroccasional first of which is that circuit riding was demanding and frustrating flp P nity in which we live; to perform in a proper to question how it was that "an annual speech of60 lines from contributions. work-somuch sothatitdrove sittingjustices intoearly retirement manner the various duties incumbent upon a British kinghas given birth to an annual speech of from3 to The
Recommended publications
  • The Political Effects of the Addition of Judgeships to the United States Supreme Court Following Electoral Realignments
    A Compliant Court: The Political Effects of the Addition of Judgeships to the United States Supreme Court Following Electoral Realignments Lauren Paige Joyce Judson Thesis submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of: Master of Arts In Political Science Jason P. Kelly, Chair Wayne D. Moore Karen M. Hult August 7, 2014 Blacksburg, Virginia Keywords: Judicial Politics, Electoral Realignment, Alteration to the Supreme Court Copyright 2014, Lauren J. Judson A Compliant Court: The Political Effects of the Addition of Judgeships to the United States Supreme Court Following Electoral Realignments Lauren J. Judson ABSTRACT During periods of turmoil when ideological preferences between the federal branches of government fail to align, the relationship between the three quickly turns tumultuous. Electoral realignments especially have the potential to increase tension between the branches. When a new party replaces the “old order” in both the legislature and the executive branches, the possibility for conflict emerges with the Court. Justices who make decisions based on old regime preferences of the party that had appointed them to the bench will likely clash with the new ideological preferences of the incoming party. In these circumstances, the president or Congress may seek to weaken the influence of the Court through court-curbing methods. One example Congress may utilize is changing the actual size of the Supreme The size of the Supreme Court has increased four times in United States history, and three out of the four alterations happened after an electoral realignment. Through analysis of Supreme Court cases, this thesis seeks to determine if, after an electoral realignment, holdings of the Court on issues of policy were more congruent with the new party in power after the change in composition as well to examine any change in individual vote tallies of the justices driven by the voting behavior of the newly appointed justice(s).
    [Show full text]
  • Conflicts of Interest in Bush V. Gore: Did Some Justices Vote Illegally? Richard K
    Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law Hofstra Law Faculty Scholarship Spring 2003 Conflicts of Interest in Bush v. Gore: Did Some Justices Vote Illegally? Richard K. Neumann Jr. Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/faculty_scholarship Recommended Citation Richard K. Neumann Jr., Conflicts of Interest in Bush v. Gore: Did Some Justices Vote Illegally?, 16 Geo. J. Legal Ethics 375 (2003) Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/faculty_scholarship/153 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hofstra Law Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLES Conflicts of Interest in Bush v. Gore: Did Some Justices Vote Illegally? RICHARD K. NEUMANN, JR.* On December 9, 2000, the United States Supreme Court stayed the presidential election litigation in the Florida courts and set oral argument for December 11.1 On the morning of December 12-one day after oral argument and half a day before the Supreme Court announced its decision in Bush v. Gore2-the Wall Street Journalpublished a front-page story that included the following: Chief Justice William Rehnquist, 76 years old, and Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, 70, both lifelong Republicans, have at times privately talked about retiring and would prefer that a Republican appoint their successors.... Justice O'Connor, a cancer survivor, has privately let it be known that, after 20 years on the high court,'she wants to retire to her home state of Arizona ...
    [Show full text]
  • Ch 5 NC Legislature.Indd
    The State Legislature The General Assembly is the oldest governmental body in North Carolina. According to tradition, a “legislative assembly of free holders” met for the first time around 1666. No documentary proof, however, exists proving that this assembly actually met. Provisions for a representative assembly in Proprietary North Carolina can be traced to the Concessions and Agreements, adopted in 1665, which called for an unicameral body composed of the governor, his council and twelve delegates selected annually to sit as a legislature. This system of representation prevailed until 1670, when Albemarle County was divided into three precincts. Berkeley Precinct, Carteret Precinct and Shaftsbury Precinct were apparently each allowed five representatives. Around 1682, four new precincts were created from the original three as the colony’s population grew and the frontier moved westward. The new precincts were usually allotted two representatives, although some were granted more. Beginning with the Assembly of 1723, several of the larger, more important towns were allowed to elect their own representatives. Edenton was the first town granted this privilege, followed by Bath, New Bern, Wilmington, Brunswick, Halifax, Campbellton (Fayetteville), Salisbury, Hillsborough and Tarborough. Around 1735 Albemarle and Bath Counties were dissolved and the precincts became counties. The unicameral legislature continued until around 1697, when a bicameral form was adopted. The governor or chief executive at the time, and his council constituted the upper house. The lower house, the House of Burgesses, was composed of representatives elected from the colony’s various precincts. The lower house could adopt its own rules of procedure and elect its own speaker and other officers.
    [Show full text]
  • Not the King's Bench Edward A
    University of Minnesota Law School Scholarship Repository Constitutional Commentary 2003 Not the King's Bench Edward A. Hartnett Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/concomm Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Hartnett, Edward A., "Not the King's Bench" (2003). Constitutional Commentary. 303. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/concomm/303 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Minnesota Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Constitutional Commentary collection by an authorized administrator of the Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NOT THE KING'S BENCH Edward A. Hartnett* Speaking at a public birthday party for an icon, even if the honoree is one or two hundred years old, can be a surprisingly tricky business. Short of turning the party into a roast, it seems rude to criticize the birthday boy too harshly. On the other hand, it is at least as important to avoid unwarranted and exaggerated praise.1 The difficult task, then, is to try to say something re­ motely new or interesting while navigating that strait. The conference organizers did make it easier for me in one respect: My assignment does not involve those ideas for which Marbury is invoked as an icon. It is for others to wrestle in well­ worn trenches with exalted arguments about judicial review and its overgrown descendent judicial supremacy, while trying to avoid unseemly criticism or fawning praise. I, on the other hand, am to address more technical issues involving section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 and its provision granting the Supreme Court the power to issue writs of mandamus.
    [Show full text]
  • Carolina Cradle: Settlement of the Northwest Carolina Frontier, 1747
    CAROLINA CRADLE Settlement of the Northwest Carolina Frontier, /;'47-1762 On the eve of All-Souls' Day I heard the dead men say Who lie by the tottering tower, To the dark and doubling wind At the midnight's turning hour, When other speech had thinned: "What of the world now?" The wind whiffed back: "Men still Who are born, do good, do ill Here, fust as in your time: Till their years the locust hath eaten, Leaving them bare, downbeaten; Somewhiles in Springtide rime, Somewhiles in summer glow, Somewhiles in winter snow:— No more I know." —Thomas Hardy CAROLINA CRADLE Settlement of the Northwest Carolina Frontier, 1747-1762 ROBERT W. RAMSEY The University of North Carolina Press Chapel Hill © 1964 by the University of North Carolina Press All rights reserved Manufactured in the United States of America ISBN 978-0-8078-0934-1 ISBN 978-0-8078-4189-1 (pbk.) Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 64-22530 12 II 10 09 08 IJ 14 73 12 II To my father, whose profound understanding of the history and people of piedmont Carolina helped make this work possible This page intentionally left blank INTRODUCTION The records of Rowan County, North Carolina, date as far back as 1752. These ancient land grants, deeds, wills, mar- riages, and church and cemetery records contain the history of the northwest Carolina frontier, the doorway to the South and West. Rowan County originally included practically all of central and northwestern North Carolina and extended westward to the Mississippi River, having no western boundary line. While the vast amount of public and other records are in existence in this region, there is no information here to indicate whence these settlers came and why they came.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court Justices
    The Supreme Court Justices Supreme Court Justices *asterick denotes chief justice John Jay* (1789-95) Robert C. Grier (1846-70) John Rutledge* (1790-91; 1795) Benjamin R. Curtis (1851-57) William Cushing (1790-1810) John A. Campbell (1853-61) James Wilson (1789-98) Nathan Clifford (1858-81) John Blair, Jr. (1790-96) Noah Haynes Swayne (1862-81) James Iredell (1790-99) Samuel F. Miller (1862-90) Thomas Johnson (1792-93) David Davis (1862-77) William Paterson (1793-1806) Stephen J. Field (1863-97) Samuel Chase (1796-1811) Salmon P. Chase* (1864-73) Olliver Ellsworth* (1796-1800) William Strong (1870-80) ___________________ ___________________ Bushrod Washington (1799-1829) Joseph P. Bradley (1870-92) Alfred Moore (1800-1804) Ward Hunt (1873-82) John Marshall* (1801-35) Morrison R. Waite* (1874-88) William Johnson (1804-34) John M. Harlan (1877-1911) Henry B. Livingston (1807-23) William B. Woods (1881-87) Thomas Todd (1807-26) Stanley Matthews (1881-89) Gabriel Duvall (1811-35) Horace Gray (1882-1902) Joseph Story (1812-45) Samuel Blatchford (1882-93) Smith Thompson (1823-43) Lucius Q.C. Lamar (1883-93) Robert Trimble (1826-28) Melville W. Fuller* (1888-1910) ___________________ ___________________ John McLean (1830-61) David J. Brewer (1890-1910) Henry Baldwin (1830-44) Henry B. Brown (1891-1906) James Moore Wayne (1835-67) George Shiras, Jr. (1892-1903) Roger B. Taney* (1836-64) Howell E. Jackson (1893-95) Philip P. Barbour (1836-41) Edward D. White* (1894-1921) John Catron (1837-65) Rufus W. Peckham (1896-1909) John McKinley (1838-52) Joseph McKenna (1898-1925) Peter Vivian Daniel (1842-60) Oliver W.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fort Dobbs Gazette
    The Fort Dobbs Gazette The Newsletter of Fort Dobbs State Historic Site and the Friends of Fort Dobbs Volume XVII Issue 4 December 2020 Raffle Tickets on Sale Tickets are now on sale for the annual Friends of Fort Dobbs raffle! All proceeds fund educational programming and events at the historic site. This year there is one bundled prize: a museum quality bow and pair of practice arrows. All three items were hand-made by Native American artist IN THIS ISSUE: Talon Silverhorn.* The 52” tall bow has a draw weight of about 40 pounds. p. 1 -Raffle Tickets are $10 each , or five for $40. -Living History Update p. 2 -Photos from the Frontier p. 3 -2021 Events p. 4-6 Tickets may be purchased in person at Fort Dobbs, via email at Enlisted NC Soldiers [email protected], or over the phone at 704-873-5882. The winner will be selected on September 26, 2021 during the “Crisis in Carolina” p. 7 living history event. You do not need to be present to win! -Friends of Fort Dobbs Roll Call *Mr. Silverhorn is an enrolled member of the Eastern Shawnee Band of Oklahoma. www.talonsilverhorn.com Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Living History Update Susi Hamilton, Secretary On November 14th, the site hosted our very first living history event since Office of Archives and History February: our annual “Military Timeline.” The event was a resounding success! 40 Dr. Kevin Cherry, reenactors interpreted 400 years of NC military history from the Roanoke Island Deputy Secretary settlement through the Vietnam War.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ratings Game: Factors That Influence Judicial Reputation William G
    Marquette Law Review Volume 79 Article 2 Issue 2 Winter 1996 The Ratings Game: Factors That Influence Judicial Reputation William G. Ross Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/mulr Part of the Law Commons Repository Citation William G. Ross, The Ratings Game: Factors That Influence Judicial Reputation, 79 Marq. L. Rev. 401 (1996). Available at: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/mulr/vol79/iss2/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Marquette Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Marquette Law Review by an authorized administrator of Marquette Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MARQUETTE LAW REVIEW Volume 79 Winter 1996 Number 2 THE RATINGS GAME: FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE JUDICIAL REPUTATION WILLIAM G. ROSS* INTRODUCTION The rating of United States Supreme Court justices is an increasingly favorite pastime among scholars, judges, journalists, students, and practicing attorneys. Once the domain of a few pundits who made personal lists of the all-time "greatest" justices,' surveys are becoming more formal and are embracing more participants. The most extensive * Professor of Law, Cumberland School of Law of Samford University; A.B., Stanford, 1976; J.D., Harvard, 1979. The author was one of the scholars polled in the 1993 Blaustein- Mersky survey that is discussed in this Article. The author thanks Professor Roy M. Mersky of the University of Texas for advice and encouragement in connection with this Article and for his permission to publish the results of that survey as an appendix to this Article.
    [Show full text]
  • Power and Populations in the North Carolina Backcountry
    Journal of Backcountry Studies People of Desperate Fortune: Power and Populations in the North Carolina Backcountry BY JOSHUA LEE MCKAUGHAN Between the late 1740’s and the outbreak of the American Revolution, the western half of North Carolina underwent a rapid change from sparsely inhabited frontier to an area containing nearly one half of the colony’s population. To one period observer, these were merely “people of desperate fortune…without any property” hoping to exchange one “best poor man’s country” for another.1 Hoping to acquire sufficient acreage so that they and their children might achieve “competency” – or economic independence – these migrants sought to make the most of the opportunity offered by Carolina’s cheap fertile land. The farms they established commonly focused on subsistence crops and home industry. For many, the marketplace was a distant force to be tapped only for the goods that they or their neighbors desired but could not produce on their own.2 However, as European demand for wheat increased during the 1750’s, the back settlers responded to the market stimulus not only through their crop choices, but by increasing their petitions for improved connections to market areas. The more enterprising frontiersmen also added the labor of African and African-American slaves to that of their families in an attempt to not only increase their production of staples, but to increase their personal power and prestige – perhaps even to free themselves for officeholding and other pursuits. With this, the Backcountry grew to reflect eastern values – albeit on a rather more modest scale. The same blending of Backcountry and tidewater traditions found in the growing awareness of the market and slavery was no less conspicuous in the efforts of some back settlers to move up in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Justices of the Supreme Court Justices of the Supreme Court, 1789 to 2014 1
    ø1970¿ 1970 JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT, 1789 TO 2014 1 Years 2 State whence ap- Date of com- Date service Name 3 of pointed mission terminated service CHIEF JUSTICES 1. John Jay ................................. New York .............. Sept. 26, 1789 June 29, 1795 5 2. John Rutledge ........................ South Carolina ..... July 1, 1795 Dec. 15, 1795 (4)(5) 3. Oliver Ellsworth .................... Connecticut ........... Mar. 4, 1796 Dec. 15, 1800 4 4. John Marshall ........................ Virginia ................. Jan. 31, 1801 July 6, 1835 34 5. Roger Brooke Taney .............. Maryland ............... Mar. 15, 1836 Oct. 12, 1864 28 6. Salmon Portland Chase ........ Ohio ....................... Dec. 6, 1864 May 7, 1873 8 7. Morrison Remick Waite ........ ....do ....................... Jan. 21, 1874 Mar. 23, 1888 14 8. Melville Weston Fuller .......... Illinois ................... July 20, 1888 July 4, 1910 21 9. Edward Douglas White ......... Louisiana .............. Dec. 12, 1910 May 19, 1921 5 10 10. William Howard Taft ............ Connecticut ........... June 30, 1921 Feb. 3, 1930 8 11. Charles Evans Hughes .......... New York .............. Feb. 13, 1930 June 30, 1941 5 11 12. Harlan Fiske Stone ............... ......do ..................... July 3, 1941 Apr. 22, 1946 5 4 13. Fred Moore Vinson ................ Kentucky ............... June 21, 1946 Sept. 8, 1953 7 14. Earl Warren ........................... California .............. Oct. 2, 1953 June 23, 1969 15 15. Warren E. Burger .................. Virginia ................. June 23, 1969 Sept. 26, 1986 17 16. William Hubbs Rehnquist .... Virginia ................. Sept. 25, 1986 Sept. 3, 2005 5 19 17. John G. Roberts, Jr ............... Maryland ............... Sept. 29, 2005 ........................ ............ ASSOCIATE JUSTICES 1. John Rutledge ........................ South Carolina ..... Sept. 26, 1789 Mar. 5, 1791 1 2. William Cushing .................... Massachusetts ...... Sept. 27, 1789 Sept.
    [Show full text]
  • The Constitution in the Supreme Court: the Powers of the Federal Courts, 1801-1835 David P
    The Constitution in the Supreme Court: The Powers of the Federal Courts, 1801-1835 David P. Curriet In an earlier article I attempted to examine critically the con- stitutional work of the Supreme Court in its first twelve years.' This article begins to apply the same technique to the period of Chief Justice John Marshall. When Marshall was appointed in 1801 the slate was by no means clean; many of our lasting principles of constitutional juris- prudence had been established by his predecessors. This had been done, however, in a rather tentative and unobtrusive manner, through suggestions in the seriatim opinions of individual Justices and through conclusory statements or even silences in brief per curiam announcements. Moreover, the Court had resolved remark- ably few important substantive constitutional questions. It had es- sentially set the stage for John Marshall. Marshall's long tenure divides naturally into three periods. From 1801 until 1810, notwithstanding the explosive decision in Marbury v. Madison,2 the Court was if anything less active in the constitutional field than it had been before Marshall. Only a dozen or so cases with constitutional implications were decided; most of them concerned relatively minor matters of federal jurisdiction; most of the opinions were brief and unambitious. Moreover, the cast of characters was undergoing rather constant change. Of Mar- shall's five original colleagues, William Cushing, William Paterson, Samuel Chase, and Alfred Moore had all been replaced by 1811.3 From the decision in Fletcher v. Peck4 in 1810 until about 1825, in contrast, the list of constitutional cases contains a succes- t Harry N.
    [Show full text]
  • Griffith Rutherford in Revolutionary North Carolina James Matthew Am C Donald Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 2006 Politics of the personal in the old north state: Griffith Rutherford in Revolutionary North Carolina James Matthew aM c Donald Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Mac Donald, James Matthew, "Politics of the personal in the old north state: Griffith Rutherford in Revolutionary North Carolina" (2006). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 3625. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/3625 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected]. POLITICS OF THE PERSONAL IN THE OLD NORTH STATE: GRIFFITH RUTHERFORD IN REVOLUTIONARY NORTH CAROLINA A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In The Department of History By James M. Mac Donald B.A., University of Delaware, 1995 M.A., Appalachian State University, 1997 May, 2006 To My Parents ii Acknowledgments I would like to thank my committee for their support and suggestions during the writing of my dissertation. As a student, I had the good fortune of taking seminars with each member beginning with my first graduate class at LSU. Mark Thompson became director late in the course of the project and generously agreed to chair the committee during the last semester.
    [Show full text]