DOCSLIB.ORG

The All-Time All-Star All-Era Supreme Court

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The All-Time All-Star All-Era Supreme Court Texas A&M University School of Law Texas A&M Law Scholarship Faculty Scholarship 1-1983 The All-Time All-Star All-Era Supreme Court James E. Hambleton Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/facscholar Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation James E. Hambleton, The All-Time All-Star All-Era Supreme Court, 69 A.B.A. J. 462 (1983). Available at: https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/facscholar/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Texas A&M Law Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Texas A&M Law Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. i:? ig t i9w *jI*A.. "'"''4 ~s'4r I' toe, 4:'c. "I% i6w ': '!!::N 4 4;,,- ' , 1 I frr?' 1 j• V.i" 1 . l . All 3' ~A~LL[*- IEKv A lot of people have come up with lists of "great" judges. Here's the list to been particularly outstanding among the meet the time's necessities." "All of end all lists: a distillation of legal luminaries who have sat on the those on our list used the power of the everyone's choice for the Court during its long history." His "Ju- bench to the full." Other shared traits dicial All-Star Nine" appears in 1964 are long tenures on the bench and serv- greatest justices of the Wisconsin Law Review 3. Excluding ing during "creative" periods of Ameri- United States Supreme living Court members, Currie gives as can law. his selection criteria: over-all ability, pro- Court. phetic vision, and judicial statesmanship. Blue ribbon rosters These four lists vary in their scope, the Prophetic vision criteria for selection, and the number of By James E. Hambleton Ability is defined by Currie as profi- judges chosen. The Mersky-Blaustein ciency in the law, the power of persua- and Currie lists have only United States AMFRTCANS are great list makers. The sion, the power to reason logically and Supreme Court justices; the Pound and New York Times best-seller list, the top write well, and the capacity to "rise Schwartz lists also have candidates from 40 tunes, the Women's Wear Daily above prior political or economic views" the various state benches. Neither best-dressed list, the Guinness Book of to decide an issue objectively. Prophetic Pound nor Mersky-Blaustein discusses World Records, and even the Book of vision enables a judge to discern the im- criteria for selection, while Currie elabo- Lists all attest this fact. Making the all- pact of a decision both on future legal rates on selection standards, and star roster can be the highlight of an development and on the social order. Ju- Schwartz draws conclusions about athlete's season. dicial statesmanship includes the power shared traits from the judges chosen. It is not surprising, then, to find that to draft an opinion dictated by prophetic Mersky's and Blaustein's survey pro- lists of America's "best" judges have vision but placed on the proper legal and duced 12 justices termed "great." The been compiled. There are at least four of constitutional grounds. The enduring Schwartz and Pound tallies contain ten these, the first of which was drawn by character of a judge's legal contributions names, while Currie limited himself to an Roscoe Pound in his 1938 book, The was counted as proof that a particular all-star nine. Formative Era of American Law. judge possessed these qualities. The dates at which the various lists Pound's roster of "the ten judges who The third survey of best judges was were published also vary widely. The must be ranked first in American judicial tallied from a questionnaire sent to 65 Pound list was the first, released in 1938, history" includes both state and federal law school deans and professors of law. followed by the Currie list in 1964, entries. Pound put his list in a footnote Compiled by Roy M. Mersky and Albert Mersky's and Blaustein's in 1972, and without detailing the criteria he used for P. Blaustein, "Rating Supreme Court Schwartz's in 1979. The 40-year lapse selection. Justices" appears in 58 American Bar between Pound's roster and that of In 1964 George Currie of the Wiscon- Association Journal 1183 (1972). The re- Schwartz accounts for the last four sin Supreme Court picked an "all-time, spondents to the questionnaire evaluated names in Schwartz's roster being dif- all-star United States Supreme Court all justices who had sat on the Supreme ferent. comprised of nine members [who] have Court on a one-to-five scale, from "great" to "failure." No selection criteria were suggested. From this sur- vey, 12 justices qualified as "great." The line-up: A more recent roster of greatest judges Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., c has been drafted by Bernard Schwartz, "The Judicial Ten: America's Greatest John Marshall, p Judges," 1979 Southern Illinois Univer- Joseph Story, lb sity Law Journal 405. Schwartz dis- cusses the reasons why each particular Benjamin N. Cardozo, 2b judge was chosen and near the end of the Charles Evans Hughes, ss article generalizes about what char- acteristics the selected judges share Hi Hugo Black, 3b conclusions are that all the judges can be Earl Warren, If distinguished by "their more affirmati' D. approach to the judicial role." Each Louis Brandeis, cf judge held rather strong views and "did Roger B. Taney, rf not hesitate to employ judicial power to Illustrations by Chuck Slack April, 1983 * Volume 69 463 Both Schwartz and Pound list: Supreme Court justices. The three John Marshall, Chief Justice of the names that appeared on the three United States, 1801-35 other lists also appear here: Marshall, James Kent, Justice, New York, Story, and Holmes. Cardozo, cut from 1798-1823 the Currie roster, reappears on Joseph Story, Justice, United States Mersky-Blaustein. The two additional Supreme Court, 1811-45 justices picked by Schwartz-Black and Lemuel Shaw, Chief Justice, Massa- Warren-also are in the line-up. Three chusetts, 1830-60 from Currie's tally also make the Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., Justice, Mersky- Blaustein list: Taney, Brandeis, Massachusetts, 1882-1902; Justice, and Hughes. The final three Supreme United States Supreme Court, 1902-32 Court justices honored are: Benjamin Nathan Cardozo, Justice, John M. Harlan, 1877-1911 New York, 1914-32; Justice, United Harlan F. Stone, 1925-46 States Supreme Court, 1932-38. Felix Frankfurter, 1939-62. The other four on Pound's tally are: John Bannister Gibson, Justice, Penn- Hall of fame trio sylvania, 1816-53 No matter what selection criteria were Thomas Ruffin, Justice, North used or whether the lists included state Carolina, 1827-53 as well as United States Supreme Court Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Judge, justices, three people are always present: Michigan, 1864-85 John Marshall, Joseph Story, and Oliver Charles Doe, Justice, New Hamp- Wendell Holmes, Jr. These three un- shire, 1861-76. doubtedly would head the roster of the Pound drew only four of his ten names best Supreme Court justices. Another from the ranks of the United States Su- all-star selection would be Benjamin preme Court: Marshall, Story, Holmes, Cardozo, chosen by three of the four list and Cardozo. The other six all sat on makers. their respective state benches. To round out the all-star, all-era United States Supreme Court nine, there Judicial M.V.P.'s are five more judges whose names ap- Schwartz chose six of his ten from the pear on two of the four lists. Roger United States Supreme Court-the four Taney, Louis Brandeis, and Charles from the Pound roster (Marshall, Story, Evans Hughes were all rated among the Holmes, and Cardozo) plus Hugo greatest by both Currie and Mersky- LaFayette Black, 1937-71, and Earl Blaustein. The remaining two positions Warren, 1953-69. Schwartz selected two are filled by Hugo Black and Earl War- state court judges whom Pound listed- ren, whose names are on both the Kent and Shaw. Schwartz rounds out his Mersky-Blaustein and Schwartz rosters. register of the ten greatest with Arthur A synthesis of these four lists provides T. Vanderbilt, Justice, New Jersey, a new roster of the all-time, all-star, all- 1947-57, and Roger John Traynor, Jus- era, Supreme Court nine: tice, California, 1940-70. John Marshall Currie's all-star nine consists only of Joseph Story United States Supreme Court justices. Roger B. Taney His nine include three of the four that Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. both Pound and Schwartz selected: John Benjamin Nathan Cardozo Marshall, Joseph Story, and Oliver Louis Dembitz Brandeis Wendell Holmes, Jr. Cardozo did not Charles Evans Hughes make the cut. The others are: Hugo Black William Johnson, 1804-34 Earl Warren. Roger B. Taney, 1836-64 This catalogue of greats represents the Samuel Freeman Miller, 1862-90 elite of all the justices who have sat on Joseph P. Bradley, 1870-92 the Supreme Court, It is the definitive Louis Dembitz Brandeis, 1916-39 list until someone else draws up an all- Charles Evans Hughes, 1910-16 and star line-up. 1930-41. The Mersky-Blaustein list, like Cur- (James E. Hambleton is director of rie's, is made up only of United States the Texas State Law Library.) 464 American Bar Association Journal Finally, a copier or the most important person in my life. Me. To you, I'm Jack Klugman the Actor. about any kind of paper. Even labels and Canon PC-1O To my agent, business manager, transparencies. It's the shortest distance between and accountant, I'm Jack Kiugman the And once the cartridge is used up, you you and a quick copy.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Election Division Presidential Electors Faqs and Roster of Electors, 1816
    Election Division Presidential Electors FAQ Q1: How many presidential electors does Indiana have? What determines this number? Indiana currently has 11 presidential electors. Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States provides that each state shall appoint a number of electors equal to the number of Senators or Representatives to which the state is entitled in Congress. Since Indiana has currently has 9 U.S. Representatives and 2 U.S. Senators, the state is entitled to 11 electors. Q2: What are the requirements to serve as a presidential elector in Indiana? The requirements are set forth in the Constitution of the United States. Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2 provides that "no Senator or Representative, or person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector." Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment also states that "No person shall be... elector of President or Vice-President... who, having previously taken an oath... to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. Congress may be a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability." These requirements are included in state law at Indiana Code 3-8-1-6(b). Q3: How does a person become a candidate to be chosen as a presidential elector in Indiana? Three political parties (Democratic, Libertarian, and Republican) have their presidential and vice- presidential candidates placed on Indiana ballots after their party's national convention.
    [Show full text]
  • In Defence of the Court's Integrity
    In Defence of the Court’s Integrity 17 In Defence of the Court’s Integrity: The Role of Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes in the Defeat of the Court-Packing Plan of 1937 Ryan Coates Honours, Durham University ‘No greater mistake can be made than to think that our institutions are fixed or may not be changed for the worse. We are a young nation and nothing can be taken for granted. If our institutions are maintained in their integrity, and if change shall mean improvement, it will be because the intelligent and the worthy constantly generate the motive power which, distributed over a thousand lines of communication, develops that appreciation of the standards of decency and justice which we have delighted to call the common sense of the American people.’ Hughes in 1909 ‘Our institutions were not designed to bring about uniformity of opinion; if they had been, we might well abandon hope.’ Hughes in 1925 ‘While what I am about to say would ordinarily be held in confidence, I feel that I am justified in revealing it in defence of the Court’s integrity.’ Hughes in the 1940s In early 1927, ten years before his intervention against the court-packing plan, Charles Evans Hughes, former Governor of New York, former Republican presidential candidate, former Secretary of State, and most significantly, former Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, delivered a series 18 history in the making vol. 3 no. 2 of lectures at his alma mater, Columbia University, on the subject of the Supreme Court.1 These lectures were published the following year as The Supreme Court: Its Foundation, Methods and Achievements (New York: Columbia University Press, 1928).
    [Show full text]
  • Ross E. Davies, Professor, George Mason University School of Law 10
    A CRANK ON THE COURT: THE PASSION OF JUSTICE WILLIAM R. DAY Ross E. Davies, Professor, George Mason University School of Law The Baseball Research Journal, Vol. 38, No. 2, Fall 2009, pp. 94-107 (BRJ is a publication of SABR, the Society for American Baseball Research) George Mason University Law and Economics Research Paper Series 10-10 This paper can be downloaded without charge from the Social Science Research Network at http://ssrn.com/abstract_id=1555017 **SABR_BRJ-38.2_final-v2:Layout 1 12/15/09 2:00 PM Page 94 BASEBALL AND LAW A Crank on the Court The Passion of Justice William R. Day Ross E. Davies here is an understandable tendency to date the Not surprisingly, there were plenty of other baseball Supreme Court’s involvement with baseball fans on the Court during, and even before, the period Tfrom 1922, when the Court decided Federal covered by McKenna’s (1898–1925), Day’s (1903–22), Baseball Club of Baltimore v. National League of Pro- and Taft’s (1921–30) service. 13 Chief Justice Edward D. fessional Base Ball Clubs —the original baseball White (1894–1921) 14 and Justices John Marshall Har - antitrust-exemption case. 1 And there is a correspon - lan (1877–1911), 15 Horace H. Lurton (1910–14), 16 and ding tendency to dwell on William Howard Taft—he Mahlon Pitney (1912–22), 17 for example. And no doubt was chief justice when Federal Baseball was decided 2— a thorough search would turn up many more. 18 There is, when discussing early baseball fandom on the Court.
    [Show full text]
  • Just Because John Marshall Said It, Doesn't Make It So: Ex Parte
    Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law Hofstra Law Faculty Scholarship 2000 Just Because John Marshall Said it, Doesn't Make it So: Ex Parte Bollman and the Illusory Prohibition on the Federal Writ of Habeas Corpus for State Prisoners in the Judiciary Act of 1789 Eric M. Freedman Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/faculty_scholarship Recommended Citation Eric M. Freedman, Just Because John Marshall Said it, Doesn't Make it So: Ex Parte Bollman and the Illusory Prohibition on the Federal Writ of Habeas Corpus for State Prisoners in the Judiciary Act of 1789, 51 Ala. L. Rev. 531 (2000) Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/faculty_scholarship/53 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]. MILESTONES IN HABEAS CORPUS: PART I JUST BECAUSE JOHN MARSHALL SAID IT, DOESN'T MAKE IT So: Ex PARTE BoLLMAN AND THE ILLUSORY PROHIBITION ON THE FEDERAL WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FOR STATE PRISONERS IN THE JUDIcIARY ACT OF 1789 Eric M. Freedman* * Professor of Law, Hofstra University School of Law ([email protected]). BA 1975, Yale University;, MA 1977, Victoria University of Wellington (New Zea- land); J.D. 1979, Yale University. This work is copyrighted by the author, who retains all rights thereto.
    [Show full text]
  • The Warren Court and the Pursuit of Justice, 50 Wash
    Washington and Lee Law Review Volume 50 | Issue 1 Article 4 Winter 1-1-1993 The aW rren Court And The Pursuit Of Justice Morton J. Horwitz Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation Morton J. Horwitz, The Warren Court And The Pursuit Of Justice, 50 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 5 (1993), https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr/vol50/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington and Lee Law Review at Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington and Lee Law Review by an authorized editor of Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE WARREN COURT AND THE PURSUIT OF JUSTICE MORTON J. HoRwiTz* From 1953, when Earl Warren became Chief Justice, to 1969, when Earl Warren stepped down as Chief Justice, a constitutional revolution occurred. Constitutional revolutions are rare in American history. Indeed, the only constitutional revolution prior to the Warren Court was the New Deal Revolution of 1937, which fundamentally altered the relationship between the federal government and the states and between the government and the economy. Prior to 1937, there had been great continuity in American constitutional history. The first sharp break occurred in 1937 with the New Deal Court. The second sharp break took place between 1953 and 1969 with the Warren Court. Whether we will experience a comparable turn after 1969 remains to be seen.
    [Show full text]
  • Student's Name
    California State & Local Government In Crisis, 6th ed., by Walt Huber CHAPTER 6 QUIZ - © January 2006, Educational Textbook Company 1. Which of the following is NOT an official of California's plural executive? (p. 78) a. Attorney General b. Speaker of the Assembly c. Superintendent of Public Instruction d. Governor 2. Which of the following are requirements for a person seeking the office of governor? (p. 78) a. Qualified to vote b. California resident for 5 years c. Citizen of the United States d. All of the above 3. Which of the following is NOT a gubernatorial power? (p. 79) a. Real estate commissioner b. Legislative leader c. Commander-in-chief of state militia d. Cerimonial and political leader 4. What is the most important legislative weapon the governor has? (p. 81) a. Line item veto b. Full veto c. Pocket veto d. Final veto 5. What is required to override a governor's veto? (p. 81) a. Simple majority (51%). b. Simple majority in house, two-thirds vote in senate. c. Two-thirds vote in both houses. d. None of the above. 6. Who is considered the most important executive officer in California after the governor? (p. 83) a. Lieutenant Governor b. Attorney General c. Secretary of State d. State Controller 1 7. Who determines the policies of the Department of Education? (p. 84) a. Governor b. Superintendent of Public Instruction c. State Board of Education d. State Legislature 8. What is the five-member body that is responsible for the equal assessment of all property in California? (p.
    [Show full text]
  • The Importance of Dissent and the Imperative of Judicial Civility
    Valparaiso University Law Review Volume 28 Number 2 Symposium on Civility and Judicial Ethics in the 1990s: Professionalism in the pp.583-646 Practice of Law Symposium on Civility and Judicial Ethics in the 1990s: Professionalism in the Practice of Law The Importance of Dissent and the Imperative of Judicial Civility Edward McGlynn Gaffney Jr. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/vulr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Edward McGlynn Gaffney Jr., The Importance of Dissent and the Imperative of Judicial Civility, 28 Val. U. L. Rev. 583 (1994). Available at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/vulr/vol28/iss2/5 This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by the Valparaiso University Law School at ValpoScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Valparaiso University Law Review by an authorized administrator of ValpoScholar. For more information, please contact a ValpoScholar staff member at [email protected]. Gaffney: The Importance of Dissent and the Imperative of Judicial Civility THE IMPORTANCE OF DISSENT AND THE IMPERATIVE OF JUDICIAL CIVILITY EDWARD McGLYNN GAFFNEY, JR.* A dissent in a court of last resort is an appeal to the brooding spirit of the law, to the intelligence of a future day, when a later decision may possibly correct the errorinto which the dissentingjudge believes the court to have been betrayed... Independence does not mean cantankerousness and ajudge may be a strongjudge without being an impossibleperson. Nothing is more distressing on any bench than the exhibition of a captious, impatient, querulous spirit.' Charles Evans Hughes I. INTRODUCTION Charles Evans Hughes served as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court from 1910 to 1916 and as Chief Justice of the United States from 1930 to 1941.
    [Show full text]
  • Rare Books & Special Collections Tarlton Law Library University Of
    Rare Books & Special Collections Tarlton Law Library University of Texas at Austin 727 E. 26th St., Austin, Texas 78705-3224 512/471-7263 SUPREME COURT NOMINATIONS RESEARCH FILES, 1823-1955, Bulk 1860-1939 Inventory Date printed: SUPREME COURT NOMINATIONS RESEARCH FILES Inventory Extent: 1.25 linear ft. (3 boxes). Frank, John P., 1917-2002- John P. Frank, a noted attorney and constitutional scholar, was born in 1917. He received his LL.B. at the University of Wisconsin, and his J.S.D. from Yale University. He was law clerk to Justice Hugo L. Black at the October, 1942 term, among other prominent positions. He taught law from 1946 to 1954 at Indiana and Yale Universities. He has authored 12 books on the Supreme Court, the Constitution and constitutional law. A senior partner with the Phoenix firm of Lewis and Roca, which he joined in 1954, Frank was lead counsel on the ground-breaking Miranda v. Arizona case, and served as counsel to Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings. While serving on the Committee on Rules of Civil Procedure, Frank led a group that worked on drafting revisions to Rule 11 attorney sanctions. Frank also served from 1960 to 1970 on the Advisory Committee of Civil Procedure of the Judicial Conference of the United States. Scope and Content: The collection consists of research into U.S. Supreme Court nominations of the 19th and 20th centuries, and includes 8 inches of printed materials and 7 microfilm reels (35mm), 1823-1939 (bulk 1860-1939), collected by Frank, for a research project concerning Supreme Court nominations.
    [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]
  • Earl Warren: a Political Biography, by Leo Katcher; Warren: the Man, the Court, the Era, by John Weaver
    Indiana Law Journal Volume 43 Issue 3 Article 14 Spring 1968 Earl Warren: A Political Biography, by Leo Katcher; Warren: The Man, The Court, The Era, by John Weaver William F. Swindler College of William and Mary Follow this and additional works at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj Part of the Judges Commons, and the Legal Biography Commons Recommended Citation Swindler, William F. (1968) "Earl Warren: A Political Biography, by Leo Katcher; Warren: The Man, The Court, The Era, by John Weaver," Indiana Law Journal: Vol. 43 : Iss. 3 , Article 14. Available at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj/vol43/iss3/14 This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Indiana Law Journal by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BOOK REVIEWS EARL WARREN: A POLITICAL BIOGRAPHY. By Leo Katcher. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967. Pp. i, 502. $8.50. WARREN: THEi MAN, THE COURT, THE ERA. By John D. Weaver. Boston: Little. Brown & Co., 1967. Pp. 406. $7.95. Anyone interested in collecting a bookshelf of serious reading on the various Chief Justices of the United States is struck at the outset by the relative paucity of materials available. Among the studies of the Chief Justices of the twentieth century there is King's Melville Weston, Fuller,' which, while not definitive, is reliable and adequate enough to have merited reprinting in the excellent paperback series being edited by Professor Philip Kurland of the University of Chicago.
    [Show full text]
  • Book Review: the Brandeis/Frankfurter Connection
    BOOK REVIEW THE BRANDEIS/FRANKFURTER CONNECTION; by Bruce Allen Murphy. New York: Oxford University Press, 1982. 473 pp. $18.95. Reviewed by Judith Resnikt Shouldl be more serviceableto the State, ifI took an employment, where function would be wholly bounded in my person, and take up all my time, than I am by instructing everyone, as I do, andin furnishing the Republic with a great number of citizens who are capable to serve her? XENoHON'S M EMORABIL bk. 1, ch. 6, para. 15 (ed 1903), as quoted in a letter by Louis . Brandeis to Felix Frankfurter(Jan. 28, 1928).' I THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JUSTICE BRANDEIS AND PROFESSOR FRANKFURTER From the same bits of information-letters, fragmentary notes, in- dividuals' recollections, newspaper and historical accounts-several different stories can emerge, as the storyteller brings to the materials his or her own personal concerns and hypotheses. From reading some of the correspondence between Justices Brandeis and Frankfurter,2 biog- raphies of each,3 and assorted articles about them and the times in which they lived,4 I envision the following exchanges between Brandeis and Frankfurter: The year was 1914. A young law professor, Felix Frankfurter, went to t Associate Professor of Law, University of Southern California Law Center. B.A. 1972, Bryn Mawr College; J.D. 1975, New York University School of Law. I wish to thank Dennis E. Curtis, William J. Genego, and Daoud Awad for their helpful comments. 1. 5 LETTERS OF Louis D. BRANDEIS 319 (M. Urofsky & D. Levy eds. 1978) [hereinafter cited as LETTERS]. 2. E.g., 1-5 LETTERs, supra note 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Supreme Court of the United States
    The Supreme Court of the United States Hearings and Reports on the Successful and Unsuccessful Nominations Now Includes the Kavanaugh and Preliminary Barrett Volumes! This online set contains all existing Senate documents for 1916 to date, as a result of the hearings and subsequent hearings on Supreme Court nominations� Included in the volumes are hearings never before made public! The series began with three volumes devoted to the controversial confirmation of Louis Brandeis, the first nominee subject to public hearings. The most recent complete volumes cover Justice Kavanaugh. After two years, the Judiciary Committee had finally released Kavanaugh’s nomination hearings, so we’ve been able to complete the online volumes� The material generated by Kavanaugh’s nomination was so voluminous that it takes up 8 volumes� The definitive documentary history of the nominations and confirmation process, this ongoing series covers both successful and unsuccessful nominations� As a measure of its importance, it is now consulted by staff of the Senate Judiciary Committee as nominees are considered� Check your holdings and complete your print set! Volume 27 (1 volume) 2021 Amy Coney Barrett �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������Online Only Volume 26 (8 volumes) - 2021 Brett Kavanaugh ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������Online Only Volume 25 (2 books) - 2018 Neil M� Gorsuch ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������$380�00
    [Show full text]