• St. Martin's Press
The Supreme Court - Jeffrey RosenSee larger image
See Hi-Res Jpeg image


email/print EmailPrint

The Supreme Court



Book Buy
Ebook Ebook 
    
Share this book with friends through your favorite social networking site. Share:           Bookmark and Share
Add this title to your virtual bookshelves at any of these book community sites. Shelve:             
sign up to get updates about this author
add this book's widget
to your site or blog

About The Author

Jeffrey Rosen

Jeffrey Rosen is a professor of law at George Washington University and the legal affairs editor of The New Republic. He is the author of The Most Democratic Branch, The Naked Crowd, and The Unwanted Gaze. His articles have appeared in many publications, including The New... More

Stay In Touch

Sign up to recieve information about new releases, author appearances, special offers, all related to you favorite authors and books.

Other Books You Might Like

cover Buy

More formats
eBook
The Godfather Effect
Changing Hollywood, America, and Me

Thomas Dunne Books
A brilliant examination of our forty year obsession with the classic film trilogy—and a personal  reflection on what it means to be Italian-American  Forty...
  
cover Buy
Chief of Staff
Lyndon Johnson and His Presidency

Thomas Dunne Books
Chief of Staff to the President is perhaps the most important political appointment in our nation's government. Aside from handling the myriad of day to day...
  
cover Buy

More formats
eBook
Mafia Summit
J. Edgar Hoover, the Kennedy Brothers, and the Meeting That Unmasked the Mob

Thomas Dunne Books
Mafia Summit is the true story of how a small-town lawman in upstate New York busted a Cosa Nostra conference in 1957, exposing the Mafia to America In a...
  
cover Buy

More formats
eBook
The Gift of Pets
Stories Only a Vet Could Tell

Thomas Dunne Books
Bruce R. Coston’s first book, Ask the Animals, earned him high praise for being another James Herriot. Now, in his delightful second memoir, Coston shares more...
  
cover Buy
What Is Best in America
Speech by President Obama at a Memorial Service for the Victims of the Shooting in Tucson, Arizona

St. Martin's Press
On January 8, 2011 a gunman opened fire in the parking lot of a Tucson, Arizona supermarket, where U. S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords was holding an...
  
cover Buy

More formats
eBook
Divided Minds
Twin Sisters and Their Journey Through Schizophrenia

St. Martin's Griffin
Growing up in the fifties, Carolyn Spiro was always in the shadow of her more intellectually dominant and social outgoing twin, Pamela. But as the twins...
  
cover Buy

More formats
eBook
Standing on Holy Ground
A Triumph over Hate Crime in the Deep South

St. Martin's Press
A sweeping epidemic of hate crime targeted over one hundred Southern Black Churches between 1995 and 1996, leaving them in charred ruins. St. John Baptist...
cover Buy

More formats
eBook
Midnight on the Line
The Secret Life of the U.S.-Mexico Border

St. Martin's Griffin/Thomas Dunne Books
A probing, ground-level investigation of illegal immigration and the people on both sides of the battle to secure the U.S.–Mexico border With illegal...
  
cover Buy

More formats
eBook
Eleanor & Park

St. Martin's Griffin
“Eleanor & Park reminded me not just what it’s like to be young and in love with a girl, but also what it’s like to be young and in love with a book.”—John...
cover Buy
Bad Kitty for President

Square Fish
The votes are in--it's a Bad Kitty landslide!  It's time to elect a new president of the Neighborhood Cat Coalition! Who will win the election? The candidate...
cover Buy
Brown Bear, Brown Bear, What Do You See? Slide and Find

Priddy Books
Eric Carle’s familiar illustrations of brown bear, red bird, yellow duck and the other endearing animals from his classic creation parade across the pages of...
  Bonus

EXCERPT

Introduction

On April 8, 1952, to prevent an imminent steelworkers’ strike that he thought would cut off the flow of guns to U.S. troops in the middle of the Korean War, President Harry S. Truman decided to use his authority as commander in chief to seize the nation’s steel mills. His decision would provoke more criticism than any other in his presidency. But Truman had been emboldened to act in part because of confidential advice from Chief Justice Fred Vinson, whom Truman had appointed to the Supreme Court in 1946. When Truman informed Vinson in advance of his intention to seize the steel mills, the chief justice assured his friend the president that the seizure would be legal under his executive powers and that a majority of the Court would support it. Vinson’s advice turned out to be wrong. In June, two months after the president issued his executive order, the Supreme Court declared in Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer that Truman had acted unconstitutionally. Writing for a 6–3 majority, Justice Hugo Black declared that the Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the power to make laws, and Congress had refused to authorize this heavy-handed approach to settling labor disputes. Black read his opinion for the Court from the bench. “Even though ‘theater of war’ be an expanding concept,” he drawled in his calm and deliberate southern accent, “we cannot with faithfulness to our constitutional system hold that the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces has the ultimate power as such to take possession of private property in order to keep labor disputes from stopping production.” Although an ardent Democrat as well as a former senator, Black revered the institution of the Supreme Court as something larger than the individual justices who composed it, and masterfully persuaded a majority of his colleagues to enforce the limits that the Constitution places on the president’s power. Vinson filed a sputtering dissent insisting that any president worthy of the office should be free to take emergency measures necessary to ensure the “survival of the nation.” Truman was understandably livid at his rebuke by a Court that had been appointed entirely by him or by his Democratic predecessor, Franklin D. Roosevelt. But Black soon made amends by inviting the aggrieved president and the entire Court over to his house in Alexandria, Virginia, for bourbon and a barbecue. As the canapés were passed around, the mollified Truman declared, “Hugo, I don’t much care for your law, but, by golly, this bourbon is good.”1

Fifty-four years later, a similar drama unfolded at the Supreme Court. President George W. Bush, seeking to protect the nation after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, issued an executive order creating special military commissions to try suspected enemy combatants who were being held at Guantánamo Bay. His decision, combined with other assertions of unilateral presidential power to authorize something close to torture or indefinite detention of suspected terrorists, provoked more criticism than any other in his presidency. Bush had been emboldened to act in part because his legal advisers had assured him that unilateral action would be upheld as constitutional under his powers as commander in chief, and also, perhaps, because the chief justice he had recently appointed, John G. Roberts, Jr., had sustained Bush’s action as an appellate judge. When the Supreme Court heard the case in 2006, Roberts properly recused himself because of his earlier participation in the case, but Bush still had reason for optimism: seven of the nine justices were Republican appointees, including an associate justice appointed by Bush, Samuel A. Alito. In Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, however, by a vote of 5–3, the Supreme Court held that the president’s military commissions were illegal. In his opinion for the Court, Justice John Paul Stevens emphasized that the president could create military commissions only with congressional support, and Congress had refused to give Bush the power to create the military commissions at issue in the case. In an emotional dissenting opinion, which he read aloud from the bench (only the second time he has done so in his fifteen years on the Court), Justice Clarence Thomas declared that the majority had endangered the nation by “sorely hamper[ing] the President’s ability to confront and defeat a new and deadly enemy.” Thomas, like Vinson, insisted that the president’s inherent authority as commander in chief was broad enough to allow him to act unilaterally in times of war.

The impassioned performances by two justices—Black in 1952, Thomas in 2006—open a window onto the Supreme Court. In many respects, the similarities between Black and Thomas are striking. Both were appointed young to the Court by a president who relished the opportunity to put a stick in the eye of his congressional opponents. Black, a southern white liberal, was Franklin D. Roosevelt’s first appointment after his bitter defeat over expanding the Court’s membership in 1937; Thomas, a southern black conservative, was George H. W. Bush’s choice to replace the civil rights icon Thurgood Marshall in 1991. Both had been on the Court for exactly fifteen years when these cases about presidential power in wartime came before them—long enough to accustom themselves to the Court’s peculiar rituals and to find their jurisprudential voices. And both men considered themselves strict constructionists and constitutional fundamentalists who refused to enforce rights that did not appear explicitly in the Constitution and believed that the constitutional text should be construed in light of the original understanding of its framers and ratifiers.

Despite these similarities in background and judicial philosophy, Black and Thomas differed in one crucial respect: judicial temperament. Black revered the institution of the Court so passionately that when he proposed marriage to his secretary, Elizabeth (six years after the death of his first wife), he made a little speech about how he had been having a love affair with the Court for almost twenty years, and therefore she had to be, like Caesar’s wife, above reproach: “I have to know that the woman I marry is a one-man woman,” he declared.2 This reverence led him to moderate or to rein in his strict constructionist ideology when he thought the good of the Court and the country required it. As a result, he became one of the most influential justices of his era, redefining large areas of American law in his own image. Thomas, by contrast, is an ideological purist, more interested in being philosophically consistent than in persuading colleagues to embrace his vision. He is so zealous in his devotion to carrying every principle to its logical conclusion that his ideological ally Justice Antonin Scalia told Thomas’s biographer that Thomas would overturn any judicial precedent with which he disagreed, whereas he, Scalia, wouldn’t do that.3 Thomas is underrated as a constitutional lawyer in the popular imagination: his Hamdan opinion, like much of his work, was exhaustively researched, and his colleagues have praised his technical ability in complicated regulatory cases. But because Thomas approaches the law as an essentially academic enterprise, he is content, after fifteen years on the Court, to marginalize himself in lonely dissenting opinions, without any immediate prospect of winning majorities. Even if Thomas had the option of ruling against the president and then inviting him over for drinks in the interest of the Court—a form of interbranch socializing that is no longer thinkable in a post-Watergate age—it seems unlikely he would have the inclination to do so.

The difference between Black and Thomas shows the importance of judicial temperament on the Supreme Court. Those who have it find that the Court is their oyster; those who do not are often condemned to grumbling on the sidelines. And this has been the story of the Supreme Court from the beginning.


Copyright © 2007 by Jeffrey Rosen. All rights reserved.

You May Also Be Interested In

cover Buy

More formats
eBook
Patient Zero
A Joe Ledger Novel

St. Martin's Paperbacks
Monday, 1300 Hours: Joe Ledger kills terrorist Javad Mustapha, aka Patient Zero, with two point-blank shots from his Glock .45.   Wednesday, 0800 Hours:...
  Bonus
cover Buy

More formats
Audio eBook
Only Time Will Tell

St. Martin's Paperbacks
Only Time Will Tell Jeffrey Archer  The first novel in the Clifton Chronicles, an ambitious new series that tells the story of a family across generations...
  Bonus
cover Buy
Hidden
A House of Night Novel
House of Night Novels

St. Martin's Griffin
In Hidden by P.C. Cast and Kristin Cast, Zoey at last has what she wanted: the truth is out. Neferet’s evil has been exposed, and the High Council is no longer...