The American State from the Civil War to the New Deal The Twilight of Constitutionalism and the Triumph of Progressivism
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Abbreviations Used in the Footnotes
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- Part I The Old Regime
- Part II Early Progressivism
- Part III Late Progressivism
- Part IV The New Deal
- 18 The Hundred Days
- 19 To the Brink
- 20 The Second New Deal
- 21 The Court Fight
- 22 The Abortive Third New Deal
- 23 The New Deal Court
- Appendix A
- Appendix B
- Primary Sources
- Index
- References
23 - The New Deal Court
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 May 2013
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Abbreviations Used in the Footnotes
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- Part I The Old Regime
- Part II Early Progressivism
- Part III Late Progressivism
- Part IV The New Deal
- 18 The Hundred Days
- 19 To the Brink
- 20 The Second New Deal
- 21 The Court Fight
- 22 The Abortive Third New Deal
- 23 The New Deal Court
- Appendix A
- Appendix B
- Primary Sources
- Index
- References
Summary
THE SCORPIONS
Roosevelt confirmed the Court’s 1937 switches by appointing seven justices within four years. He was also the first president to staff the lower federal courts for other than partisan and patronage reasons. He sought “youthful Lincolns from Manhattan and the Bronx,” who are “liberal from belief and not by lip service. . . They must know what life in a tenement means.” Long convinced that the Supreme Court was a political institution, Roosevelt’s appointments made certain that it was. His judicial selections produced a Court that resembled “scorpions in a bottle.” His first appointment, Hugo Black, shocked the Senate. Black had been among the most radical Democratic Senators, whose proposal for a 30-hour workweek prompted Roosevelt to devise the NIRA as an alternative. He had been a pioneer in the use of congressional investigative power for political publicity, and displayed no great concern for the civil liberties of his targets. When a federal judge condemned his committee’s violation of Fourth Amendment rights, Black introduced a bill to prohibit any judicial interference in congressional investigations. Black was a perfect “spite nomination,” by which the wounded President could simultaneously punish his Senate tormentors and express his contempt for the Supreme Court. Roosevelt knew that the Senate could not reject one of its own. Although the Senate did not dispense with Judiciary Committee hearings, they were perfunctory and the appointment was approved within days. Black took his oath of office immediately, rather than customarily waiting for the opening of the Court session in October, and promptly left the country.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The American State from the Civil War to the New DealThe Twilight of Constitutionalism and the Triumph of Progressivism, pp. 310 - 328Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2013
References
, Picking Federal Judges: Lower Court Selection from Roosevelt Through Reagan (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997), 31–38;Google Scholar
Roosevelt and Frankfurter: Their Correspondence, ed. (Boston: Little, Brown, 1968), 319
, Beyond the Formalist-Realist Divide: The Role of Politics in Judging (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010), 152–55Google Scholar
, “The President and the Court: Reconsidering the Court-Packing Episode of 1937,” Political Science Quarterly 103 (1988), 276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Scorpions: The Battles and Triumphs of F.D.R.’s Great Supreme Court Justices (New York: Twelve, 2010), 91, 135Google Scholar
, The Supreme Court Reborn: The Constitutional Revolution in the Age of Roosevelt (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 183–85, 211Google Scholar
, The Birth of the Modern Constitution: The United States Supreme Court, 1941–53 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 77Google Scholar
, Hugo Black and the Dilemma of American Liberalism, 2d ed. (New York: Pearson, 2008), 73Google Scholar
, Separation of Church and State (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002), 422–30Google Scholar
, New Deal Justice: The Constitutional Jurisprudence of Hugo L. Black, Felix Frankfurter, and Robert H. Jackson (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1996), 89Google Scholar
, “I Did Join the Klan,” Vital Speeches of the Day, 15 Oct. 1937, pp. 20–21
, “Radio Talk Is Brief,” New York Times, 2 Oct. 1937, p. 1
, “Education, Americanization and the Supreme Court: The 1920s,” American Quarterly 13 (1961), 166Google Scholar
, Forging New Freedoms: Nativism, Education, and the Constitution, 1917–27 (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1994), 146Google Scholar
and , “Klansman on the Court: Justice Hugo Black’s 1937 Radio Address to the Nation,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 89 (2003), 154–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
III, “Hugo Black and the Golden Age,” in Hugo Black and Modern America, ed. Tony Freyer (Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 1990), 148Google Scholar
Connecticut General Life Insurance Co. v. Johnson, 303 U.S. 77 (1938), 85–87
, “The Supreme Court To-Day,” Harper’s, May, 1938, p. 582
, Felix Frankfurter and His Times: The Reform Years (New York: Free Press, 1982), 227;Google Scholar
, “Conflict Among the Brethren: Felix Frankfurter, William O. Douglas and the Clash of Personalities on the United States Supreme Court,” Duke Law Journal (1988), 72, 111;
, Jr., “The Political Philosophy of the New Supreme Court,” Journal of Social Philosophy and Jurisprudence 7 (1942), 119Google Scholar
Nomination of Felix Frankfurter, Hearings, Senate Judiciary Subcommittee, 76th Cong., 1st Sess. (Washington: G.P.O., 1939), 123–26
, “The Appointment of Supreme Court Justices: III,” Wisconsin Law Review (1941), 506
, The American Judicial Tradition: Profiles of Leading American Judges, expanded ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), 369Google Scholar
, Achieving Our Country: Leftist Thought in Twentieth-Century America (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998), 3–38Google Scholar
, “Lawyers and Social Change in the Depression Decade,” in The New Deal: The National Level, ed. et al. (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1975), 154;Google Scholar
, “The Relentless Realist: Fred Rodell’s Life and Writings,” Illinois Law Review (1984), 823–55;
, “In the Twilight of Legal Realism: Fred Rodell and the Limits of Legal Critique,” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 11 (1991), 354–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Fred Rodell’s Case Against the Law,” Florida State University Law Review 24 (1996), 107–20Google Scholar
, “Mr. Justice Black,” American Mercury (Aug. 1944), p. 137
, “As Justice Bill Douglas Completes His First Thirty Years on the Court,” University of California at Los Angeles Law Review 16 (1969), 704–15;Google Scholar
, “The Breakup of the Roosevelt Court: The Contribution of History and Biography,” Law and History Review 2 (1984), 199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “President Seeking Post for Murphy,” New York Times, 3 Dec. 1938, p. 1
, Frank Murphy: The New Deal Years (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), 491–510Google Scholar
, Sit-Down: The General Motors Strike of 1936–37 (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1969), 301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Frank Murphy: The Washington Years (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1984), 131–37;Google Scholar
, That Man: An Insider’s Portrait of Franklin D. Roosevelt, ed. (New York: Oxford, 2003), 25;Google Scholar
, “Marshaling the Court: Leadership, Bargaining, and the Judicial Process,” University of Chicago Law Review 29 (1962), 644;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “The Call for a Liberal Bar,” Address to National Lawyer’s Guild, 20 Feb. 1938, in National Lawyer’s Guild Quarterly 1 (1938), 88Google Scholar
“La Follette Urges Outlay of Billions,” New York Times, 21 Feb. 1938, p. 20
, “Loyal Lieutenant, Able Advocate: The Role of Robert H. Jackson in Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Battle with the Supreme Court,” William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal 5 (1997), 527–618Google Scholar
, That Man: An Insider’s Portrait of Franklin D. Roosevelt, ed. (New York: Oxford, 2003), xGoogle Scholar
, “The Black-Jackson Feud,” Supreme Court Review (1988), 219, 229, 240
Dear Bess: The Letters from Harry to Bess Truman, 1910–59, ed. (New York: Norton, 1983), 525
“Half Brother, Half Son”: The Letters of Louis D. Brandeis to Felix Frankfurter, ed. and (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991), 576
, “Distribution of Judicial Power Between United States and State Courts,” Cornell Law Quarterly 13 (1928), 511–27Google Scholar
, Jr., Litigation and Inequality: Federal Diversity Jurisdiction in Industrial America, 1870–1958 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), 62;Google Scholar
, Brandeis and the Progressive Constitution: Erie, the Judicial Power, and the Politics of the Federal Courts in Twentieth-Century America (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000), 95–114Google Scholar
Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938), 77–78
Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 297 U.S. 288 (1936), 346–48
United Zinc and Chemical Co. v. Britt, 258 U.S. 268 (1922)
, Rewriting the History of the Judiciary Act of 1789: Exposing Myths, Challenging Premises, and Using New Evidence, ed. and (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1990Google Scholar
, The Upside-Down Constitution (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2012), 178, 194–96, 235, 372;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “The Great Depression, the New Deal, and the American Legal Order,” Washington Law Review 59 (1984), 744;Google Scholar
, “Swift and Erie: The Trials of an Ephemeral Landmark Case,” Journal of Supreme Court History 34 (2009), 272;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Wrong, Out of Step, and Pernicious: Erie as the Worst Decision of All Time,” Pepperdine Law Review 39 (2012), 129–54;Google Scholar
, “Federalism in the Progressive Era: A Structural Interpretation of Reform,” Journal of American History 64 (1977), 331–46;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Constitutional Illusions and Anchoring Truths: The Touchstone of the Natural Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 78, 253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Legal Realism as a Jurisprudence of Law Reform,” Georgia Law Review 44 (2010), 468Google Scholar
, “The Invention of Enterprise Liability: A Critical History of the Intellectual Foundations of Modern Tort Law,” Journal of Legal Studies 14 (1985), 461;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “The Struggle over Tort Reform and the Overlooked Legacy of the Progressives,” Akron Law Review 39 (2006), 960Google Scholar
MacPherson v. Buick, 217 N.Y. 382 (1916)
Escola v. Coca-Cola, 24 Cal.2d 453 (1944), 461–68
, “How Equity Conquered Common Law: The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in Historical Perspective,” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 135 (1987), 909–1102;Google Scholar
, “Fishing Expeditions Allowed: The Historical Background of the 1938 Federal Discovery Rules,” Boston College Law Review 39 (1988), 691–745Google Scholar
, The Return of George Sutherland: Restoring a Jurisprudence of Natural Rights (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), 111Google Scholar
U.S. v. Carolene Products, 304 U.S. 144 (1938), 150
, “The Carolene Products Footnote and the Preferred Position of Individual Rights: Louis Lusky and John Hart Ely v. Harlan Fiske Stone,” Constitutional Commentary 12 (1995), 277–303Google Scholar
, “Filled Milk, Footnote Four, and the First Amendment: An Analysis of the Preferred Position of Speech after the Carolene Products Decision,” Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal 13 (2003), 1019–52Google Scholar
, “The Famous Footnote Four: A History of the Carolene Products Footnote,” South Texas Law Review 46 (2004), 163–243Google Scholar
, “The Double Standard of Constitutional Protection in the Era of the Welfare State,” Political Science Quarterly 90 (1975), 266;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Taking from A and Giving to B: Substantive Due Process and the Case of the Shifting Paradigm,” Constitutional Commentary 14 (1997), 344Google Scholar
Kovacs v. Cooper, 336 U.S. 77 (1949), 90–91
, “Footnote Redux: A ‘Carolene Products’ Reminiscence,” Columbia Law Review 82 (1982), 1098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abrams v. U.S., 250 U.S. 616 (1919)
St. Joseph Stockyards Co. v. U.S., 298 U.S. 38 (1936), 52, 77
Reorganization of the Federal Judiciary, Hearings before the Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. Senate, 75th Cong., 1st Sess (Washington: G.P.O., 1937), 500;
, Hold Fast the Middle Way: An Outline of Economic Challenges and Alternatives (Boston: Little, Brown, 1935), 220Google Scholar
, “Economic Due Process and the Supreme Court: An Exhumation and Reburial,” Supreme Court Review (1962), 34–62;CrossRef
, “The Constitution and Economic Rights,” in Essays on the Constitution of the United States, ed. (Port Washington, NY: Kennikat, 1978), 74–98Google Scholar
, Liberty of Contract: Rediscovering a Lost Constitutional Right (Washington: CATO Institute, 2011);Google Scholar
, A Muted Fury: Populists, Progressives, and Labor Unions Confront the Courts, 1890–1937 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), 332Google Scholar
, “The Core of Free Government, 1938–40: Mr. Justice Stone and ‘Preferred Freedoms,’” Yale Law Journal 65 (1956), 618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
“Fair Labor Standards Under the Portal to Portal Act,” University of Chicago Law Review 15 (1948), 352–62CrossRef
, “The Portal-to-Portal Pay Case,” in The Third Branch of Government: Eight Cases in Constitutional Politics, ed. and (New York: Harcourt, 1963), 55–80Google Scholar
, The Roosevelt Court: A Study in Judicial Politics and Values, 1937–47 (New York: Macmillan, 1948), 67Google Scholar
Senn v. Tile Layer’s Protective Union, 301 U.S. 368 (1937)
, “The New Deal Triumph as the End of History? The Judicial Negotiation of Labor Rights and Civil Rights,” in The Supreme Court and American Political Development, ed. and (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2006), 179Google Scholar
Lauf v. E. G. Shinner & Co., 303 U.S. 323 (1938), 333, 336
N.L.R.B. v. Mackay Radio and Telegraph Co., 304 U.S. 333 (1938)
N.L.R.B. v. Fansteel Metallurgical Corp., 306 U.S. 240 (1939)
, “Judicial Deradicalization of the Wagner Act and the Origins of Modern Legal Consciousness, 1937–41,” Minnesota Law Review 62 (1978), 265–339;Google Scholar
, The State and Labor in Modern America (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1994), 162–66Google Scholar
Thornhill v. Alabama, 310 U.S. 88 (1940), 95
Milk Wagon Drivers v. Meadowmoor Dairies, 312 U.S. 287 (1941)
, , and , The American Constitution: Its Origin and Development, 7th ed. (New York: W. W. Norton, 1991), 524Google Scholar
Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942)
, “Labor Unions, Collective Bargaining, and the Antitrust Laws,” Journal of Law and Economics 6 (1963), 158–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. v. Hutcheson, 312 U.S. 219 (1941), 232
Hunt v. Crumboch, 325 U.S. 821 (1945), 830
, “Collective Bargaining and Competition: The Application of Antitrust Standards to Union Activities,” Yale Law Journal 73 (1963), 16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. v. Teamsters, 315 U.S. 521 (1942), 530, 526
, Truman and Taft-Hartley: A Question of Mandate (Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1966), 44;Google Scholar
U.S. v. Enmons, 410 U.S. 396 (1973)
, The Constitution and What It Means Today, 7th ed. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1941), vii-viiiGoogle Scholar
, “Legal Immunities of Labor Unions,” in Labor Unions and Public Policy, ed. et al. (Washington: American Enterprise Association, 1958), 145;Google Scholar
, “Constitutional Vision and Supreme Court Decisions: Reconsidering Roosevelt on Race,” Studies in American Political Development 14 (2000), 20–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Introduction, PP&A (1941) VI: xlvii
, The New Deal: The Depression Years, 1933–40 (New York: Hill and Wang, 1989), 246, 279;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The State of the Union Messages of the Presidents, 1790–1966, 3 vols., ed. (New York: Chelsea House, 1966), III: 2881
, “The ‘New’ New Deal: F.D.R. and American Liberalism, 1937–45,” Political Science Quarterly 105 (1990), 397–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “FDR, the Economic Constitutional Order, and the New Politics of Presidential Leadership,” in The New Deal and the Triumph of Liberalism, ed. and (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2002);Google Scholar
, The Second Bill of Rights: F.D.R.’s Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need It More than Ever (New York: Basic, 2004)Google Scholar
, “The Road Not Taken: FDR, the Supreme Court, and Constitutional Amendment,” Political Science Quarterly 104 (1989), 481;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Constitutional Fidelity and the Commerce Clause: A Reply to Professor Ackerman,” Syracuse Law Review 48 (1998), 139–218.Google Scholar