A History of the Supreme CourtWhen the first Supreme Court convened in 1790, it was so ill-esteemed that its justices frequently resigned in favor of other pursuits. John Rutledge stepped down as Associate Justice to become a state judge in South Carolina; John Jay resigned as Chief Justice to run for Governor of New York; and Alexander Hamilton declined to replace Jay, pursuing a private law practice instead. As Bernard Schwartz shows in this landmark history, the Supreme Court has indeed travelled a long and interesting journey to its current preeminent place in American life.In A History of the Supreme Court, Schwartz provides the finest, most comprehensive one-volume narrative ever published of our highest court. With impeccable scholarship and a clear, engaging style, he tells the story of the justices and their jurisprudence--and the influence the Court has had on American politics and society. With a keen ability to explain complex legal issues for the nonspecialist, he takes us through both the great and the undistinguished Courts of our nation's history. He provides insight into our foremost justices, such as John Marshall (who established judicial review in Marbury v. Madison, an outstanding display of political calculation as well as fine jurisprudence), Roger Taney (whose legacy has been overshadowed by Dred Scott v. Sanford), Oliver Wendell Holmes, Louis Brandeis, Benjamin Cardozo, and others. He draws on evidence such as personal letters and interviews to show how the court has worked, weaving narrative details into deft discussions of the developments in constitutional law. Schwartz also examines the operations of the court: until 1935, it met in a small room under the Senate--so cramped that the judges had to put on their robes in full view of the spectators. But when the new building was finally opened, one justice called it "almost bombastically pretentious," and another asked, "What are we supposed to do, ride in on nine elephants?" He includes fascinating asides, on the debate in the first Court, for instance, over the use of English-style wigs and gowns (the decision: gowns, no wigs); and on the day Oliver Wendell Holmes announced his resignation--the same day that Earl Warren, as a California District Attorney, argued his first case before the Court. The author brings the story right up to the present day, offering balanced analyses of the pivotal Warren Court and the Rehnquist Court through 1992 (including, of course, the arrival of Clarence Thomas).In addition, he includes four special chapters on watershed cases: Dred Scott v. Sanford, Lochner v. New York, Brown v. Board of Education, and Roe v. Wade. Schwartz not only analyzes the impact of each of these epoch-making cases, he takes us behind the scenes, drawing on all available evidence to show how the justices debated the cases and how they settled on their opinions.Bernard Schwartz is one of the most highly regarded scholars of the Supreme Court, author of dozens of books on the law, and winner of the American Bar Association's Silver Gavel Award. In this remarkable account, he provides the definitive one-volume account of our nation's highest court. |
From inside the book
Results 1-5 of 79
Page
... United States . Supreme Court - History . I. Title . 347.73'26'09 - dc20 KF8742.S39 1993 [ 347.3073509 ] 92-44097 CLOTH PAPER 57986 98 Printed in the United States of America on acid - free paper Semper uxori suae Preface There is no ...
... United States . Supreme Court - History . I. Title . 347.73'26'09 - dc20 KF8742.S39 1993 [ 347.3073509 ] 92-44097 CLOTH PAPER 57986 98 Printed in the United States of America on acid - free paper Semper uxori suae Preface There is no ...
Page 7
... United States , was stating far from radical doctrine when he asserted in the 1788 Connecticut ratifying convention , " If the United States go beyond their powers , if they make a law which the Constitution does not authorize , it is ...
... United States , was stating far from radical doctrine when he asserted in the 1788 Connecticut ratifying convention , " If the United States go beyond their powers , if they make a law which the Constitution does not authorize , it is ...
Page 15
Sorry, this page's content is restricted.
Sorry, this page's content is restricted.
Page 20
Sorry, this page's content is restricted.
Sorry, this page's content is restricted.
Page 21
Sorry, this page's content is restricted.
Sorry, this page's content is restricted.
Contents
The First Court 17901801 | 15 |
Marshall Court 18011836 | 32 |
Taney Court 18371864 | 69 |
Watershed Cases Dred Scott v Sandford 1857 | 105 |
War and Reconstruction 18611877 | 126 |
Chase and Waite Courts 18641888 | 147 |
Fuller Court 18881910 | 174 |
Watershed Cases Lochner v New York 1905 | 190 |
Watershed Cases Brown v Board of Education 1954 | 286 |
Burger Court 19691986 | 311 |
Watershed Cases Roe v Wade 1973 | 337 |
Rehnquist Court 1986 | 362 |
Epilogue | 378 |
The Justices of the Supreme Court | 381 |
Notes | 387 |
439 | |
White and Taft Courts 19101930 | 203 |
Hughes Court 19301941 | 225 |
Stone and Vinson Courts 19411953 | 246 |
Warren Court 19531969 | 263 |
447 | |
453 | |
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
abortion American Appointed by President approach asserted authority became bench Brandeis Brown Burger Court Cardozo century Chief Justice Warren Civil conception conference Congress congressional constitutional corporate Curtis decided decision declared dissent doctrine draft Dred Scott Due Process Clause Earl Warren economic equal protection federal Felix Frankfurter Fourteenth Amendment Framers Fuller governmental Harlan Hughes Ibid important invalid ironclad oath issue Jackson Jacksonian John Joseph Story judge judicial restraint judicial review Judiciary jurisdiction jurisprudence Justice Black Justice Blackmun Justice Brennan Justice Douglas Justice Frankfurter Justice Holmes Justice's law clerks legislative legislature letter liberty Lochner majority Marshall Court Marshall's ment nation Ninth Amendment opinion Peckham Plessy political prohibition question Reconstruction regulation Resigned rule segregation Senate slavery statute supra note Supreme Court Taft Taney Court Taney's tenure territories Texas tion tribunal unconstitutional United upheld Vinson vote Warren Court White wrote
Popular passages
Page 13 - The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts. A constitution is in fact, and must be, regarded by the judges as a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body.