A People's History of the Supreme Court

by Peter Irons

  183 “has earned the gratitude”: Fehrenbacher, 298.

  183 New York Times, “an act of supreme folly”: ibid.

  184 “It is a pity”: Abraham, 100-101.

  184 Chase nomination: Abraham, 120-122; Urofsky, 101-106.

  185 Lincoln, “With malice”: Stern, 840-842.

  185 Lincoln, “the constitutional”: id. at 846-851.

  186 Wade, “Johnson, we have faith”: Eric Foner, Reconstruction, 177.

  188 Milligan case: Currie, 288-292; 71 U.S. 2 (1866).

  CHAPTER 16

  190 “joined in the shouting”: Foner, 66.

  190 Seward, “The Constitution”: ibid.

  191 Lincoln, “the people”: Stern, 477.

  191 Giddings, “Let no man”: Farber and Sherry, 263.

  191 Hamlin, “must answer”: id. at 266.

  191 Adams, “over two thousand”: Foner, 119.

  191 “a sight that apaled me”: ibid.

  192 “the wholesale slaughter”: id. at 261-263.

  192 Civil Rights bill, “full and equal”: id. at 243.

  192 “then I demand”: id. at 244.

  192 Morrill, “I admit”: id. at 245.

  192 Johnson, “stride toward”: id. at 250.

  192 Bingham, “Congress shall”: Farber and Sherry, 305.

  192 Bingham, “for the enforcement”: ibid.

  193 Douglas, “zones of privacy”: Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965).

  194 “very unanimous”: Foner, 268.

  195 “sacrificed the moral power”: id. at 265.

  195 “Battle fought and won”: Farber and Sherry, 322.

  195 “Are we not”: Foner, 269.

  195 New York Times, “with so exclusive”: id. at 267.

  195 “If I was ever”: id. at 261.

  195 Reconstruction Act: id. at 316-319.

  196 Klan violence: id. at 425-444.

  198 Strong nomination: Abraham, 127; Urofsky, 445-447.

  198 Bradley nomination: Abraham, 127-128; Urofsky, 33-37.

  198 Hunt nomination: Abraham, 128; Urofsky, 247-248.

  198 Slaughterhouse Cases: Charles Fairman, Reconstruction and Reunion, Part I, 1323; Currie, 342-351; 83 U.S. 36-130 (1873).

  201 Waite nomination: Abraham, 130-131; Urofsky, 493-499.

  202 Cruickshank case: Foner, 437; 92 U.S. 452 (1875).

  205 “When the decision”: Howard N. Meyer, The Amendment That Refused to Die, 87.

  CHAPTER 17

  206 “They are going around”: Foner, 560.

  207 “Is it possible”: id. at 556.

  207 Hawley, “I have been”: ibid.

  207 Douglass, “Do you mean”: id. at 567.

  208 “He is connected”: id. at 568.

  208 “Armed bands”: id. at 571-572.

  208 Hayes-Tilden election: id. at 579-581.

  209 Harlan nomination: Abraham, 132-134; Urofsky, 205-23.

  210 Harlan, “even upon grounds”: 109 U.S. 3, 59 (1883).

  210 Woods nomination: Abraham, 134; Urofsky, 539.

  210 Matthews nomination: Abraham, 134-136; Urofsky, 315-316.

  211 Gray nomination: Abraham, 137; Urofsky, 197-201.

  211 Blatchford nomination: Abraham, 138; Urofsky, 29-31.

  211 “may stand forever”: Foner, 590.

  211 Indictments in Civil Rights Cases: Philip B. Kurland and Gerhard Casper, eds., Landmark Briefs and Arguments of the Supreme Court (cited below as Landmark Briefs), Vol. 8, 307, 311-312, 355, 334-335.

  213 Bradley votes: Strauder v. West Virginia, 100 U.S. 303 (1880); Ex parte Virginia, 100 U.S. 339 (1880); United States v. Harris, 106 U.S. 629 (1883)

  213 Civil Rights Cases: 109 U.S. 3 (1883).

  215 Heart of Atlanta Motel case: 379 U.S. 241 (1964).

  215 Editorial reaction to decision: Charles Warren, The Supreme Court in American History, Vol. 2, 614.

  216 Yick Wo case: 118 U.S. 356 (1886).

  217 Industrial growth: Zinn, 247-260.

  217 Lamar nomination: Abraham, 139-140; Urofsky, 283-284.

  218 Fuller nomination: Abraham, 141-142; Urofsky, 183-188.

  218 Brewer nomination: Abraham, 147-148; Urofsky, 61-65.

  218 Brown nomination: Abraham, 148-149; Urofsky, 67-68.

  219 Shiras nomination: Abraham, 149-150; Urofsky, 403-404.

  219 Jackson nomination: Urofsky, 255.

  219 White nomination: Abraham, 143-144; Urofsky, 525-531.

  220 Peckham nomination: Abraham, 145-146; Urofsky, 351-353.

  CHAPTER 18

  221 McKinley, “We want a foreign”: Zinn, 292.

  221 “I give you”: id. at 254.

  222 Plessy case background: Charles Lofgren, The Plessy Case, 29-41; 163 U.S. 538-539 (1895).

  222 Parks, “I was quite tired”: Zinn, 442.

  224 Martinet, “We’ll make”: Garraty, 161-163.

  225 Plessy decisions in state courts: Lofgren, 44-60; 11 So. 948 (1892).

  226 Tourgee, “Of the whole number”: Lofgren, 149.

  226 Tourgee brief in Plessy: Landmark Briefs, Vol. 13, 62-63.

  227 Brown opinion in Plessy: 163 U.S. 537, 545-552 (1895).

  229 Harlan dissent in Plessy: 163 U.S. at 554-559.

  231 Tourgee, “virtually nullified”: Lofgren, 201.

  231 Harlan in Cumming case: 175 U.S. 528, 542-545 (1899).

  232 Taft in Gong Lum case: 275 U.S. 78, 79-87 (1927).

  232 Harlan in Plessy: 163 U.S. at 560.

  232 Du Bois, “The problem”: W. E. B. Du Bois, The Souls of Black Folk (Dover edition), 24.

  CHAPTER 19

  235 Goodwyn, “the crop lien system”: Zinn, 278.

  236 Grangers, “The State must”: Warren, Vol. 2, 574.

  236 “That it has”: id. at 576.

  236 Cooley, “legislative enactment”: Sidney Fine, Laissez-Faire and the General Welfare State, 142-143.

  237 Spencer, “The poverty”: id. at 38.

  237 Fine, “It would be difficult”: id. at 44.

  237 “found a new toy”: id. at 45.

  237 Fine, “It was in the courts”: id. at 126.

  237 Background of Munn case: Lee Epstein and Thomas G. Walker, Constitutional Law for a Changing America: Institutional Powers and Constraints, 439; Currie, 370-373.

  238 “this assault”: Warren, Vol. 2, 577-578.

  238 Munn brief: 94 U.S. at 119.

  238 Waite opinion in Munn: 94 U.S. 113, 123-136 (1877).

  238 Field dissent in Munn: 94 U.S. at 136-154.

  239 Pomeroy, “No other decision”: Warren, Vol. 2, 583.

  239 “the country”: Zinn, 240.

  239 Marx, “What do you think”: id. at 245-246.

  240 “When the great”: id. at 246.

  240 Haymarket Affair: id. at 264-266.

 
241 Jacobs case: 98 N.Y. 98, 104-115 (1885).

  241 “in practically every case”: Benjamin Twiss, Lawyers and the Constitution, 99-100.

  241 “Socialism, Communism”: Christopher Tiedeman, Limitations on the Police Power, 10.

  242 Harlan opinion in Mugler case: 123 U.S. 623, 653-674 (1887).

  242 Blatchford opinion in Chicago, Milwaukee case: 134 U.S. 418, 458 (1890).

  243 Bradley opinion in Chicago, Milwaukee case: 134 U.S. at 461.

  243 Larrabee, “further changes”: Warren, Vol. 2, 593.

  243 Sherman, “You must heed”: Zinn, 253-254.

  244 Fuller opinion in E. C. Knight case: 156 U.S. 1, 9-18 (1895).

  244 Fuller opinion in Pollock case: 158 U.S. 601, 617-637 (1895).

  245 Brown dissent in Pollock case: 158 U.S. at 686-695.

  245 Debs case: Zinn, 272-275; 158 U.S. 564 (1894).

  246 “all must applaud”: Warren, Vol. 2, 700.

  246 Pennoyer, “Our constitutional”: id. at 704.

  247 Debs, “I was”: Zinn, 275.

  CHAPTER 20

  248 Allgeyer case: 165 U.S. 578 (1897).

  249 Holden case: 169 U.S. 366 (1898).

  250 Hughes, “apparently oblivious”: Urofsky, 166-167.

  250 McKenna nomination: Abraham, 152-153, Urofsky, 289-290.

  251 Holmes nomination: Holmes, The Common Law, 1; Abraham, 156-161; Urofsky, 225-234.

  252 Holmes opinion in Buck case: 274 U.S. 200, 205-207 (1927).

  252 Later history of Buck case: J. David Smith, The Sterilization of Carrie Buck.

  253 Day nomination: Abraham, 161-162; Urofsky, 139-140.

  253 Moody nomination: Abraham, 162-163; Urofsky, 327.

  254 Background of Lochner case: Landmark Briefs, Vol. 14, 663.

  255 Wiesmann, “When I was young”: New York Times, April 19, 1905.

  256 Wiesmann brief in Lochner : Landmark Briefs, Vol. 14, 662, 674-675.

  256 Mayer brief in Lochner: id. at 725, 733.

  256 Peckham, “class against class”: Fine, 135, 138; People v. Budd, 117 N.Y. 1, 30-34, 68-71.

  256 Peckham opinion in Lochner : 198 U.S. 45, 55-64 (1905).

  257 Harlan dissent in Lochner : 198 U.S. at 68-69.

  257 Holmes dissent in Lochner : 198 U.S. at 75-76.

  258 Brandeis brief in Muller case: Landmark Briefs, Vol. 16, 63-113.

  259 Muller’s brief in Muller case: id. at 3-35.

  259 Brewer opinion in Muller: 208 U.S. 412, 419-422 (1908).

  259 Loewe case: 208 U.S. 274 (1908).

  259 Adair case: 208 U.S. 161 (1908).

  260 Lurton nomination: Abraham, 165; Urofsky, 287-288.

  260 Hughes nomination: Abraham, 166-168; Urofsky, 235-245.

  260 Holmes, “How could you”: Urofsky, 527.

  260 Van Devanter nomination: Abraham, 170-171; Urofsky, 485-487.

  261 Lamar nomination: Abraham, 171-172; Urofsky, 281-282.

  261 Pitney nomination: Abraham, 172-173; Urofsky, 355-356.

  261 Brandeis, “a first-rate”: Urofsky, 460.

  262 McReynolds nomination: Abraham, 175-178; Urofsky, 297-299.

  262 Brandeis nomination: Abraham, 178-181; Urofsky, 39-48.

  262 Clarke nomination: Abraham, 181-182; Urofsky, 121-122.

  264 Adkins case: Landmark Briefs, Vol. 21, 636; 261 U.S. 525 (1923).

  CHAPTER 21

  265 Hofstadter, “rationalization”: Zinn, 352.

  266 Root, “We must have” and “there are men”: id. at 359.

  266 Literary Digest, “send to us” and “report the man,” and Palmer, “It is safe”: id. at 360.

  267 New York Herald and Minneapolis Journal: id. at 361.

  267 Hardwick, “general and widespread”: ibid.

  267 United States v. Spirit of ’76 and Hall cases: Richard Polenberg, Fighting Faiths, 26-29.

  269 Background of Schenck case: id. at 212-216.

  270 Hand opinion in Masses case: 244 Fed. 535 (1917).

  270 Holmes on free speech: Polenberg, 211-212.

  270 Holmes opinion in Schenck: 249 U.S. 47, 52 (1919).

  272 Holmes, “The life”: Holmes, The Common Law, 1.

  274 Debs case: Polenberg, 314-315; Landmark Briefs, Vol. 19, 522-530, 249 U.S. 211, 213-216 (1919).

  274 Debs, “Your honor”: Zinn, 359.

  275 Hand, “when the words,” and Holmes, “I don’t quite”: Polenberg, 218-219.

  275 Freund, “implied provocation,” and Holmes, “I hated”: id. at 219-222.

  275 Chaffee, “where the line”: id. at 222-223.

  278 Background of Abrams case: id. at 42-53.

  278 Briefs in Abrams: id. at 228-233.

  278 Clarke opinion in Abrams: 250 U.S. 616, 623-624 (1919).

  279 Holmes dissent in Abrams: 250 U. . at 627-630.

  280 Brandenberg case: 395 U.S. 444 (1969).

  281 Fate of Abrams defendants: Polenberg, 319-332, 341-370.

  CHAPTER 22

  283 Palmer raids: Samuel Walker, In Defense of American Liberties, 42-45.

  283 Washington Post, “There is no time”: id. at 44.

  284 Background of Gitlow case: id. at 79-80.

  285 Background of Whitney case: id. at 80.

  286 Harding, “I am not fit”: Abraham, 182.

  286 Taft, “to prevent”: id. at 184.

  286 Sutherland nomination: Abraham, 186-187; Urofsky, 449-453.

  286 Butler nomination: Abraham, 187-189; Urofsky, 81-85.

  287 Sanford nomination: Abraham, 190-191; Urofsky, 395-396.

  287 Stone nomination: Abraham, 192-196; Urofsky, 425-434.

  288 Sanford opinion in Gitlow: 268 U.S. 652, 654-672 (1925).

  289 Holmes dissent in Gitlow: 268 U.S. 672-673.

  290 Sanford opinion in Whitney: 274 U.S. 357, 359-372 (1927).

  290 Brandeis concurrence in Whitney: 274 U.S. at 372-380.

  292 Hughes opinion in DeJonge: 299 U.S. 353, 356-366 (1938).

  292 Roberts opinion in Herndon: 301 U.S. 242, 243-264 (1938).

  292 Van Devanter dissent in Herndon: 301 U.S. at 264-278.

  CHAPTER 23

  294 Hoover, “We in America”: Zinn, 378.

  294 Ford, “There is plenty”: ibid.

  295 Wilson, “There is not”: Peter Irons, The New Deal Lawyers (cited below as Irons, New Deal ), 17.

  295 “Indiana Harbor” and “Chicago, April 1”: Zinn, 380-381.

  295 Roosevelt, “The country needs”: Urofsky, March of Liberty, 655.

  295 Norris, “No man”: Abraham, 197-199.

  296 Parker, “The participation”: id. at 43.

  296 Roberts nomination: Abraham, 200-201; Urofsky, 383-387.

  296 Cardozo nomination: Abraham, 201-205; Urofsky, 91-94.

  298 Hughes opinion in Blaisdell: 290 U.S. 398, 426-427 (1934).

  298 Sutherl
and dissent in Blaisdell: 290 U.S. at 473, 448.

  299 Roberts opinion in Nebbia: 201 U.S. 502, 523-537 (1934).

  299 McReynolds dissent in Nebbia: 291 U.S. at 558-559.

  300 Wyzanski, “go so far,” and Wagner, “It is true”: Irons, New Deal, 24-27.

  301 Background of Schechter case: Irons, New Deal, 86-90.

  303 Hughes opinion in Panama Refining: id. at 58-73; 293 U.S. 388, 405-433 (1935).

  303 Arguments in Schechter : id. at 94-99.

  303 Hughes opinion in Schechter : 295 U.S. 495, 538-543 (1935).

  303 Roosevelt, “what is happening”: Leonard Baker, Back to Back, 116-117.

  303 Roosevelt, “The implications,” and Time, “was obviously”: Irons, New Deal, 104-107.

  305 Background of Butler case: Irons, New Deal, 181-183.

  305 Brief in Butler: id. at 187-189.

  305 Arguments in Butler: id. at 192-193.

  306 Roberts opinion in Butler: 297 U.S. 1, 53-78 (1936).

  306 Stone dissent in Butler: 297 U.S. at 78-88.

  306 Early, “Please resist all”: Irons, New Deal, 197.

  CHAPTER 24

  307 Roosevelt, “that the proposed”: Irons, New Deal, 248.

  307 Background of Carter case: id. at 248-250.

  308 Sutherland opinion in Carter: 298 U.S. 278, 295-308 (1936).

  308 Cardozo dissent in Carter : 298 U.S. at 317-341.

  309 Epstein, “make the rule”: 298 U.S. 587, 592-593.

  310 “A social philosophy”: 298 U.S. at 596-597.

  310 Butler opinion in Morehead: 298 U.S. 602, 610-611 (1936).

  310 Stone dissent in Morehead: 298 U.S. at 632-635.

  310 Brant, “Because five”: Irons, New Deal, 278.

  311 Hoover, “regimented people”: Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Transformations, 306.

  311 Landon, “has been responsible”: id. at 308.

  312 Ickes, “there was” and Roosevelt, “is a mighty”: Baker, 129-130.