Law Commons^™

Thinking About The Supreme Court's Successes And Failures, Erwin Chemerinsky

Vanderbilt Law Review

The Supreme Court often has failed at its most important tasks and at the most important times. I set out this thesis at the beginning the book:

To be clear, I am not saying that the Supreme Court has failed at these crucial tasks every time. Making a case against the Supreme Court does not require taking such an extreme position. I also will talk about areas where the Court has succeeded in protecting minorities and in enforcing the limits of the Constitution. My claim is that the Court has often failed where and when it has been most needed. …

There Were Great Men Before Agamemnon, William R. Casto

Vanderbilt Law Review

John Marshall is the Agamemnon of Supreme Court history. He is universally considered the Court's greatest Justice, and rightly so. But there were great Justices before Marshall. One of those great Justices was James Iredell. No Justice in the Court's history has provided a more detailed or sophisticated explanation and justification of the doctrine of judicial review. Iredell needs a bard, and this Essay is my ode to his memory.

"The Threes": Re-Imagining Supreme Court Decisionmaking, Tracey E. George, Chris Guthrie

Vanderbilt Law Review

Article III is odd. In contrast to Articles 12 and II, which specify in some detail how the legislative and executive branches are to be assembled, Article III says virtually nothing about the institutional design of the Supreme Court.

Consistent with this Constitutional silence, the Court's look, shape, and behavior have adapted to changed circumstances. For example, the Court's membership has changed substantially. Initially, six Justices sat on the Court; in time, the Court grew to ten and shrank to seven. Only in 1869 did it settle at nine. Likewise, the Court's jurisdiction has changed, first expanding, then contracting, and …

The Coercion Test And Conditional Federal Grants To The States, Donald J. Mizerk

Vanderbilt Law Review

In July of 1984 Congress amended the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982' to require the states either to raise their minimum drinking age to twenty-one or forfeit a percentage of their federal highway grant. This congressional action forced the states to make an extremely difficult decision. The states either could enact a law that their residents might not support or forego the federal highway funds that the states desperately needed to complete important highway improvements. Many states were displeased with both options and challenged the constitutionality of Congress' conditional spending program.

The states' legal challenge has initiated renewed discussion …

The Court, The Constitution, And Chief Justice Burger, William F. Swindler

Vanderbilt Law Review

Although the constitutional crisis of 1973 has not yet demanded a definitive response from the Supreme Court, it obviously has established a landmark in the ultimate history of Warren Burger's Chief Justiceship. While the unprecedented confrontation between executive and judiciary was not carried beyond the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, Burger's old court,' and although the prospective confrontation between executive and Congress did not--at least in its first round-- reach a stage of review on the merits, the questions presented went to the cornerstones of Anglo-American constitutional theory itself. The case of Vice President Agnew raised issues …

The Supreme Court And Fundamental Rights--A Problem Of Judicial Method, James H. Wildman

Vanderbilt Law Review

Since the Constitution is a plan of written but flexible basic rights, interpreted and applied by a judiciary with few limitations upon its powers, it is necessary to avoid conferring carte blanche discretion upon the Court. This Note adopts the premises that we may be arriving at an era when "liberty" will demand constitutional protection of human interests other than those explicitly embodied within the text of the Bill of Rights; that judicial identification of those interests is often the most effective method for granting this protection; and that the function of constitutional due process is to preserve the relevancy …

Book Reviews, Law Review Staff

Vanderbilt Law Review

This is a deceptive book. It appears to be one more friendly appraisal of the work of the Warren Court--this time from the recent Solicitor General-surveying in giant steps and broad strokes its decisions in six major areas within the short space of 135 pages. On close reading it turns out to be a tough-minded essay written with notable lucidity, analytical density, and high professional competence. Moreover, it confronts directly and steadily the well-worn paradox or dilemma of the Supreme Court of the United States which must be both court and political institution, and it seriously attempts to appraise the …

Theodore Roosevelt And The Appointment Of Mr. Justice Moody, Paul T. Heffron

Vanderbilt Law Review

The author here describes the events leading to the appointment of William Henry Moody to the United States Supreme Court. Here counts the pressures brought to bear on President Theodore Roosevelt and the considerations which led to the President's selection of Moody over Horace Harmon Lurton.

Salmon P. Chase: Chief Justice, David F. Hughes

Vanderbilt Law Review

This article is not an in-depth study of some aspect of Salmon P. Chase's career as Chief Justice. Nor is it a survey of his judicial career. Rather, it is an attempt to present an overall view of Chase as Chief Justice through an examination of a limited number of topics. Such an approach seemed appropriate, for the sweep of his days on the Court are not well enough known to make a detailed study of one aspect of his career particularly valuable, nor is enough known about him to make a summary more than an exercise in superficiality. In …

Constitutional Law -- 1958 Tennessee Survey, Elvin E. Overton

Vanderbilt Law Review

State constitutional law decisions, lacking the universality of application of many other fields of the law, are vital and of significance frequently only to the local bar and local public officials. There is another difference between state constitutional law decisions, and federal constitutional law decisions: state courts are inclined to deal with state constitutional issues with an emphasis on the pragmatic problem of deciding the case and getting it out of the way,rather than with an emphasis on completing the blue print-of seeking to establish the general principle which reflects the conflicting policies struggling for recognition. In most United States …

Justice William Cushing And The Treaty-Making Power, F. William O'Brien S.J.

Vanderbilt Law Review

Although the work of the Supreme Court during the first few years was not great if measured in the number of cases handled, it would be a mistake to conclude that the six men who sat on the Bench during this formative period made no significant contribution to the development of American constitutional law. The Justices had few if any precedents to use as guides, and therefore their judicial work, limited though it was in volume, must be considered as stamped with the significance which attaches to all pioneer activity. Moreover, most of this work was done while on circuit …

Book Reviews, Carl B. Swisher (Reviewer), Elvin E. Overton (Reviewer), Jay Murphy (Reviewer), Charlotte Williams (Reviewer), Alexander Holtzoff (Reviewer)

Vanderbilt Law Review

Book Reviews

LIONS UNDER THE THRONE

By Charles P. Curtis, Jr.

Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1947. Pp. xviii, 368. $3.50

MR. JUSTICE BLACK: THE MAN AND His OPINIONS

By John P. Frank (Introduction by Charles A. Beard)

New York: Knopf Company, 1949.Pp. xix, 357. $4.00

ON UNDERSTANDING THE SUPREME COURT

By Paul A. Freund

Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1949. Pp. vi, 130. $3.00

MELVILLE VESTON FULLER: CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE UNITED STATES, 1888-1919

By Willard L. King

New York: Macmillan Company, 1950. Pp.394. $5.00

CHIEF JUSTICE STONE AND THE SUPREME COURT

By Samuel J. Konefsky (Prefatory Note by Charles A. …

A Modern Supreme Court In A Modern World, Charles F. Curtis

Vanderbilt Law Review

It is all very well, indeed it is very good, to bear down on the fact that the author of the Constitution was, and still is, "We the People of the United States." But there is more sentiment than explanation in it. We think too much about who is the author of the Constitution. Of course it was not the Convention of 1789, nor the First Congress which wrote the Bill of Rights, nor the Thirty-Ninth which wrote the Fourteenth Amendment. It was We the People, but even when we have recognized this, all we have done is recognize that …