Supreme Court
Supreme Court
19
19
0
On September 30, 1953, Earl Warren was appointed Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court. From the article:
"Earl Warren
Earl Warren (1891-1974) was a prominent 20th century leader of American politics and law. Elected California governor in 1942, Warren secured major reform legislation during his three terms in office. After failing to claim the Republican nomination for the presidency, he was appointed the 14th chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1953. The landmark case of his tenure was Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954), in which the Court unanimously determined the segregation of schools to be unconstitutional. The Warren Court also sought electoral reforms, equality in criminal justice and the defense of human rights before its chief justice retired in 1969.
Warren, born and raised in California, was elected district attorney of Alameda County in 1925, California attorney general in 1938, and governor in 1942. In three terms as governor he reorganized the state government and secured major reform legislation-modernizing the state’s hospital system, prisons, and highways, and expanding old-age and unemployment benefits. In 1953, President Dwight D. Eisenhower appointed him the fourteenth chief justice of the United States. He retired in 1969.
There have been two great creative periods in American public law. During the first, the Marshall Court laid down the foundations of the American system. During the second, the Warren era, the Court rewrote much of the corpus of constitutional law. Warren was the leader in his Court’s work, actively exercising his authority to reach the results he favored. In terms of creative impact Warren’s tenure can be compared only with that of Marshall.
As a successful chief executive, Warren developed leadership abilities that enabled him to guide his Court effectively. His fellow justices all stressed his forceful leadership, particularly at the conferences where cases are discussed and decided. Justice William O. Douglas ranked him with John Marshall and Charles Evans Hughes ‘as our three greatest Chief Justices.’ Those behind the ‘Impeach Earl Warren’ movement were correct in considering him the prime mover in the Warren Court’s jurisprudence.
Warren’s leadership can best be seen in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka decision-the most important by his Court. When the justices first discussed the case under Warren’s predecessor, they were sharply divided. But under Warren, they ruled unanimously that school segregation was unconstitutional. The unanimous decision was a direct result of Warren’s efforts. This and other Warren Court decisions furthering racial equality were the catalyst for the civil rights protests of the 1950s and 1960s and the civil rights laws passed by Congress, themselves upheld by the Warren Court.
Next in importance were the reapportionment decisions. The Court ruled that the ‘one-person, one-vote’ principle controls in all legislative apportionments. The result has been an electoral reform shifting voting power from rural districts to urban and suburban areas.
In addition to racial and political equality, the Warren Court sought equality in criminal justice. The landmark here was Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), which required counsel for indigent defendants. Warren’s emphasis on fairness in criminal proceedings also led to Mapp v. Ohio (1961), barring illegally seized evidence and Miranda v. Arizona (1966), requiring warnings to arrested persons of their right to counsel, including appointed counsel if they could not afford one.
Earlier Courts had stressed property rights. Under Warren the emphasis shifted to personal rights, placing them in a preferred constitutional position. This was particularly true of First Amendment rights. Protection was extended to civil rights demonstrators and criticism of public officials; the power to restrain publication on obscenity grounds was also limited. Moreover, the Court recognized new personal rights, notably a constitutional right of privacy.
Warren expressed disappointment that he had never become president, although he had actively sought the Republican nomination in 1948 and 1952. Yet, as chief justice, he was able to accomplish more than most presidents. He led his Court to what Justice Abe Fortas once termed ‘the most profound and pervasive revolution ever achieved by substantially peaceful means.’"
"Earl Warren
Earl Warren (1891-1974) was a prominent 20th century leader of American politics and law. Elected California governor in 1942, Warren secured major reform legislation during his three terms in office. After failing to claim the Republican nomination for the presidency, he was appointed the 14th chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1953. The landmark case of his tenure was Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954), in which the Court unanimously determined the segregation of schools to be unconstitutional. The Warren Court also sought electoral reforms, equality in criminal justice and the defense of human rights before its chief justice retired in 1969.
Warren, born and raised in California, was elected district attorney of Alameda County in 1925, California attorney general in 1938, and governor in 1942. In three terms as governor he reorganized the state government and secured major reform legislation-modernizing the state’s hospital system, prisons, and highways, and expanding old-age and unemployment benefits. In 1953, President Dwight D. Eisenhower appointed him the fourteenth chief justice of the United States. He retired in 1969.
There have been two great creative periods in American public law. During the first, the Marshall Court laid down the foundations of the American system. During the second, the Warren era, the Court rewrote much of the corpus of constitutional law. Warren was the leader in his Court’s work, actively exercising his authority to reach the results he favored. In terms of creative impact Warren’s tenure can be compared only with that of Marshall.
As a successful chief executive, Warren developed leadership abilities that enabled him to guide his Court effectively. His fellow justices all stressed his forceful leadership, particularly at the conferences where cases are discussed and decided. Justice William O. Douglas ranked him with John Marshall and Charles Evans Hughes ‘as our three greatest Chief Justices.’ Those behind the ‘Impeach Earl Warren’ movement were correct in considering him the prime mover in the Warren Court’s jurisprudence.
Warren’s leadership can best be seen in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka decision-the most important by his Court. When the justices first discussed the case under Warren’s predecessor, they were sharply divided. But under Warren, they ruled unanimously that school segregation was unconstitutional. The unanimous decision was a direct result of Warren’s efforts. This and other Warren Court decisions furthering racial equality were the catalyst for the civil rights protests of the 1950s and 1960s and the civil rights laws passed by Congress, themselves upheld by the Warren Court.
Next in importance were the reapportionment decisions. The Court ruled that the ‘one-person, one-vote’ principle controls in all legislative apportionments. The result has been an electoral reform shifting voting power from rural districts to urban and suburban areas.
In addition to racial and political equality, the Warren Court sought equality in criminal justice. The landmark here was Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), which required counsel for indigent defendants. Warren’s emphasis on fairness in criminal proceedings also led to Mapp v. Ohio (1961), barring illegally seized evidence and Miranda v. Arizona (1966), requiring warnings to arrested persons of their right to counsel, including appointed counsel if they could not afford one.
Earlier Courts had stressed property rights. Under Warren the emphasis shifted to personal rights, placing them in a preferred constitutional position. This was particularly true of First Amendment rights. Protection was extended to civil rights demonstrators and criticism of public officials; the power to restrain publication on obscenity grounds was also limited. Moreover, the Court recognized new personal rights, notably a constitutional right of privacy.
Warren expressed disappointment that he had never become president, although he had actively sought the Republican nomination in 1948 and 1952. Yet, as chief justice, he was able to accomplish more than most presidents. He led his Court to what Justice Abe Fortas once termed ‘the most profound and pervasive revolution ever achieved by substantially peaceful means.’"
Earl Warren
Posted from history.com
Supreme Court
World History
American History
Law
Constitution
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 6
7
7
0
Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren: A Profile of the Man
A public domain video Earl Warren was an American jurist and politician, who served as the 30th Governor of California (1943–1953) and later the 14th Chief J...
Thank you, my friend SGT (Join to see) for reminding us that on September 30, 1953, Earl Warren was appointed Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court by President Dwight David Eisenhower. He served as 14th Chief Justice of the United States.
It is interesting to me that Earl Warren was replaced by Warren Earl Burger as Chef Justice
Thank you, my friend Maj Marty Hogan for making us aware that March 19 is the anniversary of the birth of American jurist and politician who served as the 30th Governor of California (1943–1953) Earl Warren who served as the 14th Chief Justice of the United States (1953–1969).
Most noteworthy to conspiracy theorists he was appointed to chair what became known as the Warren Commission, which was formed to investigate the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy. :-)
Rest in peace Earl Warren!
"Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren: A Profile of the Man
1. Brown versus Board of education decision.
"We conclude that the doctrine of 'separate but equal' has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal." —Chief Justice Earl Warren
In Topeka, Kansas in the 1950s, schools were segregated by race. Each day, Linda Brown and her sister had to walk through a dangerous railroad switchyard to get to the bus stop for the ride to their all-black elementary school. There was a school closer to the Brown's house, but it was only for white students. Linda Brown and her family believed that the segregated school system violated the Fourteenth Amendment and took their case to court. Federal district court decided that segregation in public education was harmful to black children, but because all-black schools and all-white schools had similar buildings, transportation, curricula, and teachers, the segregation was legal. The Browns appealed their case to the Supreme Court, stating that even if the facilities were similar, segregated schools could never be equal to one another. The Court decided that state laws requiring separate but equal schools violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
2. Earl Warren was an American jurist and politician, who served as the 30th Governor of California (1943–1953) and later the 14th Chief Justice of the United States (1953–1969).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kf_tyoABCs
Image:
1. Justice Earl Warren Library of Congress, LC-USZ62-41653
2. Formal portrait of members of the United States Supreme Court, Washington DC, 1962. Pictured are, front row, from left, Justice Tom C Clark, Justice Hugo L Black, Chief Justice Earl Warren, Justice William O Douglas, and Justice John M Harlan; back row, from left, Justice Byron R White, Justice William J Brennan Jr, Justice Potter Stewart, and Justice Arthur J Goldberg.
3. June 23, 1969. Outgoing Chief Justice Earl Warren waves from the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court at the end of 16 years on the high tribunal. Earlier in the day he administered the oath to his successor, Warren Earl Burger as President Nixon looked on. Nixon praised Warren for his "dignity, example, and fairness.".
4.
Biography
1. Thoughtco.com
2. landmarkcases.org
1. Background from
"The Warren Court: Its Impact and Importance
Formal portrait of members of the United States Supreme Court, Washington DC, 1962. Pictured are, front row, from left, Justice Tom C Clark, Justice Hugo L Black, Chief Justice Earl Warren, Justice William O Douglas, and Justice John M Harlan; back row, from left, Justice Byron R White, Justice William J Brennan Jr, Justice Potter Stewart, and Justice Arthur J Goldberg.
by Robert Longley
Robert Longley is a U.S. government and history expert with over 30 years of experience in municipal government. He has written for ThoughtCo since 1997.
Updated August 13, 2019
The Warren Court was the period from October 5, 1953, to June 23, 1969, during which Earl Warren served as chief justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Along with the Marshall Court of Chief Justice John Marshall from 1801 to 1835, the Warren Court is remembered as one of the two most impactful periods in American constitutional law. Unlike any court before or since, the Warren Court dramatically expanded civil rights and civil liberties, as well as the powers of the judiciary and the federal government.
Key Takeaways: The Warren Court
• The term Warren Court refers to the U.S. Supreme Court as led by Chief Justice Earl Warren from October 5, 1953, to June 23, 1969.
• Today, the Warren Court is considered one of the two most important periods in the history of American constitutional law.
• As Chief Justice, Warren applied his political abilities to guide the court to reaching often controversial decisions that dramatically expanded civil rights and liberties, as well as judicial power.
• The Warren Court effectively ended racial segregation in U.S. public schools, expanded the constitutional rights of defendants, ensured equal representation in state legislatures, outlawed state-sponsored prayer in public schools, and paved the way for the legalization of abortion.
Today, the Warren Court is hailed and criticized for ending racial segregation in the United States, liberally applying the Bill of Rights through the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, and ending state-sanctioned prayer in public schools.
Warren and Judicial Power
Best known for his ability to manage the Supreme Court and win the support of his fellow justices, Chief Justice Warren was famous for wielding judicial power to force major social changes.
When President Eisenhower appointed Warren as chief justice in 1953, the other eight justices were New Deal liberals appointed by Franklin D. Roosevelt or Harry Truman. However, the Supreme Court remained ideologically divided. Justices Felix Frankfurter and Robert H. Jackson favored judicial self-restraint, believing the Court should defer to the wishes of the White House and Congress. On the other side, Justices Hugo Black and William O. Douglas led a majority faction that believed the federal courts should play a leading role in expanding property rights and individual liberties. Warren’s belief that the overriding purpose of the judiciary was to seek justice aligned him with Black and Douglas. When Felix Frankfurter retired in 1962 and was replaced by Justice Arthur Goldberg, Warren found himself in charge of a solid 5-4 liberal majority.
In leading the Supreme Court, Warren was aided by the political skills he had acquired while serving as governor of California from 1943 to 1953 and running for vice president in 1948 with Republican presidential candidate Thomas E. Dewey. Warren strongly believed that the highest purpose of the law was to “right wrongs” by applying equity and fairness. This fact, argues historian Bernard Schwartz, made his political acumen most impactful when the “political institutions”—such as Congress and the White House—had failed to “address problems such as segregation and reapportionment and cases where the constitutional rights of defendants were abused."
Warren’s leadership was best characterized by his ability to bring the Court to reach remarkable agreement on its most controversial cases. For example, Brown v. Board of Education, Gideon v. Wainwright, and Cooper v. Aaron were all unanimous decisions. Engel v. Vitale banned nondenominational prayer in public schools with only one dissenting opinion.
Harvard Law School professor Richard H. Fallon has written, “Some thrilled to the approach of the Warren Court. Many law professors were perplexed, often sympathetic to the Court’s results but skeptical of the soundness of its constitutional reasoning. And some of course were horrified.”
Racial Segregation and Judicial Power
In challenging the constitutionality of racial segregation of America’s public schools, Warren’s very first case, Brown v. Board of Education (1954), tested his leadership skills. Since the Court’s 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson ruling, racial segregation of schools had been allowed as long as “separate but equal” facilities were provided. In Brown v. Board, however, the Warren Court ruled 9-0 that the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment prohibited the operation of separate public schools for whites and blacks. When some states refused to end the practice, the Warren Court—again unanimously—ruled in the case of Cooper v. Aaron that all states must obey the decisions of the Supreme Court and cannot refuse to follow them.
The unanimity Warren achieved in Brown v. Board and Cooper v. Aaron made it easier for Congress to enact legislation banning racial segregation and discrimination in broader areas, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Especially in Cooper v. Aaron, Warren clearly established the power of the courts to stand with the Executive and Legislative Branches as an active partner in proactively governing the nation.
Equal Representation: ‘One Man, One Vote’
In the early 1960s, over the strong objections of Justice Felix Frankfurter, Warren convinced the Court that questions of the unequal representation of citizens in the state legislatures were not issues of politics and thus fell within the Court’s jurisdiction. For years, sparsely populated rural areas had been over-represented, leaving densely populated urban areas under-represented. By the 1960s, as people moved out of the cities, the sprawling middle class became under-represented. Frankfurter insisted that the Constitution barred the Court from entering the “political thicket,” and warned that the justices could never agree on a defensible definition of “equal” representation. Justice William O. Douglas, however, found that perfect definition: “one man, one vote.”
In the landmark 1964 apportionment case of Reynolds v. Sims, Warren crafted an 8-1 decision that stands as a civics lesson today. “To the extent that a citizen’s right to vote is debased, he is that much less a citizen,” he wrote, adding, “The weight of a citizen’s vote cannot be made to depend on where he lives. This is the clear and strong command of our Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause.” The Court ruled that the states should attempt to establish legislative districts of nearly equal population. Despite objections from rural legislators, the states complied quickly, reapportioning their legislatures with minimal problems.
Due Process and Rights of Defendants
Again during the 1960s, the Warren Court delivered three landmark decisions expanding the constitutional due process rights of criminal defendants. Despite having been a prosecutor himself, Warren privately detested what he considered “police abuses” such as warrantless searches and forced confessions.
In 1961, Mapp v. Ohio strengthened the Fourth Amendment’s protections by banning prosecutors from using evidence seized in illegal searches in trials. In 1963, Gideon v. Wainwright held that the Sixth Amendment required that all indigent criminal defendants be assigned a free, publicly-funded defense attorney. Finally, the 1966 case of Miranda v. Arizona required that all persons being interrogated while in police custody be clearly informed of their rights—such as the right to an attorney—and acknowledge their understanding of those rights—the so-called “Miranda warning.”
Calling the three rulings the “handcuffing of the police,” Warren’s critics note that violent crime and homicide rates rose sharply from 1964 to 1974. However, homicide rates have fallen dramatically since the early 1990s.
First Amendment Rights
In two landmark decisions that continue to spark controversy today, the Warren Court expanded the scope of the First Amendment by applying its protections to the actions of the states.
The Warren Court’s 1962 decision in the case of Engel v. Vitale held that New York had violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by officially authorizing mandatory, nondenominational prayer services in the state’s public schools. The Engel v. Vitale decision effectively outlawed mandatory school prayer and remains one of the Supreme Court’s most-often challenged actions to date.
In its 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut decision, the Warren Court affirmed that personal privacy, though not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, is a right granted by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. After Warren’s retirement, the Griswold v. Connecticut ruling would play a decisive role in the Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion and confirming the constitutional protection of women’s reproductive rights. During the first six months of 2019, nine states pressed the boundaries of Roe v. Wade by enacting early abortion bans outlawing abortions when performed after a certain point early in the pregnancy. Legal challenges to these laws will linger in the courts for years."
2. Background from landmarkcases.org/en/Page/523/Earl_Warren_biography
Earl Warren biography
LANDMARK CASE BIOGRAPHY: EARL WARREN (1891–1974)
Earl Warren was Chief Justice during one of the most turbulent times in our nation's history. During his tenure, the Court dealt with controversial cases on civil rights and civil liberties and the very nature of the political system.
Warren was born in Los Angeles, but grew up in Bakersfield, California where his father worked as a railroad car repairman. Bakersfield was a rough and tumble frontier town where Warren recalled seeing "crime and vice of all kinds countenanced by a corrupt government." He worked on the railroad himself in the summer, which left him with knowledge about working people and their problems, as well as with the anti-Asian racism then rampant on the West Coast.
Warren attended the University of California at Berkeley and its law school. After serving a brief stint in the army during World War I, he worked for the Alameda County district attorney's office for eighteen years. During that time he proved to be a tough prosecutor, but he was also sensitive to the rights of the accused and personally fought to secure a public defender for people who could not afford one. A 1931 survey concluded that Earl Warren was the best district attorney in the United States.
From 1938 to 1942, Earl Warren was attorney general of California and was then elected governor. Warren is remembered mostly for his role in demanding the evacuation of Japanese from the West Coast. Though the action seemed inconsistent with his future decisions, Warren maintained during his lifetime that it seemed like the right action at the time. In his memoirs, however, he acknowledged error.
Warren served three terms as governor of California and played a key role in Dwight Eisenhower's nomination for the presidency in 1952. Eisenhower rewarded Warren with the Chief Justice position in 1953. Warren took over a court that was deeply divided between those justices who advocated a more active role for the court and those who supported judicial restraint. He proved skillful at "massing the court" and securing consensus as is evidenced by the unanimous decision in the Brown v. Board of Education case, one of the first cases that he had to deal with as Chief Justice.
The Brown case was the first in a long string of judgments that marked a more active role for the Supreme Court of the United States in American life. The Warren Court took on the defense of individual rights as no court before it. Warren considered this a proper role for the courts; he never saw the role of the judiciary as passive, or somehow inferior to the other two branches of government.
Warren's opinion in Brown has been criticized for its lack of constitutional analysis. In Brown the key finding does not appeal to precedent or to the history of the Fourteenth Amendment. Rather there is an emphasis on common sense, justice, and fairness that can be seen in Warren's reliance on social science and psychological research. Warren was not antigovernment, but he believed that the Constitution prohibited the government from acting unfairly against the individual. In taking this position, he carved out a powerful position for the Court as a protector of civil rights and civil liberties.
Read letters written to Chief Justice Warren by other justices remarking on his Brown v. Board of Education decision.
What do the letters reveal about Justice Warren, his decision in the Brown case, and his relationship with the other justices?
Why was a unanimous decision in the Brown case so important?
Cray, Ed. Chief Justice: A Biography of Earl Warren. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1997."
FYI SP5 Jeannie Carle SPC Chris Bayner-Cwik SPC Diana Rodriguez SPC Diana D. SSG Diane R. LTC Hillary Luton Sgt Kelli Mays SFC (Join to see) SSG(P) James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4" MSG Andrew White 1SG Steven Imerman COL Mikel J. Burroughs Col Carl Whicker Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen MAJ Rene De La Rosa TSgt David L.PO1 William "Chip" Nagel SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL
It is interesting to me that Earl Warren was replaced by Warren Earl Burger as Chef Justice
Thank you, my friend Maj Marty Hogan for making us aware that March 19 is the anniversary of the birth of American jurist and politician who served as the 30th Governor of California (1943–1953) Earl Warren who served as the 14th Chief Justice of the United States (1953–1969).
Most noteworthy to conspiracy theorists he was appointed to chair what became known as the Warren Commission, which was formed to investigate the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy. :-)
Rest in peace Earl Warren!
"Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren: A Profile of the Man
1. Brown versus Board of education decision.
"We conclude that the doctrine of 'separate but equal' has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal." —Chief Justice Earl Warren
In Topeka, Kansas in the 1950s, schools were segregated by race. Each day, Linda Brown and her sister had to walk through a dangerous railroad switchyard to get to the bus stop for the ride to their all-black elementary school. There was a school closer to the Brown's house, but it was only for white students. Linda Brown and her family believed that the segregated school system violated the Fourteenth Amendment and took their case to court. Federal district court decided that segregation in public education was harmful to black children, but because all-black schools and all-white schools had similar buildings, transportation, curricula, and teachers, the segregation was legal. The Browns appealed their case to the Supreme Court, stating that even if the facilities were similar, segregated schools could never be equal to one another. The Court decided that state laws requiring separate but equal schools violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
2. Earl Warren was an American jurist and politician, who served as the 30th Governor of California (1943–1953) and later the 14th Chief Justice of the United States (1953–1969).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kf_tyoABCs
Image:
1. Justice Earl Warren Library of Congress, LC-USZ62-41653
2. Formal portrait of members of the United States Supreme Court, Washington DC, 1962. Pictured are, front row, from left, Justice Tom C Clark, Justice Hugo L Black, Chief Justice Earl Warren, Justice William O Douglas, and Justice John M Harlan; back row, from left, Justice Byron R White, Justice William J Brennan Jr, Justice Potter Stewart, and Justice Arthur J Goldberg.
3. June 23, 1969. Outgoing Chief Justice Earl Warren waves from the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court at the end of 16 years on the high tribunal. Earlier in the day he administered the oath to his successor, Warren Earl Burger as President Nixon looked on. Nixon praised Warren for his "dignity, example, and fairness.".
4.
Biography
1. Thoughtco.com
2. landmarkcases.org
1. Background from
"The Warren Court: Its Impact and Importance
Formal portrait of members of the United States Supreme Court, Washington DC, 1962. Pictured are, front row, from left, Justice Tom C Clark, Justice Hugo L Black, Chief Justice Earl Warren, Justice William O Douglas, and Justice John M Harlan; back row, from left, Justice Byron R White, Justice William J Brennan Jr, Justice Potter Stewart, and Justice Arthur J Goldberg.
by Robert Longley
Robert Longley is a U.S. government and history expert with over 30 years of experience in municipal government. He has written for ThoughtCo since 1997.
Updated August 13, 2019
The Warren Court was the period from October 5, 1953, to June 23, 1969, during which Earl Warren served as chief justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Along with the Marshall Court of Chief Justice John Marshall from 1801 to 1835, the Warren Court is remembered as one of the two most impactful periods in American constitutional law. Unlike any court before or since, the Warren Court dramatically expanded civil rights and civil liberties, as well as the powers of the judiciary and the federal government.
Key Takeaways: The Warren Court
• The term Warren Court refers to the U.S. Supreme Court as led by Chief Justice Earl Warren from October 5, 1953, to June 23, 1969.
• Today, the Warren Court is considered one of the two most important periods in the history of American constitutional law.
• As Chief Justice, Warren applied his political abilities to guide the court to reaching often controversial decisions that dramatically expanded civil rights and liberties, as well as judicial power.
• The Warren Court effectively ended racial segregation in U.S. public schools, expanded the constitutional rights of defendants, ensured equal representation in state legislatures, outlawed state-sponsored prayer in public schools, and paved the way for the legalization of abortion.
Today, the Warren Court is hailed and criticized for ending racial segregation in the United States, liberally applying the Bill of Rights through the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, and ending state-sanctioned prayer in public schools.
Warren and Judicial Power
Best known for his ability to manage the Supreme Court and win the support of his fellow justices, Chief Justice Warren was famous for wielding judicial power to force major social changes.
When President Eisenhower appointed Warren as chief justice in 1953, the other eight justices were New Deal liberals appointed by Franklin D. Roosevelt or Harry Truman. However, the Supreme Court remained ideologically divided. Justices Felix Frankfurter and Robert H. Jackson favored judicial self-restraint, believing the Court should defer to the wishes of the White House and Congress. On the other side, Justices Hugo Black and William O. Douglas led a majority faction that believed the federal courts should play a leading role in expanding property rights and individual liberties. Warren’s belief that the overriding purpose of the judiciary was to seek justice aligned him with Black and Douglas. When Felix Frankfurter retired in 1962 and was replaced by Justice Arthur Goldberg, Warren found himself in charge of a solid 5-4 liberal majority.
In leading the Supreme Court, Warren was aided by the political skills he had acquired while serving as governor of California from 1943 to 1953 and running for vice president in 1948 with Republican presidential candidate Thomas E. Dewey. Warren strongly believed that the highest purpose of the law was to “right wrongs” by applying equity and fairness. This fact, argues historian Bernard Schwartz, made his political acumen most impactful when the “political institutions”—such as Congress and the White House—had failed to “address problems such as segregation and reapportionment and cases where the constitutional rights of defendants were abused."
Warren’s leadership was best characterized by his ability to bring the Court to reach remarkable agreement on its most controversial cases. For example, Brown v. Board of Education, Gideon v. Wainwright, and Cooper v. Aaron were all unanimous decisions. Engel v. Vitale banned nondenominational prayer in public schools with only one dissenting opinion.
Harvard Law School professor Richard H. Fallon has written, “Some thrilled to the approach of the Warren Court. Many law professors were perplexed, often sympathetic to the Court’s results but skeptical of the soundness of its constitutional reasoning. And some of course were horrified.”
Racial Segregation and Judicial Power
In challenging the constitutionality of racial segregation of America’s public schools, Warren’s very first case, Brown v. Board of Education (1954), tested his leadership skills. Since the Court’s 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson ruling, racial segregation of schools had been allowed as long as “separate but equal” facilities were provided. In Brown v. Board, however, the Warren Court ruled 9-0 that the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment prohibited the operation of separate public schools for whites and blacks. When some states refused to end the practice, the Warren Court—again unanimously—ruled in the case of Cooper v. Aaron that all states must obey the decisions of the Supreme Court and cannot refuse to follow them.
The unanimity Warren achieved in Brown v. Board and Cooper v. Aaron made it easier for Congress to enact legislation banning racial segregation and discrimination in broader areas, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Especially in Cooper v. Aaron, Warren clearly established the power of the courts to stand with the Executive and Legislative Branches as an active partner in proactively governing the nation.
Equal Representation: ‘One Man, One Vote’
In the early 1960s, over the strong objections of Justice Felix Frankfurter, Warren convinced the Court that questions of the unequal representation of citizens in the state legislatures were not issues of politics and thus fell within the Court’s jurisdiction. For years, sparsely populated rural areas had been over-represented, leaving densely populated urban areas under-represented. By the 1960s, as people moved out of the cities, the sprawling middle class became under-represented. Frankfurter insisted that the Constitution barred the Court from entering the “political thicket,” and warned that the justices could never agree on a defensible definition of “equal” representation. Justice William O. Douglas, however, found that perfect definition: “one man, one vote.”
In the landmark 1964 apportionment case of Reynolds v. Sims, Warren crafted an 8-1 decision that stands as a civics lesson today. “To the extent that a citizen’s right to vote is debased, he is that much less a citizen,” he wrote, adding, “The weight of a citizen’s vote cannot be made to depend on where he lives. This is the clear and strong command of our Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause.” The Court ruled that the states should attempt to establish legislative districts of nearly equal population. Despite objections from rural legislators, the states complied quickly, reapportioning their legislatures with minimal problems.
Due Process and Rights of Defendants
Again during the 1960s, the Warren Court delivered three landmark decisions expanding the constitutional due process rights of criminal defendants. Despite having been a prosecutor himself, Warren privately detested what he considered “police abuses” such as warrantless searches and forced confessions.
In 1961, Mapp v. Ohio strengthened the Fourth Amendment’s protections by banning prosecutors from using evidence seized in illegal searches in trials. In 1963, Gideon v. Wainwright held that the Sixth Amendment required that all indigent criminal defendants be assigned a free, publicly-funded defense attorney. Finally, the 1966 case of Miranda v. Arizona required that all persons being interrogated while in police custody be clearly informed of their rights—such as the right to an attorney—and acknowledge their understanding of those rights—the so-called “Miranda warning.”
Calling the three rulings the “handcuffing of the police,” Warren’s critics note that violent crime and homicide rates rose sharply from 1964 to 1974. However, homicide rates have fallen dramatically since the early 1990s.
First Amendment Rights
In two landmark decisions that continue to spark controversy today, the Warren Court expanded the scope of the First Amendment by applying its protections to the actions of the states.
The Warren Court’s 1962 decision in the case of Engel v. Vitale held that New York had violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by officially authorizing mandatory, nondenominational prayer services in the state’s public schools. The Engel v. Vitale decision effectively outlawed mandatory school prayer and remains one of the Supreme Court’s most-often challenged actions to date.
In its 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut decision, the Warren Court affirmed that personal privacy, though not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, is a right granted by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. After Warren’s retirement, the Griswold v. Connecticut ruling would play a decisive role in the Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion and confirming the constitutional protection of women’s reproductive rights. During the first six months of 2019, nine states pressed the boundaries of Roe v. Wade by enacting early abortion bans outlawing abortions when performed after a certain point early in the pregnancy. Legal challenges to these laws will linger in the courts for years."
2. Background from landmarkcases.org/en/Page/523/Earl_Warren_biography
Earl Warren biography
LANDMARK CASE BIOGRAPHY: EARL WARREN (1891–1974)
Earl Warren was Chief Justice during one of the most turbulent times in our nation's history. During his tenure, the Court dealt with controversial cases on civil rights and civil liberties and the very nature of the political system.
Warren was born in Los Angeles, but grew up in Bakersfield, California where his father worked as a railroad car repairman. Bakersfield was a rough and tumble frontier town where Warren recalled seeing "crime and vice of all kinds countenanced by a corrupt government." He worked on the railroad himself in the summer, which left him with knowledge about working people and their problems, as well as with the anti-Asian racism then rampant on the West Coast.
Warren attended the University of California at Berkeley and its law school. After serving a brief stint in the army during World War I, he worked for the Alameda County district attorney's office for eighteen years. During that time he proved to be a tough prosecutor, but he was also sensitive to the rights of the accused and personally fought to secure a public defender for people who could not afford one. A 1931 survey concluded that Earl Warren was the best district attorney in the United States.
From 1938 to 1942, Earl Warren was attorney general of California and was then elected governor. Warren is remembered mostly for his role in demanding the evacuation of Japanese from the West Coast. Though the action seemed inconsistent with his future decisions, Warren maintained during his lifetime that it seemed like the right action at the time. In his memoirs, however, he acknowledged error.
Warren served three terms as governor of California and played a key role in Dwight Eisenhower's nomination for the presidency in 1952. Eisenhower rewarded Warren with the Chief Justice position in 1953. Warren took over a court that was deeply divided between those justices who advocated a more active role for the court and those who supported judicial restraint. He proved skillful at "massing the court" and securing consensus as is evidenced by the unanimous decision in the Brown v. Board of Education case, one of the first cases that he had to deal with as Chief Justice.
The Brown case was the first in a long string of judgments that marked a more active role for the Supreme Court of the United States in American life. The Warren Court took on the defense of individual rights as no court before it. Warren considered this a proper role for the courts; he never saw the role of the judiciary as passive, or somehow inferior to the other two branches of government.
Warren's opinion in Brown has been criticized for its lack of constitutional analysis. In Brown the key finding does not appeal to precedent or to the history of the Fourteenth Amendment. Rather there is an emphasis on common sense, justice, and fairness that can be seen in Warren's reliance on social science and psychological research. Warren was not antigovernment, but he believed that the Constitution prohibited the government from acting unfairly against the individual. In taking this position, he carved out a powerful position for the Court as a protector of civil rights and civil liberties.
Read letters written to Chief Justice Warren by other justices remarking on his Brown v. Board of Education decision.
What do the letters reveal about Justice Warren, his decision in the Brown case, and his relationship with the other justices?
Why was a unanimous decision in the Brown case so important?
Cray, Ed. Chief Justice: A Biography of Earl Warren. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1997."
FYI SP5 Jeannie Carle SPC Chris Bayner-Cwik SPC Diana Rodriguez SPC Diana D. SSG Diane R. LTC Hillary Luton Sgt Kelli Mays SFC (Join to see) SSG(P) James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4" MSG Andrew White 1SG Steven Imerman COL Mikel J. Burroughs Col Carl Whicker Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen MAJ Rene De La Rosa TSgt David L.PO1 William "Chip" Nagel SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL
(7)
(0)
LTC Stephen F.
FYI SFC William Farrell SSgt Robert Marx SSgt (Join to see) TSgt Joe C. SGT John " Mac " McConnell SP5 Mark KuzinskiLTC Wayne Brandon LTC Bill Koski Maj Bill Smith, Ph.D. MSgt Jason McClish SPC Tom DeSmetSPC Woody Bullard Sgt Albert Castro SSG(P) (Join to see) LTC John Shaw Maj William W. 'Bill' Price CW5 John M. LTC (Join to see)Sgt John H.CPT Tommy Curtis
(2)
(0)
LTC Stephen F.
FYI 1sg-dan-capriSGT Robert R.SGT (Join to see) SGT Steve McFarland 1585663:SGT Mark Anderson]SSG Michael NollCPT Daniel CoxSFC David Reid, M.S, PHR, SHRM-CP, DTMSFC Jack ChampionA1C Ian WilliamsCpl James R. " Jim" Gossett Jr SPC Jon O.MAJ Raúl Rovira Cynthia Croft
SSgt Brian Brakke
SSgt Brian Brakke
(1)
(0)
5
5
0
4
4
0
...and Earl Warren was a fan of the Baltimore Orioles. I saw him a couple of times in the cheap seats wearing jeans and a flannel shirt, eating a hot dog, and washing it down with a National Boh beer. Not a Secret Service man in sight. Those were the days...
(4)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google