Constitutional Vision and Supreme Court Decisions: Reconsidering Roosevelt on Race

Studies in American Political Development

Volumn 14, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 20-50

  McMahon, Kevin J ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0141528245     PISSN: 0898588X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0898588X00002996     Document Type: Review

References (89)

1. Truman's 1947 State of the Union address, January 6, 1947, Public Papers of the Presidents: Harry S. Truman, 1947 (Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office, 1962), 9; The President's Committee on Civil Rights, (PCCR) To Secure These Rights (New York: Simon and Schuster, October 26, 1947), 166; Truman's Special Message to the Congress on Civil Rights, February 2, 1948, Public Papers of the Presidents: Harry S. Truman, 1948 (Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office, 1964), 126.
2. Truman's 1947 State of the Union address, January 6, 1947, Public Papers of the Presidents: Harry S. Truman, 1947 (Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office, 1962), 9; The President's Committee on Civil Rights, (PCCR) To Secure These Rights (New York: Simon and Schuster, October 26, 1947), 166; Truman's Special Message to the Congress on Civil Rights, February 2, 1948, Public Papers of the Presidents: Harry S. Truman, 1948 (Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office, 1964), 126.
3. Truman's 1947 State of the Union address, January 6, 1947, Public Papers of the Presidents: Harry S. Truman, 1947 (Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office, 1962), 9; The President's Committee on Civil Rights, (PCCR) To Secure These Rights (New York: Simon and Schuster, October 26, 1947), 166; Truman's Special Message to the Congress on Civil Rights, February 2, 1948, Public Papers of the Presidents: Harry S. Truman, 1948 (Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office, 1964), 126.
4. See William C. Berman's The Politics of Civil Rights in the Truman Administration (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1970); Richard M. Dalfiume, Desegregation of the U.S. Armed Forces: Fighting on Two Fronts, 1939-1953 (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1969); Alonzo L. Hamby, Liberalism and its Challengers: FDR to Reagan (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985); Donald R. McCoy and Richard T. Ruetten, Quest and Response: Minority Rights and the Truman Administration (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1973); and Harvard Sitkoff, "Years of the Locust: Interpretations of the Truman Presidency Since 1965," in The Truman Period as a Research Filed: A Reappraisal, 1972, ed. Richard S. Kirkendall (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1974) 75-112.
5. See William C. Berman's The Politics of Civil Rights in the Truman Administration (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1970); Richard M. Dalfiume, Desegregation of the U.S. Armed Forces: Fighting on Two Fronts, 1939-1953 (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1969); Alonzo L. Hamby, Liberalism and its Challengers: FDR to Reagan (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985); Donald R. McCoy and Richard T. Ruetten, Quest and Response: Minority Rights and the Truman Administration (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1973); and Harvard Sitkoff, "Years of the Locust: Interpretations of the Truman Presidency Since 1965," in The Truman Period as a Research Filed: A Reappraisal, 1972, ed. Richard S. Kirkendall (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1974) 75-112.
6. See William C. Berman's The Politics of Civil Rights in the Truman Administration (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1970); Richard M. Dalfiume, Desegregation of the U.S. Armed Forces: Fighting on Two Fronts, 1939-1953 (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1969); Alonzo L. Hamby, Liberalism and its Challengers: FDR to Reagan (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985); Donald R. McCoy and Richard T. Ruetten, Quest and Response: Minority Rights and the Truman Administration (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1973); and Harvard Sitkoff, "Years of the Locust: Interpretations of the Truman Presidency Since 1965," in The Truman Period as a Research Filed: A Reappraisal, 1972, ed. Richard S. Kirkendall (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1974) 75-112.
7. See William C. Berman's The Politics of Civil Rights in the Truman Administration (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1970); Richard M. Dalfiume, Desegregation of the U.S. Armed Forces: Fighting on Two Fronts, 1939-1953 (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1969); Alonzo L. Hamby, Liberalism and its Challengers: FDR to Reagan (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985); Donald R. McCoy and Richard T. Ruetten, Quest and Response: Minority Rights and the Truman Administration (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1973); and Harvard Sitkoff, "Years of the Locust: Interpretations of the Truman Presidency Since 1965," in The Truman Period as a Research Filed: A Reappraisal, 1972, ed. Richard S. Kirkendall (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1974) 75-112.
8. See William C. Berman's The Politics of Civil Rights in the Truman Administration (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1970); Richard M. Dalfiume, Desegregation of the U.S. Armed Forces: Fighting on Two Fronts, 1939-1953 (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1969); Alonzo L. Hamby, Liberalism and its Challengers: FDR to Reagan (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985); Donald R. McCoy and Richard T. Ruetten, Quest and Response: Minority Rights and the Truman Administration (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1973); and Harvard Sitkoff, "Years of the Locust: Interpretations of the Truman Presidency Since 1965," in The Truman Period as a Research Filed: A Reappraisal, 1972, ed. Richard S. Kirkendall (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1974) 75-112.
9. Smith v. v. Allwight, 321 U.S. 649 (1944; overruling Grovey v. Townsend, 295 US. 45 [1935]); Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954); To Secure These Rights, 36, and V. O. Key's Southern Politics (New York: Vintage, 1949), 618.
10. Smith v. v. Allwight, 321 U.S. 649 (1944; overruling Grovey v. Townsend, 295 US. 45 [1935]); Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954); To Secure These Rights, 36, and V. O. Key's Southern Politics (New York: Vintage, 1949), 618.
11. Smith v. v. Allwight, 321 U.S. 649 (1944; overruling Grovey v. Townsend, 295 US. 45 [1935]); Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954); To Secure These Rights, 36, and V. O. Key's Southern Politics (New York: Vintage, 1949), 618.
12. Morgan v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 328 U.S. 373 (1946), with Justice Robert Jackson not participating.
13. Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1 (1948). Justices Reed, Jackson, and Rutledge did not participate.
14. See Sipuel v. Oklahoma, 332 U.S. 631 (1948); Sweatt v. Painter, 339 U.S. 629 (1950); and McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 (1950). Also see, Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada, 305 U.S. 337 (1938).
15. Mary Dudziak, "Desegregation as a Cold War Imperative," Stanford Law Review 41 (1988); 61-120. See also sources in n.2 above.
16. Martin M. Shapiro, "Chief Justice Rehnquist and the Future of the Supreme Court," in An Essential Safeguard: Essays on the United States Supreme Court and Its Justices, ed. D. Grier Stephenson (Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing, 1990), 145-164, 145; Shapiro, "The Supreme Court: From Warren to Burger," in The New American Political System, ed. Anthony King (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 1978), 179-211, 194; and Robert A. Dahl, "Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker," Journal of Public Law 6 (1957): 279-95. See also among a vast literature, Walter Dean Burnham, Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics (New York: W.W. Norton, 1970); David Adamany "Law and Society: Realigning Elections and the Supreme Court," Wisconsin Law Review 3 (1973): 790-846; William Lasser, "The Supreme Court in Periods of Critical Realignment," Journal of Politics 47 (1985): 1174-87; John B. Gates, The Supreme Court and Partisan Realignment: A Macro- and Microlevel Perspective (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1992) ; and Mark A. Graber, "The Nonmajoritarian Difficulty: Legislative Deference to the Judiciary," Studies in American Political Development 7 (1993): 35-73.
17. Martin M. Shapiro, "Chief Justice Rehnquist and the Future of the Supreme Court," in An Essential Safeguard: Essays on the United States Supreme Court and Its Justices, ed. D. Grier Stephenson (Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing, 1990), 145-164, 145; Shapiro, "The Supreme Court: From Warren to Burger," in The New American Political System, ed. Anthony King (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 1978), 179-211, 194; and Robert A. Dahl, "Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker," Journal of Public Law 6 (1957): 279-95. See also among a vast literature, Walter Dean Burnham, Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics (New York: W.W. Norton, 1970); David Adamany "Law and Society: Realigning Elections and the Supreme Court," Wisconsin Law Review 3 (1973): 790-846; William Lasser, "The Supreme Court in Periods of Critical Realignment," Journal of Politics 47 (1985): 1174-87; John B. Gates, The Supreme Court and Partisan Realignment: A Macro- and Microlevel Perspective (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1992) ; and Mark A. Graber, "The Nonmajoritarian Difficulty: Legislative Deference to the Judiciary," Studies in American Political Development 7 (1993): 35-73.
18. Martin M. Shapiro, "Chief Justice Rehnquist and the Future of the Supreme Court," in An Essential Safeguard: Essays on the United States Supreme Court and Its Justices, ed. D. Grier Stephenson (Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing, 1990), 145-164, 145; Shapiro, "The Supreme Court: From Warren to Burger," in The New American Political System, ed. Anthony King (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 1978), 179-211, 194; and Robert A. Dahl, "Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker," Journal of Public Law 6 (1957): 279-95. See also among a vast literature, Walter Dean Burnham, Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics (New York: W.W. Norton, 1970); David Adamany "Law and Society: Realigning Elections and the Supreme Court," Wisconsin Law Review 3 (1973): 790-846; William Lasser, "The Supreme Court in Periods of Critical Realignment," Journal of Politics 47 (1985): 1174-87; John B. Gates, The Supreme Court and Partisan Realignment: A Macro- and Microlevel Perspective (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1992) ; and Mark A. Graber, "The Nonmajoritarian Difficulty: Legislative Deference to the Judiciary," Studies in American Political Development 7 (1993): 35-73.
19. Martin M. Shapiro, "Chief Justice Rehnquist and the Future of the Supreme Court," in An Essential Safeguard: Essays on the United States Supreme Court and Its Justices, ed. D. Grier Stephenson (Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing, 1990), 145-164, 145; Shapiro, "The Supreme Court: From Warren to Burger," in The New American Political System, ed. Anthony King (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 1978), 179-211, 194; and Robert A. Dahl, "Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker," Journal of Public Law 6 (1957): 279-95. See also among a vast literature, Walter Dean Burnham, Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics (New York: W.W. Norton, 1970); David Adamany "Law and Society: Realigning Elections and the Supreme Court," Wisconsin Law Review 3 (1973): 790-846; William Lasser, "The Supreme Court in Periods of Critical Realignment," Journal of Politics 47 (1985): 1174-87; John B. Gates, The Supreme Court and Partisan Realignment: A Macro- and Microlevel Perspective (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1992) ; and Mark A. Graber, "The Nonmajoritarian Difficulty: Legislative Deference to the Judiciary," Studies in American Political Development 7 (1993): 35-73.
20. Martin M. Shapiro, "Chief Justice Rehnquist and the Future of the Supreme Court," in An Essential Safeguard: Essays on the United States Supreme Court and Its Justices, ed. D. Grier Stephenson (Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing, 1990), 145-164, 145; Shapiro, "The Supreme Court: From Warren to Burger," in The New American Political System, ed. Anthony King (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 1978), 179-211, 194; and Robert A. Dahl, "Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker," Journal of Public Law 6 (1957): 279-95. See also among a vast literature, Walter Dean Burnham, Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics (New York: W.W. Norton, 1970); David Adamany "Law and Society: Realigning Elections and the Supreme Court," Wisconsin Law Review 3 (1973): 790-846; William Lasser, "The Supreme Court in Periods of Critical Realignment," Journal of Politics 47 (1985): 1174-87; John B. Gates, The Supreme Court and Partisan Realignment: A Macro- and Microlevel Perspective (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1992) ; and Mark A. Graber, "The Nonmajoritarian Difficulty: Legislative Deference to the Judiciary," Studies in American Political Development 7 (1993): 35-73.
21. Martin M. Shapiro, "Chief Justice Rehnquist and the Future of the Supreme Court," in An Essential Safeguard: Essays on the United States Supreme Court and Its Justices, ed. D. Grier Stephenson (Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing, 1990), 145-164, 145; Shapiro, "The Supreme Court: From Warren to Burger," in The New American Political System, ed. Anthony King (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 1978), 179-211, 194; and Robert A. Dahl, "Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker," Journal of Public Law 6 (1957): 279-95. See also among a vast literature, Walter Dean Burnham, Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics (New York: W.W. Norton, 1970); David Adamany "Law and Society: Realigning Elections and the Supreme Court," Wisconsin Law Review 3 (1973): 790-846; William Lasser, "The Supreme Court in Periods of Critical Realignment," Journal of Politics 47 (1985): 1174-87; John B. Gates, The Supreme Court and Partisan Realignment: A Macro- and Microlevel Perspective (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1992) ; and Mark A. Graber, "The Nonmajoritarian Difficulty: Legislative Deference to the Judiciary," Studies in American Political Development 7 (1993): 35-73.
22. Martin M. Shapiro, "Chief Justice Rehnquist and the Future of the Supreme Court," in An Essential Safeguard: Essays on the United States Supreme Court and Its Justices, ed. D. Grier Stephenson (Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing, 1990), 145-164, 145; Shapiro, "The Supreme Court: From Warren to Burger," in The New American Political System, ed. Anthony King (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 1978), 179-211, 194; and Robert A. Dahl, "Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker," Journal of Public Law 6 (1957): 279-95. See also among a vast literature, Walter Dean Burnham, Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics (New York: W.W. Norton, 1970); David Adamany "Law and Society: Realigning Elections and the Supreme Court," Wisconsin Law Review 3 (1973): 790-846; William Lasser, "The Supreme Court in Periods of Critical Realignment," Journal of Politics 47 (1985): 1174-87; John B. Gates, The Supreme Court and Partisan Realignment: A Macro- and Microlevel Perspective (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1992) ; and Mark A. Graber, "The Nonmajoritarian Difficulty: Legislative Deference to the Judiciary," Studies in American Political Development 7 (1993): 35-73.
23. Martin M. Shapiro, "Chief Justice Rehnquist and the Future of the Supreme Court," in An Essential Safeguard: Essays on the United States Supreme Court and Its Justices, ed. D. Grier Stephenson (Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing, 1990), 145-164, 145; Shapiro, "The Supreme Court: From Warren to Burger," in The New American Political System, ed. Anthony King (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 1978), 179-211, 194; and Robert A. Dahl, "Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker," Journal of Public Law 6 (1957): 279-95. See also among a vast literature, Walter Dean Burnham, Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics (New York: W.W. Norton, 1970); David Adamany "Law and Society: Realigning Elections and the Supreme Court," Wisconsin Law Review 3 (1973): 790-846; William Lasser, "The Supreme Court in Periods of Critical Realignment," Journal of Politics 47 (1985): 1174-87; John B. Gates, The Supreme Court and Partisan Realignment: A Macro- and Microlevel Perspective (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1992) ; and Mark A. Graber, "The Nonmajoritarian Difficulty: Legislative Deference to the Judiciary," Studies in American Political Development 7 (1993): 35-73.
24. Jeffrey A. Segal and Harold J. Spaeth, The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 332. As Segal and Spaeth write, "we can predict [that] the ideology of the President's choice . . . will be a function of the President's ideology, the ideology composition of the Senate, and the ideological makeup of the Supreme Court" (159), To be sure, partisanship is still important for the attitudinal theorists. In an earlier work Spaeth and co-author David Rohde showed that presidents were successful over 79 percent of the time in selecting justices supportive of their policy positions by focusing exclusively on ideology and party affiliation, and by assuming that "Republican Presidents wanted their appointees to be moderate to conservative, and that Democratic Presidents wanted their appointees to be moderate to liberal" ( David Rohde and Harold J. Spaeth, Supreme Court Decision Making [San Francisco: W.H. Freeman, 1976], 107). Moreover, at times Segal and Speath fall back on partisanship in their analysis of the selection of justices. For example, they conclude, "if Nixon had had a Republican Senate majority, Carswell would have been confirmed" (The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model, 137).
25. Jeffrey A. Segal and Harold J. Spaeth, The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 332. As Segal and Spaeth write, "we can predict [that] the ideology of the President's choice . . . will be a function of the President's ideology, the ideology composition of the Senate, and the ideological makeup of the Supreme Court" (159), To be sure, partisanship is still important for the attitudinal theorists. In an earlier work Spaeth and co-author David Rohde showed that presidents were successful over 79 percent of the time in selecting justices supportive of their policy positions by focusing exclusively on ideology and party affiliation, and by assuming that "Republican Presidents wanted their appointees to be moderate to conservative, and that Democratic Presidents wanted their appointees to be moderate to liberal" ( David Rohde and Harold J. Spaeth, Supreme Court Decision Making [San Francisco: W.H. Freeman, 1976], 107). Moreover, at times Segal and Speath fall back on partisanship in their analysis of the selection of justices. For example, they conclude, "if Nixon had had a Republican Senate majority, Carswell would have been confirmed" (The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model, 137).
26. Jeffrey A. Segal and Harold J. Spaeth, The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 332. As Segal and Spaeth write, "we can predict [that] the ideology of the President's choice . . . will be a function of the President's ideology, the ideology composition of the Senate, and the ideological makeup of the Supreme Court" (159), To be sure, partisanship is still important for the attitudinal theorists. In an earlier work Spaeth and co-author David Rohde showed that presidents were successful over 79 percent of the time in selecting justices supportive of their policy positions by focusing exclusively on ideology and party affiliation, and by assuming that "Republican Presidents wanted their appointees to be moderate to conservative, and that Democratic Presidents wanted their appointees to be moderate to liberal" ( David Rohde and Harold J. Spaeth, Supreme Court Decision Making [San Francisco: W.H. Freeman, 1976], 107). Moreover, at times Segal and Speath fall back on partisanship in their analysis of the selection of justices. For example, they conclude, "if Nixon had had a Republican Senate majority, Carswell would have been confirmed" (The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model, 137).
27. Here, I am informed by Stephen Skowronek's view of the presidency as the most disruptive institution in American politics. For him, a paradox is built, into the institution as presidents enter office seeking to put their imprint on the nation's institutions and policies, but must still abide by the constitutional command of executive leadership. As a result, "presidential action in history is politicized by the order-shattering, order-affirming, and order-creating impulses inherent in the institution itself." Presidents with the most "political authority," like FDR, lead during a "politics of reconstruction" and have the greatest opportunity to institute change because they face a highly vulnerable pre-existing institutional order. Presidents "in all other situations" possess less authority and therefore have varying degrees of difficulty in marking "their moments in history and refashion [ing] legitimacy on their own terms." The presidency, then, "is a battering ram." Those who have been most successful have not necessarily been the most skillful, but rather "have been the best situated to use it forthrightly as such" (Stephen Skowronek, The Politics Presidents Make: Leadership from John Adams to George Bush [Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993], 20-21, 39, 27-28). See also, Keith E. Whittington, "Oppositional Presidents and Judicial Negotiations: Judicial Authority in Political Time," paper presented at the 1998 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, MA.
28. Here, I am informed by Stephen Skowronek's view of the presidency as the most disruptive institution in American politics. For him, a paradox is built, into the institution as presidents enter office seeking to put their imprint on the nation's institutions and policies, but must still abide by the constitutional command of executive leadership. As a result, "presidential action in history is politicized by the order-shattering, order-affirming, and order-creating impulses inherent in the institution itself." Presidents with the most "political authority," like FDR, lead during a "politics of reconstruction" and have the greatest opportunity to institute change because they face a highly vulnerable pre-existing institutional order. Presidents "in all other situations" possess less authority and therefore have varying degrees of difficulty in marking "their moments in history and refashion [ing] legitimacy on their own terms." The presidency, then, "is a battering ram." Those who have been most successful have not necessarily been the most skillful, but rather "have been the best situated to use it forthrightly as such" (Stephen Skowronek, The Politics Presidents Make: Leadership from John Adams to George Bush [Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993], 20-21, 39, 27-28). See also, Keith E. Whittington, "Oppositional Presidents and Judicial Negotiations: Judicial Authority in Political Time," paper presented at the 1998 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, MA.
29. On the Roosevelt administration's legislative compromises on race, sec Jill S. Quandagno, The Color of Welfare: How Racism Undermined the War on Poverty (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994), and Robert C. Lieberman, Shifting the Color Line: Race and the American Welfare State, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998); see also, Gareth Davies and Martha Derthick, "Race and Social Welfare Policy: The Social Security Act of 1935," Political Science Quarterly 112 (1997): 217-35.
30. On the Roosevelt administration's legislative compromises on race, sec Jill S. Quandagno, The Color of Welfare: How Racism Undermined the War on Poverty (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994), and Robert C. Lieberman, Shifting the Color Line: Race and the American Welfare State, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998); see also, Gareth Davies and Martha Derthick, "Race and Social Welfare Policy: The Social Security Act of 1935," Political Science Quarterly 112 (1997): 217-35.
31. On the Roosevelt administration's legislative compromises on race, sec Jill S. Quandagno, The Color of Welfare: How Racism Undermined the War on Poverty (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994), and Robert C. Lieberman, Shifting the Color Line: Race and the American Welfare State, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998); see also, Gareth Davies and Martha Derthick, "Race and Social Welfare Policy: The Social Security Act of 1935," Political Science Quarterly 112 (1997): 217-35.
32. See Terry Moe and William G. Howell, "The Presidential Power of Unilateral Action, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 15 (1999) 132-79.
33. See Frances Fox Piven and Richard Cloward, Poor People's Movements (New York: Vintage, 1979); Doug McAdam, Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1930-1970 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982); and Gerald N. Rosenberg, The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991). On the NAACP, see Richard Kluger, Simple Justice (New York: Vintage, 1975); and Mark V. Tushnet, The NAACP's Legal Strategy against Segregated Education, 1925-1950 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1987), On an independent judiciary, see the number of judicial biographies that emphasize the role of the individual justices. For instance, Bernard Schwartz, Super Chief: Earl Warren and His Supreme Court: Judicial Biography (New York: New York University Press, 1983). Also see, Ronald Kahn, The Supreme Court and Constitutional Theory, 1953-1993 (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1994).
34. See Frances Fox Piven and Richard Cloward, Poor People's Movements (New York: Vintage, 1979); Doug McAdam, Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1930-1970 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982); and Gerald N. Rosenberg, The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991). On the NAACP, see Richard Kluger, Simple Justice (New York: Vintage, 1975); and Mark V. Tushnet, The NAACP's Legal Strategy against Segregated Education, 1925-1950 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1987), On an independent judiciary, see the number of judicial biographies that emphasize the role of the individual justices. For instance, Bernard Schwartz, Super Chief: Earl Warren and His Supreme Court: Judicial Biography (New York: New York University Press, 1983). Also see, Ronald Kahn, The Supreme Court and Constitutional Theory, 1953-1993 (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1994).
35. See Frances Fox Piven and Richard Cloward, Poor People's Movements (New York: Vintage, 1979); Doug McAdam, Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1930-1970 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982); and Gerald N. Rosenberg, The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991). On the NAACP, see Richard Kluger, Simple Justice (New York: Vintage, 1975); and Mark V. Tushnet, The NAACP's Legal Strategy against Segregated Education, 1925-1950 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1987), On an independent judiciary, see the number of judicial biographies that emphasize the role of the individual justices. For instance, Bernard Schwartz, Super Chief: Earl Warren and His Supreme Court: Judicial Biography (New York: New York University Press, 1983). Also see, Ronald Kahn, The Supreme Court and Constitutional Theory, 1953-1993 (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1994).
36. See Frances Fox Piven and Richard Cloward, Poor People's Movements (New York: Vintage, 1979); Doug McAdam, Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1930-1970 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982); and Gerald N. Rosenberg, The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991). On the NAACP, see Richard Kluger, Simple Justice (New York: Vintage, 1975); and Mark V. Tushnet, The NAACP's Legal Strategy against Segregated Education, 1925-1950 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1987), On an independent judiciary, see the number of judicial biographies that emphasize the role of the individual justices. For instance, Bernard Schwartz, Super Chief: Earl Warren and His Supreme Court: Judicial Biography (New York: New York University Press, 1983). Also see, Ronald Kahn, The Supreme Court and Constitutional Theory, 1953-1993 (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1994).
37. See Frances Fox Piven and Richard Cloward, Poor People's Movements (New York: Vintage, 1979); Doug McAdam, Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1930-1970 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982); and Gerald N. Rosenberg, The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991). On the NAACP, see Richard Kluger, Simple Justice (New York: Vintage, 1975); and Mark V. Tushnet, The NAACP's Legal Strategy against Segregated Education, 1925-1950 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1987), On an independent judiciary, see the number of judicial biographies that emphasize the role of the individual justices. For instance, Bernard Schwartz, Super Chief: Earl Warren and His Supreme Court: Judicial Biography (New York: New York University Press, 1983). Also see, Ronald Kahn, The Supreme Court and Constitutional Theory, 1953-1993 (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1994).
38. See Frances Fox Piven and Richard Cloward, Poor People's Movements (New York: Vintage, 1979); Doug McAdam, Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1930-1970 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982); and Gerald N. Rosenberg, The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991). On the NAACP, see Richard Kluger, Simple Justice (New York: Vintage, 1975); and Mark V. Tushnet, The NAACP's Legal Strategy against Segregated Education, 1925-1950 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1987), On an independent judiciary, see the number of judicial biographies that emphasize the role of the individual justices. For instance, Bernard Schwartz, Super Chief: Earl Warren and His Supreme Court: Judicial Biography (New York: New York University Press, 1983). Also see, Ronald Kahn, The Supreme Court and Constitutional Theory, 1953-1993 (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1994).
39. See Frances Fox Piven and Richard Cloward, Poor People's Movements (New York: Vintage, 1979); Doug McAdam, Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1930-1970 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982); and Gerald N. Rosenberg, The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991). On the NAACP, see Richard Kluger, Simple Justice (New York: Vintage, 1975); and Mark V. Tushnet, The NAACP's Legal Strategy against Segregated Education, 1925-1950 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1987), On an independent judiciary, see the number of judicial biographies that emphasize the role of the individual justices. For instance, Bernard Schwartz, Super Chief: Earl Warren and His Supreme Court: Judicial Biography (New York: New York University Press, 1983). Also see, Ronald Kahn, The Supreme Court and Constitutional Theory, 1953-1993 (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1994).
40. Cornell Clayton and Howard Gillman, "Introduction," in The Supreme Court in American Politics: New Institutionalist Interpretations, ed. Howard Gillman and Cornell Clayton (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1999 1-11), 2. Still, I identify the disparities between executive calls for judicial action and the Court's final decisions - disparities which suggests the independent role of the Court as an institution. Clearly, this places my work in the midst of the debate between attitudinal theorists who assert that Supreme Court justices decide cases based on their own policy preferences, and new historical institutionalists who argue that such decision-making is shaped by institutional and historical contexts. On new historical institutionalism, see Cornell W. Clayton and Howard Gillman, eds., Supreme Court Decision-Making: New Institutionalist Approaches (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999) ; Karen Orren and Stephen Skowronek, "Institutions and Intercurrence: Theory Building in the Fullness of Time," Political Order (Nommos XXXVII), ed. Ian Shapiro and Russell Harden (New York: New York University Press, 1996): 111-46; and Orren and Skowronek, "Beyond the Iconography of Order: Notes for a 'New Instkutionalism'," in The Dynamics of American Politics: Approaches and Interpretations, ed. Lawrence Dodd and Calvin Jillson (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994): 311-30; Rogers Smith, "Political Jurisprudence, The 'New Institutionalism,' and the Future of Public Law," American Political Science Review 82 (1988): 89-108; "If Politics Matters: Implications for a 'New Institutionalisrn,'" Studies in American Political Development, 6, 1992, 1-36; and "Still Blowing in the Wind: The American Quest for a Democratic, Scientific Political Science," Daedalus 126 (1997): 253-87; and articles in "Polity Forum: Institutions and Institutionalism," Polity, 28 (1995): 84-140.
41. Cornell Clayton and Howard Gillman, "Introduction," in The Supreme Court in American Politics: New Institutionalist Interpretations, ed. Howard Gillman and Cornell Clayton (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1999 1-11), 2. Still, I identify the disparities between executive calls for judicial action and the Court's final decisions - disparities which suggests the independent role of the Court as an institution. Clearly, this places my work in the midst of the debate between attitudinal theorists who assert that Supreme Court justices decide cases based on their own policy preferences, and new historical institutionalists who argue that such decision-making is shaped by institutional and historical contexts. On new historical institutionalism, see Cornell W. Clayton and Howard Gillman, eds., Supreme Court Decision-Making: New Institutionalist Approaches (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999) ; Karen Orren and Stephen Skowronek, "Institutions and Intercurrence: Theory Building in the Fullness of Time," Political Order (Nommos XXXVII), ed. Ian Shapiro and Russell Harden (New York: New York University Press, 1996): 111-46; and Orren and Skowronek, "Beyond the Iconography of Order: Notes for a 'New Instkutionalism'," in The Dynamics of American Politics: Approaches and Interpretations, ed. Lawrence Dodd and Calvin Jillson (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994): 311-30; Rogers Smith, "Political Jurisprudence, The 'New Institutionalism,' and the Future of Public Law," American Political Science Review 82 (1988): 89-108; "If Politics Matters: Implications for a 'New Institutionalisrn,'" Studies in American Political Development, 6, 1992, 1-36; and "Still Blowing in the Wind: The American Quest for a Democratic, Scientific Political Science," Daedalus 126 (1997): 253-87; and articles in "Polity Forum: Institutions and Institutionalism," Polity, 28 (1995): 84-140.
42. Cornell Clayton and Howard Gillman, "Introduction," in The Supreme Court in American Politics: New Institutionalist Interpretations, ed. Howard Gillman and Cornell Clayton (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1999 1-11), 2. Still, I identify the disparities between executive calls for judicial action and the Court's final decisions - disparities which suggests the independent role of the Court as an institution. Clearly, this places my work in the midst of the debate between attitudinal theorists who assert that Supreme Court justices decide cases based on their own policy preferences, and new historical institutionalists who argue that such decision-making is shaped by institutional and historical contexts. On new historical institutionalism, see Cornell W. Clayton and Howard Gillman, eds., Supreme Court Decision-Making: New Institutionalist Approaches (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999) ; Karen Orren and Stephen Skowronek, "Institutions and Intercurrence: Theory Building in the Fullness of Time," Political Order (Nommos XXXVII), ed. Ian Shapiro and Russell Harden (New York: New York University Press, 1996): 111-46; and Orren and Skowronek, "Beyond the Iconography of Order: Notes for a 'New Instkutionalism'," in The Dynamics of American Politics: Approaches and Interpretations, ed. Lawrence Dodd and Calvin Jillson (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994): 311-30; Rogers Smith, "Political Jurisprudence, The 'New Institutionalism,' and the Future of Public Law," American Political Science Review 82 (1988): 89-108; "If Politics Matters: Implications for a 'New Institutionalisrn,'" Studies in American Political Development, 6, 1992, 1-36; and "Still Blowing in the Wind: The American Quest for a Democratic, Scientific Political Science," Daedalus 126 (1997): 253-87; and articles in "Polity Forum: Institutions and Institutionalism," Polity, 28 (1995): 84-140.
43. Cornell Clayton and Howard Gillman, "Introduction," in The Supreme Court in American Politics: New Institutionalist Interpretations, ed. Howard Gillman and Cornell Clayton (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1999 1-11), 2. Still, I identify the disparities between executive calls for judicial action and the Court's final decisions - disparities which suggests the independent role of the Court as an institution. Clearly, this places my work in the midst of the debate between attitudinal theorists who assert that Supreme Court justices decide cases based on their own policy preferences, and new historical institutionalists who argue that such decision-making is shaped by institutional and historical contexts. On new historical institutionalism, see Cornell W. Clayton and Howard Gillman, eds., Supreme Court Decision-Making: New Institutionalist Approaches (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999) ; Karen Orren and Stephen Skowronek, "Institutions and Intercurrence: Theory Building in the Fullness of Time," Political Order (Nommos XXXVII), ed. Ian Shapiro and Russell Harden (New York: New York University Press, 1996): 111-46; and Orren and Skowronek, "Beyond the Iconography of Order: Notes for a 'New Instkutionalism'," in The Dynamics of American Politics: Approaches and Interpretations, ed. Lawrence Dodd and Calvin Jillson (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994): 311-30; Rogers Smith, "Political Jurisprudence, The 'New Institutionalism,' and the Future of Public Law," American Political Science Review 82 (1988): 89-108; "If Politics Matters: Implications for a 'New Institutionalisrn,'" Studies in American Political Development, 6, 1992, 1-36; and "Still Blowing in the Wind: The American Quest for a Democratic, Scientific Political Science," Daedalus 126 (1997): 253-87; and articles in "Polity Forum: Institutions and Institutionalism," Polity, 28 (1995): 84-140.
44. Cornell Clayton and Howard Gillman, "Introduction," in The Supreme Court in American Politics: New Institutionalist Interpretations, ed. Howard Gillman and Cornell Clayton (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1999 1-11), 2. Still, I identify the disparities between executive calls for judicial action and the Court's final decisions - disparities which suggests the independent role of the Court as an institution. Clearly, this places my work in the midst of the debate between attitudinal theorists who assert that Supreme Court justices decide cases based on their own policy preferences, and new historical institutionalists who argue that such decision-making is shaped by institutional and historical contexts. On new historical institutionalism, see Cornell W. Clayton and Howard Gillman, eds., Supreme Court Decision-Making: New Institutionalist Approaches (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999) ; Karen Orren and Stephen Skowronek, "Institutions and Intercurrence: Theory Building in the Fullness of Time," Political Order (Nommos XXXVII), ed. Ian Shapiro and Russell Harden (New York: New York University Press, 1996): 111-46; and Orren and Skowronek, "Beyond the Iconography of Order: Notes for a 'New Instkutionalism'," in The Dynamics of American Politics: Approaches and Interpretations, ed. Lawrence Dodd and Calvin Jillson (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994): 311-30; Rogers Smith, "Political Jurisprudence, The 'New Institutionalism,' and the Future of Public Law," American Political Science Review 82 (1988): 89-108; "If Politics Matters: Implications for a 'New Institutionalisrn,'" Studies in American Political Development, 6, 1992, 1-36; and "Still Blowing in the Wind: The American Quest for a Democratic, Scientific Political Science," Daedalus 126 (1997): 253-87; and articles in "Polity Forum: Institutions and Institutionalism," Polity, 28 (1995): 84-140.
45. Cornell Clayton and Howard Gillman, "Introduction," in The Supreme Court in American Politics: New Institutionalist Interpretations, ed. Howard Gillman and Cornell Clayton (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1999 1-11), 2. Still, I identify the disparities between executive calls for judicial action and the Court's final decisions - disparities which suggests the independent role of the Court as an institution. Clearly, this places my work in the midst of the debate between attitudinal theorists who assert that Supreme Court justices decide cases based on their own policy preferences, and new historical institutionalists who argue that such decision-making is shaped by institutional and historical contexts. On new historical institutionalism, see Cornell W. Clayton and Howard Gillman, eds., Supreme Court Decision-Making: New Institutionalist Approaches (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999) ; Karen Orren and Stephen Skowronek, "Institutions and Intercurrence: Theory Building in the Fullness of Time," Political Order (Nommos XXXVII), ed. Ian Shapiro and Russell Harden (New York: New York University Press, 1996): 111-46; and Orren and Skowronek, "Beyond the Iconography of Order: Notes for a 'New Instkutionalism'," in The Dynamics of American Politics: Approaches and Interpretations, ed. Lawrence Dodd and Calvin Jillson (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994): 311-30; Rogers Smith, "Political Jurisprudence, The 'New Institutionalism,' and the Future of Public Law," American Political Science Review 82 (1988): 89-108; "If Politics Matters: Implications for a 'New Institutionalisrn,'" Studies in American Political Development, 6, 1992, 1-36; and "Still Blowing in the Wind: The American Quest for a Democratic, Scientific Political Science," Daedalus 126 (1997): 253-87; and articles in "Polity Forum: Institutions and Institutionalism," Polity, 28 (1995): 84-140.
46. Cornell Clayton and Howard Gillman, "Introduction," in The Supreme Court in American Politics: New Institutionalist Interpretations, ed. Howard Gillman and Cornell Clayton (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1999 1-11), 2. Still, I identify the disparities between executive calls for judicial action and the Court's final decisions - disparities which suggests the independent role of the Court as an institution. Clearly, this places my work in the midst of the debate between attitudinal theorists who assert that Supreme Court justices decide cases based on their own policy preferences, and new historical institutionalists who argue that such decision-making is shaped by institutional and historical contexts. On new historical institutionalism, see Cornell W. Clayton and Howard Gillman, eds., Supreme Court Decision-Making: New Institutionalist Approaches (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999) ; Karen Orren and Stephen Skowronek, "Institutions and Intercurrence: Theory Building in the Fullness of Time," Political Order (Nommos XXXVII), ed. Ian Shapiro and Russell Harden (New York: New York University Press, 1996): 111-46; and Orren and Skowronek, "Beyond the Iconography of Order: Notes for a 'New Instkutionalism'," in The Dynamics of American Politics: Approaches and Interpretations, ed. Lawrence Dodd and Calvin Jillson (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994): 311-30; Rogers Smith, "Political Jurisprudence, The 'New Institutionalism,' and the Future of Public Law," American Political Science Review 82 (1988): 89-108; "If Politics Matters: Implications for a 'New Institutionalisrn,'" Studies in American Political Development, 6, 1992, 1-36; and "Still Blowing in the Wind: The American Quest for a Democratic, Scientific Political Science," Daedalus 126 (1997): 253-87; and articles in "Polity Forum: Institutions and Institutionalism," Polity, 28 (1995): 84-140.
47. Cornell Clayton and Howard Gillman, "Introduction," in The Supreme Court in American Politics: New Institutionalist Interpretations, ed. Howard Gillman and Cornell Clayton (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1999 1-11), 2. Still, I identify the disparities between executive calls for judicial action and the Court's final decisions - disparities which suggests the independent role of the Court as an institution. Clearly, this places my work in the midst of the debate between attitudinal theorists who assert that Supreme Court justices decide cases based on their own policy preferences, and new historical institutionalists who argue that such decision-making is shaped by institutional and historical contexts. On new historical institutionalism, see Cornell W. Clayton and Howard Gillman, eds., Supreme Court Decision-Making: New Institutionalist Approaches (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999) ; Karen Orren and Stephen Skowronek, "Institutions and Intercurrence: Theory Building in the Fullness of Time," Political Order (Nommos XXXVII), ed. Ian Shapiro and Russell Harden (New York: New York University Press, 1996): 111-46; and Orren and Skowronek, "Beyond the Iconography of Order: Notes for a 'New Instkutionalism'," in The Dynamics of American Politics: Approaches and Interpretations, ed. Lawrence Dodd and Calvin Jillson (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994): 311-30; Rogers Smith, "Political Jurisprudence, The 'New Institutionalism,' and the Future of Public Law," American Political Science Review 82 (1988): 89-108; "If Politics Matters: Implications for a 'New Institutionalisrn,'" Studies in American Political Development, 6, 1992, 1-36; and "Still Blowing in the Wind: The American Quest for a Democratic, Scientific Political Science," Daedalus 126 (1997): 253-87; and articles in "Polity Forum: Institutions and Institutionalism," Polity, 28 (1995): 84-140.
48. Ira Katznelson, Kim Geiger, and Daniel Kryder, "Limiting Liberalism: The Southern Veto in Congress," Political Science Quarterly 108 (1993): 288-306, 297.
49. Harvard Sitkoff, A New Deal for Blacks (New York: Oxford University Press, 1978); John B. Kirby, Black Americans in the Roosevelt Era: Liberalism and Race (Knoxville, University of Tennessee Press, 1980); and Raymond Wolters, Negroes and the Great Depression: The Problem of Economic Recovery (Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing, 1970) . See also, George B. Tindall, The Emergence of the New South, 1931-1945 (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1967); and Gunnar Myrdal, An American Dilemma: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1944).
50. Harvard Sitkoff, A New Deal for Blacks (New York: Oxford University Press, 1978); John B. Kirby, Black Americans in the Roosevelt Era: Liberalism and Race (Knoxville, University of Tennessee Press, 1980); and Raymond Wolters, Negroes and the Great Depression: The Problem of Economic Recovery (Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing, 1970) . See also, George B. Tindall, The Emergence of the New South, 1931-1945 (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1967); and Gunnar Myrdal, An American Dilemma: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1944).
51. Harvard Sitkoff, A New Deal for Blacks (New York: Oxford University Press, 1978); John B. Kirby, Black Americans in the Roosevelt Era: Liberalism and Race (Knoxville, University of Tennessee Press, 1980); and Raymond Wolters, Negroes and the Great Depression: The Problem of Economic Recovery (Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing, 1970) . See also, George B. Tindall, The Emergence of the New South, 1931-1945 (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1967); and Gunnar Myrdal, An American Dilemma: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1944).
52. Harvard Sitkoff, A New Deal for Blacks (New York: Oxford University Press, 1978); John B. Kirby, Black Americans in the Roosevelt Era: Liberalism and Race (Knoxville, University of Tennessee Press, 1980); and Raymond Wolters, Negroes and the Great Depression: The Problem of Economic Recovery (Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing, 1970) . See also, George B. Tindall, The Emergence of the New South, 1931-1945 (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1967); and Gunnar Myrdal, An American Dilemma: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1944).
53. Harvard Sitkoff, A New Deal for Blacks (New York: Oxford University Press, 1978); John B. Kirby, Black Americans in the Roosevelt Era: Liberalism and Race (Knoxville, University of Tennessee Press, 1980); and Raymond Wolters, Negroes and the Great Depression: The Problem of Economic Recovery (Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing, 1970) . See also, George B. Tindall, The Emergence of the New South, 1931-1945 (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1967); and Gunnar Myrdal, An American Dilemma: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1944).
54. Robert Harrison, "The Breakup of the Roosevelt Court: A Contribution of History and Biography," (Ph.D. Diss., Columbia University, 1987) , abstract. See also Harrison's article, "The Breakup of the Roosevelt Supreme Court: A Contribution of History and Biography," in Law and History Review 2 (1984): 165-221.
55. Robert Harrison, "The Breakup of the Roosevelt Court: A Contribution of History and Biography," (Ph.D. Diss., Columbia University, 1987) , abstract. See also Harrison's article, "The Breakup of the Roosevelt Supreme Court: A Contribution of History and Biography," in Law and History Review 2 (1984): 165-221.
56. Sheldon Goldman, Picking Federal Judges: Lower Court Selection From Roosevelt Through Reagan (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1997), 17, 360, 3.
57. Edward Purcell, The Crisis of Democratic Theory: Scientific Naturalism and the Problem of Value (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1973), 81. On legal realism, see also, Morton Horwitz, The Transformation of American Law, 1870-1960: The Crisis of Legal Orthodoxy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992); and Laura Kalman, Legal Realism at Yale, 1927-1960 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1986).
58. Edward Purcell, The Crisis of Democratic Theory: Scientific Naturalism and the Problem of Value (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1973), 81. On legal realism, see also, Morton Horwitz, The Transformation of American Law, 1870-1960: The Crisis of Legal Orthodoxy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992); and Laura Kalman, Legal Realism at Yale, 1927-1960 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1986).
59. Edward Purcell, The Crisis of Democratic Theory: Scientific Naturalism and the Problem of Value (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1973), 81. On legal realism, see also, Morton Horwitz, The Transformation of American Law, 1870-1960: The Crisis of Legal Orthodoxy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992); and Laura Kalman, Legal Realism at Yale, 1927-1960 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1986).
60. As Mark Tushnet writes, most of the justices who served on the Court in the early 1940s were personally sympathetic, to varying degrees, to the legal positions asserted by the NAACP, and none had strong objections based in constitutional theory to acting in a manner consistent with their inclinations . . . . As Roosevelt gained support among African Americans, the Court began to take that community as one of its constituencies as well. (Mark Tushnet, Making Civil Rights Law: Thurgood and the Supreme Court, 1936-1961 [New York: Oxford University Press, 1994], 70, 67). On the Roosevelt administration's close relationship with the ACLU, see Joel Auerbach, Labor and Liberty: The La Follette Committee and the New Deal (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1966), chap. 9.
61. As Mark Tushnet writes, most of the justices who served on the Court in the early 1940s were personally sympathetic, to varying degrees, to the legal positions asserted by the NAACP, and none had strong objections based in constitutional theory to acting in a manner consistent with their inclinations . . . . As Roosevelt gained support among African Americans, the Court began to take that community as one of its constituencies as well. (Mark Tushnet, Making Civil Rights Law: Thurgood and the Supreme Court, 1936-1961 [New York: Oxford University Press, 1994], 70, 67). On the Roosevelt administration's close relationship with the ACLU, see Joel Auerbach, Labor and Liberty: The La Follette Committee and the New Deal (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1966), chap. 9.
62. Murphy to Roosevelt, July, 7, 1939, Justice Department Files, Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library; Memo from Turner Smith to Douglas McGregor, The Assistant to the Attorney General, June 3, 1947, repr. in Justice Department Civil Rights Policies Prior to 1960: Crucial Documents from the Files of Arthur Brann Caldwell , ed. Michal R. Belknap, vol. 16 of Civil Rights, The White House, and the Justice Department, 1945-1968 (New York: Garland Publishing, 1991), 110-12. After interviewing Murphy in 1945, Robert K. Carr concluded that "the creation of a civil liberties unit at that particular moment was [Murphy's] idea and his alone" (Carr, Federal Protection of Civil Rights: Quest for a Sword [Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1947], 25), Given Murphy's penchant as a self-promoter, however, it would have surprised few in Washington if he took for full credit for a development where only partial credit was due; see, for example, J. Woodford Howard, Jr., Mr. Justice Murphy: A Political Biography (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1968), 187, 225-28.
63. Murphy to Roosevelt, July, 7, 1939, Justice Department Files, Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library; Memo from Turner Smith to Douglas McGregor, The Assistant to the Attorney General, June 3, 1947, repr. in Justice Department Civil Rights Policies Prior to 1960: Crucial Documents from the Files of Arthur Brann Caldwell , ed. Michal R. Belknap, vol. 16 of Civil Rights, The White House, and the Justice Department, 1945-1968 (New York: Garland Publishing, 1991), 110-12. After interviewing Murphy in 1945, Robert K. Carr concluded that "the creation of a civil liberties unit at that particular moment was [Murphy's] idea and his alone" (Carr, Federal Protection of Civil Rights: Quest for a Sword [Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1947], 25), Given Murphy's penchant as a self-promoter, however, it would have surprised few in Washington if he took for full credit for a development where only partial credit was due; see, for example, J. Woodford Howard, Jr., Mr. Justice Murphy: A Political Biography (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1968), 187, 225-28.
64. Murphy to Roosevelt, July, 7, 1939, Justice Department Files, Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library; Memo from Turner Smith to Douglas McGregor, The Assistant to the Attorney General, June 3, 1947, repr. in Justice Department Civil Rights Policies Prior to 1960: Crucial Documents from the Files of Arthur Brann Caldwell , ed. Michal R. Belknap, vol. 16 of Civil Rights, The White House, and the Justice Department, 1945-1968 (New York: Garland Publishing, 1991), 110-12. After interviewing Murphy in 1945, Robert K. Carr concluded that "the creation of a civil liberties unit at that particular moment was [Murphy's] idea and his alone" (Carr, Federal Protection of Civil Rights: Quest for a Sword [Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1947], 25), Given
65. Murphy to Roosevelt, July, 7, 1939, Justice Department Files, Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library; Memo from Turner Smith to Douglas McGregor, The Assistant to the Attorney General, June 3, 1947, repr. in Justice Department Civil Rights Policies Prior to 1960: Crucial Documents from the Files of Arthur Brann Caldwell , ed. Michal R. Belknap, vol. 16 of Civil Rights, The White House, and the Justice Department, 1945-1968 (New York: Garland Publishing, 1991), 110-12. After interviewing Murphy in 1945, Robert K. Carr concluded that "the creation of a civil liberties unit at that particular moment was [Murphy's] idea and his alone" (Carr, Federal Protection of Civil Rights: Quest for a Sword [Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1947], 25), Given Murphy's penchant as a self-promoter, however, it would have surprised few in Washington if he took for full credit for a development where only partial credit was due; see, for example, J. Woodford Howard, Jr., Mr. Justice Murphy: A Political Biography (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1968), 187, 225-28.
66. Murphy to Roosevelt, July, 7, 1939, Justice Department Files, Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library; Memo from Turner Smith to Douglas McGregor, The Assistant to the Attorney General, June 3, 1947, repr. in Justice Department Civil Rights Policies Prior to 1960: Crucial Documents from the Files of Arthur Brann Caldwell , ed. Michal R. Belknap, vol. 16 of Civil Rights, The White House, and the Justice Department, 1945-1968 (New York: Garland Publishing, 1991), 110-12. After interviewing Murphy in 1945, Robert K, Carr concluded that "the creation of a civil liberties unit at that particular moment was [Murphy's] idea and his alone" (Carr, Federal Protection of Civil Rights: Quest for a Sword [Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1947], 25), Given Murphy's penchant as a self-promoter, however, it would have surprised few in Washington if he took for full credit for a development where only partial credit was due; see, for example, J. Woodford Howard, Jr., Mr. Justice Murphy: A Political Biography (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1968), 187, 225-28.
67. Brian K. Landsberg, Enforcing Civil Rights: Race Discrimination and the Department of Justice (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1997), 9.
68. Sidney Milkis, The President and the Parties: The Transformation of the American Party System since the New Deal (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 4, 24.
69. On the democratic nature of the New Deal "Democratic order," see David Plotke's Building a Democratic Political Order: Reshaping American Liberalism in the 1930s and 1940s (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996), For an analysis on the role diminishing collective behavior has had on American politics more recently, see Morris P, Fiorina, "The Decline of Collective Responsibility in American Politics," Daedalus 109 (1980) 25-45.
70. On the democratic nature of the New Deal "Democratic order," see David Plotke's Building a Democratic Political Order: Reshaping American Liberalism in the 1930s and 1940s (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996), For an analysis on the role diminishing collective behavior has had on American politics more recently, see Morris P, Fiorina, "The Decline of Collective Responsibility in American Politics," Daedalus 109 (1980) 25-45.
71. Due to the importance of the seniority rule in the committee system in Congress, those members who returned to Capitol Hill election after election occupied the most sought-after committee assignments and chaired the most powerful committees.
72. The President continued: When you come down to it, there is little difference between the feudal system and the Fascist, system. If you believe in the one, you lean to the other" (Roosevelt, "Address at Gainesville, Georgia," March 23, 1957, Public Papers and Addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1938 [New York: Random House, 1938-1950], 399).
73. Francis Biddle, In Brief Authority (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1962), 197. The complete version of the memo appears in Biddle, In Brief Authority, 197-98.
74. Francis Biddle, In Brief Authority (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1962), 197. The complete version of the memo appears in Biddle, In Brief Authority, 197-98.
75. Alan Brinkley, "The New Deal and Southern Politics," in The New Deal and the South, eds., James C. Cobb and Michael V. Namorata (Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 1984), 97-115, 97.
76. Black and Black, Politics and Society in the South (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987), 175; Morgan J. Kousser writes that "by 1910, almost no Negroes and only about half of the whites bothered to vote in the most hotly contested elections . . . the Southern political system which was to last through mid-century had been formed" (The Shaping of Southern Politics: Suffrage Restriction and the Establishment of the One-Party South, 1880-1910 [New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1974], 224, 226; quoted in Black and Black, Politics and Society in the South, 4).
77. Black and Black, Politics and Society in the South (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987), 175; Morgan J. Kousser writes that "by 1910, almost no Negroes and only about half of the whites bothered to vote in the most hotly contested elections . . . the Southern political system which was to last through mid-century had been formed" (The Shaping of Southern Politics: Suffrage Restriction and the Establishment of the One-Party South, 1880-1910 [New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1974], 224, 226; quoted in Black and Black, Politics and Society in the South, 4).
78. Black and Black, Politics and Society in the South (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987), 175; Morgan J. Kousser writes that "by 1910, almost no Negroes and only about half of the whites bothered to vote in the most hotly contested elections . . . the Southern political system which was to last through mid-century had been formed" (The Shaping of Southern Politics: Suffrage Restriction and the Establishment of the One-Party South, 1880-1910 [New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1974], 224, 226; quoted in Black and Black, Politics and Society in the South, 4).
79. Myrdal, An American Dilemma, 453; Thomas Stokes, Chip Off My Shoulder (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1940), 503,
80. Myrdal, An American Dilemma, 453; Thomas Stokes, Chip Off My Shoulder (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1940), 503,
81. quoted in Milkis, The President and the Parties, 87.
82. On the purge campaign, see Milkis, The President and the Parties, 75-97.
83. The number of southern and border state senators and representatives stood steady at 30 and 130, respectively, Sitkoff, A New Deal for Blacks, 111.
84. Sitkoff, A New Deal for Blacks, 41, 95.
85. Quoted in Frank Freidel, FDR and the Smith (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1965), 90. In a February 1936 article, White analyzed the Literary Digest poll of December 28, 1935 and bluntly presented the anticipated electoral bind the president faced in the upcoming campaign: The chief criticism of Negroes of the Roosevelt administration has been its too great deference to the second and third-rate politicians who in most instances represent the South in the two houses of Congress. Between now and November the administration needs to determine whether it will continue to listen to anti-Negro senators and congressmen from the eleven southern states with an electoral vote of only 124, or whether it will pay attention to the wishes of thoughtful people of both races in the seventeen states with more than twice as many electoral votes. Of one thing the administration may be sure . . . these eleven southern states will not revolt despite the frothing at the mouth of men like Governor Talmadge of Georgia, as to do so would mean the loss to southerners of committee chairmanships in both houses of Congress, huge sums of relief, public works and other benefits from the national treasury and the power which they hold in a Democratic administration, which in turn is based largely upon direct disfranchisement of Negro voters and indirect disfranchisement of many white votes in their states, ( White, "An Estimate of the 1936 Vote," The Crisis (1936): 46-47, copy in the Thomas G. Corcoran Papers, Library of Congress)
86. Quoted in Frank Freidel, FDR and the Smith (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1965), 90. In a February 1936 article, White analyzed the Literary Digest poll of December 28, 1935 and bluntly presented the anticipated electoral bind the president faced in the upcoming campaign: The chief criticism of Negroes of the Roosevelt administration has been its too great deference to the second and third-rate politicians who in most instances represent the South in the two houses of Congress. Between now and November the administration needs to determine whether it will continue to listen to anti-Negro senators and congressmen from the eleven southern states with an electoral vote of only 124, or whether it will pay attention to the wishes of thoughtful people of both races in the seventeen states with more than twice as many electoral votes. Of one thing the administration may be sure . . . these eleven southern states will not revolt despite the frothing at the mouth of men like Governor Talmadge of Georgia, as to do so would mean the loss to southerners of committee chairmanships in both houses of Congress, huge sums of relief, public works and other benefits from the national treasury and the power which they hold in a Democratic administration, which in turn is based largely upon direct disfranchisement of Negro voters and indirect disfranchisement of many white votes in their states, ( White, "An Estimate of the 1936 Vote," The Crisis (1936): 46-47, copy in the Thomas G. Corcoran Papers, Library of Congress)
87. Unsigned and undated memo, "Statement in Support of Proposed Negro Plank," in the Robert H. Jackson Paper's, Library of Congress. Henry Lee Moon, Balance of Power: The Negro Vote(Garden City, NY: Doubleday and Company, 1948), confirms that this memo was roughly correct in calculating the total of potential black participation in these states: Delaware, 13.3 percent; Illinois, 5.1 percent; Indiana, 3.7 percent; Kansas, 3.7 percent; Kentucky, 8.5 percent; Maryland, 15.9 percent; Michigan, 4.4 percent; Missouri, 6.7 percent; New Jersey, 5.5 percent; New York, 4.3 percent; Ohio, 5.0 percent; Pennsylvania, 5.0 percent; and West Virginia, 6.7 percent, 237-38.
88. According to the unsigned "Statement in Support of Proposed Negro Plank": [I] n the 1938 elections - when the social program of the New Deal may be said to have reached its peak -a swing back to the Republican Party was noticeable among the Negro vote. For example, in Ohio in 5 out of the 7 congressional districts where the Negro vote exceeded 10,000 Republicans replaced Democratic Congressmen. The Senator-ship was lost, with Negro wards in Columbus, Cincinnati and Cleveland going heavily Republican. In Pennsylvania Robert S. Vann -owner of the Pittsburgh Courier (200,000 circulation) - who had managed the campaign among Negro Democrats in 1936 bolted the Democratic Party.
89. "Statement in Support of Proposed Negro Plank"; Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada, 305 U.S.337 (1938).