Character, the constitution, and the ideological embodiment of “civil rights” in the 1967 nomination of thurgood marshall to the supreme court

Quarterly Journal of Speech

Volumn 82, Issue 4, 1996, Pages 364-382

  Parry Giles, Trevor ^a  

^a Department of Physics   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0346061304     PISSN: 00335630     EISSN: 14795779     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00335639609384163     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Michael Calvin McGee, ‘Not Men, But Measures’: The Origins and Import of an Ideological Principle,” Quarterly Journal ofSpeech64 (1978): 141-154.
2. Mary Katherine Boyte, “The Supreme Court Confirmation Process in Crisis: Is the System Defective, or Merely the Participants?” Whittier Law Review 14 (1993): 517-47
3. “Essays on the Supreme Court Appointment Process,” Harvard Law Review 101 (1988): 1146-1229
4. Joseph Faria and David Markey, “Supreme Court Appointments After the Thomas Nomination: Reforming the Confirmation Process,” Journal of Legal Commentary 7 (1991): 389-416
5. Frank Guliuzza, Daniel J. Reagan, and David M. Barrett, “Character, Competency, and Constitutionalism: Did the Bork Nomination Represent a Fundamental Shift in Confirmation Criteria?” Marquette Law Review 75 (1992): 409-37
6. Richard D. Manoloff, “The Advice and Consent of Congress: Toward a Supreme Court Appointment Process for Our Time,” Ohio State Law Journal 54 (1993): 1087-1107
7. Paul Simon, Advice & Consent: Clarence Thomas, Robert Bork and the Intriguing History of the Supreme Court’s Nomination Battles (Washington, DC: National Press, 1992)
8. David A. Strauss and Cass R. Sunstein, “The Senate, the Constitution, and the Confirmation Process,” Yale Law Journal 101 (1992): 1491-1524
9. “Symposium, Confirmation Controversy: The Selection of a Supreme Court Justice,” Northwestern University Law Review 84 (1990): 832-1046
10. “Symposium Issue: The Selection of judges in the United States,” Kentucky Law Journal 77 (1988-89): 481-644.
11. Mark Silverstein, Judicious Choices: The New Politics of Supreme Court Confirmations (New York: Norton, 1994) 6. Silverstein is a bit hasty in his criticism of President Clinton’s nomination of Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the Supreme Court. He argues that she was not “a public figure of great stature, well known to the citizenry and likely to alter dramatically the evolution of American constitutional law” at the time of her nomination (171). By these criteria many, if not most, of the greatest jurists to serve on the Supreme Court would never have been appointed.
12. Meyrowitz offers a complete discussion of the impact of television and other electronic media on the political environment and those who occupy that public space. See Joshua Meyrowitz, No Sense of Place: The Impact of Electronic Media on Social Behavior (New York: Oxford UP, 1985).
13. See also Roderick P. Hart, Seducing America: How Television Charms the Modem Voter (New York: Oxford UP, 1994)
14. Timothy Luke, Screens of Power: Ideology, Domination, and Resistance in Informational Society (Urbana: U of Illinois P, 1989).
15. See Twentieth Century Fund, Judicial Roulette: Report of the Twentieth Century Fund Task Force on Judicial Selection (New York: Priority, 1988) 3-12.
16. For an interesting examination of the intersections of race, class, gender and the mass-mediated public sphere in the Thomas/Hill hearings, see Nancy Fraser, “Sex, Lies, and the Public Sphere: Some Reflections on the Confirmation of Clarence Thomas,” Critical Inquiry 18 (1992): 595-612.
17. Henry J. Abraham, Justices and Presidents: A Political History of Appointments to the Supreme Court, 3d ed. (New York: Oxford UP, 1992) 72-3
18. Maeva Marcus and James R. Perry, eds., The Documentary History of the Supreme Court of the United States, 1789-1800, vol. 1 (New York: Columbia UP, 1985) 94-100
19. Laurence H. Tribe, God Save this Honorable Court (New York: Random House, 1985) 79-80.
20. Michael Calvin McGee, “The ‘Ideograph’: A Link Between Rhetoric and Ideology,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 66 (1980): 5.
21. For more on the rhetorical construction of community, see Maurice Charland, “Constitutive Rhetoric: The Case of the PeupU Quebecois” Quarterly Journal of Speech 73 (1987): 133-50
22. Michael Calvin McGee, “In Search of ‘The People’: A Rhetorical Alternative,” Quarterly Journal of Speech X (1975): 235-49
23. Edmund S. Morgan, Inventing the People: The Rise of Popular Sovereignty in England and America (New York: Norton, 1988).
24. Kenneth Burke, A Grammar of Motives (Berkeley: U of California P, 1969) 377.
25. See also Kenneth Burke, The Philosophy of Literary Form: Studies in Symbolic Action (Berkeley: U of California P, 1973) 109-11.
26. For commentaries on Burke’s view of the dialectics of constitutions, see Stephen Bygrave, Kenneth Burke: Rhetoric and Ideology (London: Roudedge, 1993) 89-94
27. Robert L. Heath, Realism and Relativism: A Perspective on Kenneth Burke (Macon, GA: Mercer UP, 1986)
28. Thomas Meisenhelder, “Law as Symbolic Action: Kenneth Burke’s Sociology of Law,” Symbolic Interaction A (1981): 43-57.
29. Sheldon S. Wolin, The Presence of the Past: Essays on the State and the Constitution (Baltimore, MD: Tohns Hopkins UP, 1989) 9.
30. Walter Fisher, Human Communication as Narration: Toward a Philosophy of Reason, Value, and Action (Columbia: U of South Carolina P, 1987) 47.
31. Aristotle, O, The “Art” of Rhetoric, trans. John Henry Freese (Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1982) 17-19.
32. See James S. Baumlin and Tina French Baumlin, eds., Ethos: New Essays in Rhetorical and Critical Theory (Dallas: Southern Methodist UP, 1994).
33. Cal M. Logue and Eugene F. Miller, “Rhetorical Status: A Study of Its Origins, Functions, and Consequences,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 81 (1995): 20-47.
34. Jerry Frug, “Argument as Character,” Stanford Law Review AO (1988): 875.
35. A critique of Frug’s approach is found in Brian Leiter, “Intellectual Voyeurism in Legal Scholarship,” YaleJournal of Law & the Humanities A (1992): 79-104.
36. Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue: A Study inMoral Theory (Notre Dame: U of Notre Dame P, 1981) 27.
37. Robert W. Hoffert, A Politics of Tension: The Articles of Confederation and American Political Ideas (Niwot: UP of Colorado, 1992) xiii.
38. Eric M. Freedman, “Why Constitutional Lawyers and Historians Should Take a Fresh Look at the Emergence of the Constitution from the Confederation Period: The Case of the Drafting of the Articles of Confederation,” Tennessee Law Review 60 (1993): 784.
39. See also Arthur R. Landever, “Those Indispensable Articles of Confederation-Stage in Constitutionalism, Passage for the Framers, and Clue to the Nature of the Constitution,” Arizona Law Review 31 (1989): 79-125
40. Donald S. Lutz, “The Articles of Confederation as the Background to the Federal Republic,” Publius 20 (1990): 55-70.
41. John Leubsdorf, “Deconstructing the Constitution,” Stanford Law Review A0 (1987): 193-4.
42. See Joseph R. Biden, Jr., “The Constitution, the Senate, and the Court,” Wake Forest Law Review 24 (1989): 951-8
43. Bork; Orrin G. Hatch, “More Marbury Myths,” Cincinnati Law Review 57 (1989): 891-901
44. Nathaniel R. Jones, “Whither Goest Judicial Nominations, Brown or Plessy?-Advice and Consent Revisited,” SMU Law Review 46 (1992): 735-49
45. Joseph S. Larisa, Jr., “Popular Mythology: The Framers’ Intent, the Constitution, and Ideological Review of Supreme Court Nominees,” Boston College Law Review 30 (1989): 969-86
46. Charles H. Percy, “Advice and Consent: A Reevaluation,” Southern Illinois University Law Journal 1978 (1978): 31-43
47. Norman Vieira and Leonard E. Gross, “The Appointments Clause: Judge Bork and the Role of Ideology injudicial Confirmations,” Journal of Legal History 11 (1990): 311-52.
48. George Carey, The Federalist: Design fora Constitutional Republic (Urbana: U of Illinois P, 1994) xi.
49. See also David F, Epstein, The Political Theory of The Federalist (Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1984)
50. Robert Ferguson, “Ideology and the Framing of the Constitution,” Early American Literature 22 (1987): 157-65
51. Tames Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and Tohn lay, The Federalist Papers, ed. Issac Kramnick (Middlesex, Eng.: Penguin, 1987) 87-322.
52. Sanford Levinson, “‘The Constitution’ in American Civil Religion,” The Supreme Court Review 1979, eds. Philip B. Kurland and Gerhard Casper (Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1979) 123-51.
53. John Louis Lucaites and Maurice Charland, “The Legacy of [Liberty]: Rhetoric, Ideology, and Aesthetics in the Postmodern Condition,” Canadian Journal of Political and Social Theory (1989): 33.
54. John B. Thompson, Ideology and Modem Culture (Stanford: Stanford UP, 1990) 292.
55. Carter; James E. Gauch, “The Intended Role of the Senate in Supreme Court Appointments,” University of Chicago Law Review 56 (1989): 337-65
56. Joel B. Grossman and S. L. Wasby, “The Senate and Supreme Court Nominations: Some Reflections,” Duke Law Journal 1972 (1972): 557-91
57. Hatch Jones; Donald E. Lively, “The Supreme Court Appointment Process: In Search of Constitutional Roles and Responsibilities,” Southern California Law Review 59 (1986): 551-79
58. William G. Ross, “The Functions, Roles, and Duties of the Senate in the Supreme Court Appointment Process,” William and Mary Law Review28 (1987): 633-82
59. John Louis Lucaites, “Between Rhetoric and ‘the Law’: Power, Legitimacy, and Social Change,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 76 (1990): 435-49.
60. Additional commentaries on the relationship between rhetoric and law are offered by Peter Goodrich, Legal Discourse: Studies in Linguistics, Rhetoric and Legal Analysis (New York: St. Martin’s, 1987)
61. Marouf Hasian, Jr., “Critical Legal Rhetorics: The Theory and Practice of Law in a Postmodern World,” Southern Communica-tion, Journal 4 (1994): 44-56
62. Anselm Haverkamp, “Rhetoric, Law, and the Poetics of Memory,” Cardozo Law Review 13 (1992): 1639-53
63. Victoria Kahn, “Rhetoric and the Law,” Diacritics 19 (1989): 21-34
64. Geoffrey Klinger, “Law as Communicative Praxis: Toward a Rhetorical Jurisprudence,” Argumentation and Advocacy 30 (1994): 236-47
65. William Lewis, “Law’s Tragedy,” Rhetoric Society Quarterly 21 (1991): 11-21
66. Joseph Pilotta, et al., “The Contemporary Rhetoric of the Social Theories of Law,” Central States Speech Journal 34 (1983): 211-20
67. Austin Sarat and Thomas R. Kearns, eds., The Rhetoric of Law (Ann Arbor: U of Michigan P, 1994)
68. Robert Weisberg, “The Law-Literature Enterprise,” Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities 1 (1988): 1-67
69. Gerald B. Wetlaufer, “Rhetoric and Its Denial in Legal Discourse,” Virginia Law Review 76 (1990): 1545-97
70. Todd Gitlin, The Sixties: Years of Hope, Days of Rage (New York: Bantam, 1987) 242.
71. A comprehensive account of the chronology of the nomination and confirmation of Thurgood Marshall is offered in Linda S. Greene, “The Confirmation of Thurgood Marshall to the Supreme Court,” The Harvard BlackletterJournals (Spring, 1989): 27-50.
72. See also Neil D. McFeeley, Appointment of Judges: The Johnson Presidency (Austin: U of Texas P, 1986) 110-13.
73. L. Marvin Overby, Beth M. Henschen, Julie Strauss, and Michael H. Walsh, “African-American Constituents and Supreme Court Nominees: An Examination of the Senate Confirmation of Thurgood Marshall,” Political Research Quarterly 47 (1994): 849.
74. Michael Calvin McGee, “Text, Context, and the Fragmentation of Contemporary Culture,” Western Journal of Speech Communication 54 (1990): 285.
75. See Dilip Parameshwar Gaonkar, “Epilogue The Oratorical Text: The Enigma of Arrival,” Texts in Context: Critical Dialogues on Significant Episodes in American Political Rhetoric, eds. Michael C. Lefif and Fred J. Kauffeld (Davis: Hermagoras, 1989) 255-76.