About Us

In article ,
says...
Wow, was Earl Warren any "good". ; )

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.

"PocoLoco" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 03:14:05 GMT, OlBlueEyes wrote:

Harry Krause wrote in
:

As far as future Judge Harriet goes, she seems totally, completely
unqualified for the job because SHE HAS NO JUDICIAL EXPERIENCE
WHATSOEVER.

Supreme Court Justices with NO JUDICIAL EXPERIENCE WHATSOEVER include
William Rehnquist, Louis Brandeis, Abe Fortas, Felix Frankfurter, Robert
Jackson, Byron White, Earl Warren, Lewis Powell, James Wilson and William
Paterson (the last two were among George Washington's twelve appointees).

EIGHT Chief Justices (in other words, HALF of the CJ's who preceded John
Roberts) had NO JUDICIAL EXPERIENCE WHATSOEVER before their appointment to
SCOTUS.

Earl Warren went from NO JUDICIAL EXPERIENCE WHATSOEVER straight to CJ in
1954.

Harry, having been caught stepping on his dong again, will probably not
answer
that.

Wasn't Earl Warren a governor or something?

At least he'd been in public service and run a state.

Harriett's best qualification is her status as a born-again Christian.

Wink, wink.

jps

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

Menu

About Us