A valuable analysis of the political environment, judicial records, and implications of rulings during the era of the Burger Court. The Burger Court delivered significant decisions in cases involving the separation of powers, equal protection, free speech, and civil liberties. The Burger Court guaranteed in Roe v. Wade a woman's right to an abortion, demonstrating that this court definitely had a mind of its own. This handbook is as suitable for the preparation of term papers and debates as it is for ready reference and more involved research. Includes extensive reference materials such as further reading and bibliographical sections directing users to primary sources and Court documents Covers key people such as Archibald Cox and Gerald Ford, laws such as the Equal Rights Amendment and the Voting Rights Act, and events such as the Iranian Hostage Crisis and the Watergate Scandal

An eighth-generation Charlestonian with a prestigious address, impeccable social credentials, and years of intimate association with segregationist politicians, U.S. District Court Judge Julius Waties Waring shocked family, friends, and an entire state in 1945 when, at age sixty-five, he divorced his wife of more than thirty years and embarked upon a far-reaching challenge to the most fundamental racial values of his native region. The first jurist in modern times to declare segregated schooling "inequality per se," Waring also ordered the equalization of teachers' salaries and outlawed South Carolina's white primary. Off the bench, he and his second wife--a twice-divorced, politically liberal Northerner who was even more outspoken in her political views than Waring himself--castigated Dixiecrats and southern liberals alike for their defense of segregation, condemned the "sickness" of white southern society, urged a complete breakdown of state-enforced bars to racial intermingling, and entertained blacks in their home, becoming pariahs in South Carolina and controversial figures nationally. Tinsley Yarbrough examines the life and career of this fascinating but neglected jurist, assessing the controversy he generated, his place in the early history of the modern civil rights movement, and the forces motivating his repudiation of his past.

When the first President Bush chose David Hackett Souter for the Supreme Court in 1990, the slender New Englander with the shy demeanor and ambiguous past was quickly dubbed a "stealth candidate". Determined to avoid a repeat of the firestorm surrounding President Reagan's nomination of the controversial Robert Bork, Bush opted for Souter, who had, remarkably, produced only one law review article in his legal career. Souter, an obscure but well-respected New Hampshire conservative, seemed unlikely to arouse the kind of passionate opposition that defined the Bork confirmation process. And, indeed, Souter was accepted onto the Court with little fuss. Today, fifteen years into his tenure, Souter remains as enigmatic and unpredictable as ever, a mystery even to avid Court watchers. Who is David Hackett Souter and what will be his legacy on the Supreme Court? Sifting through Souter's opinions, papers of the Justice's contemporaries and other relevant records and interviews, esteemed Supreme Court biographer Tinsley Yarbrough here gives us the real David Souter, crafting a fascinating account of one of the heretofore most elusive Justices in the history of the Court. Though Souter's record on legal issues was generally conservative before his arrival on the Court, his mixed views caused some concern among both the left and the right during the appointment process. His reclusive lifestyle and frugality added to his mystique, making him even more difficult to peg. His penchant for solitude and his seemingly narrow circle of close friends convinced some that the middle-aged bachelor was out of touch with the sort of "real world" problems the nation's highest court regularly confronts. Court watchers soon realized-to their delight or dismay-that President Bush's "stealth" justice was a traditional New England Republican deeply tied to the party's historic roots in the union and civil rights-in stark contrast to most Reagan-Bush I appointees. On the bench, Souter has embraced a flexible, evolving, and highly pragmatic judicial style that embraces a high regard for precedent-even liberal decisions of the Warren and Burger Courts with which he may have personally disagreed. Even more significantly, Souter has become a regular and very effective critic of the set of rulings via which his ostensible political brethren-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas-have abandoned precedent to assert their conservative vision. Ultimately, Yarbrough contends, Souter has become the principal Rehnquist Court opponent of the originalist, text-bound jurisprudence that many of the more conservative Justices profess to champion.

In The Rehnquist Court and the Constitution, Tinsley Yarbrough provides a comprehensive look at today's Supreme Court Justices and their record--a study all the more valuable for the Court's mixed decisions and hard-to-categorize course. An accomplished biographer, Yarbrough offers incisive portraits of the nine who now sit on the high bench, and tellingly reviews their nomination hearings. He also explores the workings of the Court, ranging from the selection and role of the clerks to the work load (including the end-of-term "June crunch") and assignment of opinions. But the heart of the book is a systematic exploration of the Court's record in such fields as government power, economic regulation, and criminal justice. In decision after decision, the author discusses the various justices' opinions, arguments, and legal theories; he also offers his own analysis (including a sharp critique of the decision to allow the Paula Jones lawsuit to move forward). Like many writers on the Rehnquist Court, Yarbrough finds a general continuity with the past, shaded by a conservative outlook (especially in matters of criminal justice and affirmative action), but he identifies a significant departure in its rulings on economic regulation. Since 1937, he writes, the Supreme Court had generally adopted an expansive view of federal power over economic matters; the Rehnquist Court has reversed that trend. The Rehnquist Court has not launched an all-out assault on the Warren Court's precedents, as many conservatives hoped, but as Yarbrough shows it has embarked on important new departures. Thoughtful, wide-ranging, intelligently written, this book will stand as the finest study of the Rehnquist Court for years to come.

In 1945, when southern segregationist Judge J. Waties Waring turned civil rights activist, he became the first jurist in modern times to declare segregated schooling "inequality per se". Throughout his career he also ordered the equalization of teachers' salaries, outlawed South Carolina's white primary, and urged the complete breakdown of state-enforced bars to racial intermingling. Yarbrough examines the life and career of this fascinating but neglected jurist, assessing the controversy he generated and his place in the early history of the modern civil rights movement.

John Marshall Harlan, grandson of the first Supreme Court Justice of the same name, served on the Court from 1955 until his retirement and death in 1971. An articulate and forceful critic of the expansive civil liberties doctrines and constitutional trends of the period, Harlan is considered one of the most scholarly jurists ever to have served on the Supreme Court. To date, however, there exists no book-length biography or analysis of his judicial and constitutional philosophy.

Tinsley Yarbrough, a biographer of Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, Judge Frank Johnson, and Judge J Waties Waring, is writing the first biography of Supreme Court Justice Harlan. Drawing on a thorough examination of the John Marshall Harlan Papers archive at Princeton, interviews with Harlan's family, clerks, and acquaintances, and inter-chambers memoranda and related archival material, Yarbrough will provide a fascinating portrait of Harlan's life, career and the evolution of his judicial and constitutional philosophy. He will give special attention to Harlan's approach to constitutional issues such as the relationship of the Bill of Rights to states, the nature and scope of freedom of expression, the reach of congressional power over civil rights, the right to privacy, the rights of suspects and defendants, modern trends in equal protection doctrine, and the extent to which private activities are subject to constitutional limitations. Throughout his analysis, Yarbrough will consider the possible connections between Harlan's private life and his jurisprudence.

Yarborough provides a comprehensive look at today's Supreme Court Justices and their record - a study all the more valuable for the Court's mixed decisions and hard-to-categorize course. Thoughtful, wide-ranging, intelligently written, this book will stand as the finest study of the Rehnquist Court for years to come.

Through much of the 1990s, a newly hatched snake wreaked political havoc in the South.

When North Carolina gained a seat in Congress following the 1990 census, it sought to rectify a long-standing failure to represent African American voters by creating, under federal pressure, two "majority-minority" voting districts. One of these snaked along Interstate 85 for nearly two hundred miles--not much wider than the road itself in some places--and was ridiculed by many as one of the least compact legislative districts ever proposed.

From 1993 to 2001, three intertwined cases went before the Supreme Court that decided how far a state could go in establishing voting districts along racial lines. Noted Supreme Court biographer Tinsley Yarbrough examines these closely linked landmark cases to show how the Court addressed the constitutionality of redistricting within the volatile contexts of civil rights and partisan politics.

A suit was first filed by Duke University law professor Robinson Everett, a liberal who loathed discrimination but considered racially motivated redistricting a clear violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause. Yarbrough tells how Everett enlisted associates as plaintiffs and went on to win two Supreme Court victories in "Shaw v. Reno" (1993) and "Shaw v. Hunt" (1996)--both by 5-4 decisions. Following the creation of another "flawed" redistricting plan, he rounded up a new set of plaintiffs to take the battle back to the Supreme Court. But this time, in Easley v. Cromartie--on the swing vote of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor-the 5-4 vote went against him.

Yarbrough shows the significant impact these cases have had on election law and the fascinating interplay of law, politics, and human conflict that the dispute generated. Drawing heavily on court records and on interviews with attorneys on both sides of the litigation, he relates a complex and intriguing tale about these protracted struggles. His cogent and balanced analysis considers whether the state legislature was wrong in using race as a measure for establishing the new district, or whether it was simply engaging in the time-honored practice of gerrymandering to ensure political balance.

"Race and Redistricting" spotlights efforts to "racially engineer" voting districts in an effort to achieve fair representation. By examining one state's efforts to confront such dilemmas, it helps readers better understand future disputes over race and politics, as well as the ongoing debates over our "color-blind" constitution.