Journal of Supreme Court History最新文献_第7页

The Great Dissenter: The Story of John Marshall Harlan, America’s Judicial Hero by Peter S. Canellos (review) 《大异议者：美国司法英雄约翰·马歇尔·哈兰的故事》，Peter s.Canellos著（评论）

IF 0.1

Journal of Supreme Court History Pub Date : 2023-01-02 DOI: 10.1353/sch.2022.0016

P. Kens

引用次数: 0

The Yankee from Olympus Redivivus 来自奥林匹斯的美国佬

IF 0.1

Journal of Supreme Court History Pub Date : 2023-01-02 DOI: 10.1353/sch.2022.0026

M. Urofsky

引用次数: 0

An Accident of History: The Fourth Amendment as Applied to Schools and New Jersey v. T.L.O. 历史的偶然:第四修正案在学校和新泽西诉T.L.O.案中的应用

IF 0.1

Journal of Supreme Court History Pub Date : 2022-12-05 DOI: 10.1111/jsch.12308

Andrew H. Meck

引用次数: 0

Illustrations 插图

IF 0.1

Journal of Supreme Court History Pub Date : 2022-12-05 DOI: 10.1111/jsch.12311

引用次数: 0

The Judicial Bookshelf 司法书架

IF 0.1

Journal of Supreme Court History Pub Date : 2022-12-05 DOI: 10.1111/jsch.12312

Donald Grier Stephenson Jr.

引用次数: 0

Helen J. Knowles, Making Minimum Wage: Elsie Parrish versus the West Coast Hotel Company. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2021, 257 pp. + acknowledgements, notes, bibliography, and index 海伦·j·诺尔斯，《最低工资:埃尔西·帕里什诉西海岸酒店公司》。诺曼:俄克拉何马大学出版社，2021年，257页+致谢，注释，参考书目和索引

IF 0.1

Journal of Supreme Court History Pub Date : 2022-12-05 DOI: 10.1111/jsch.12309

Paul Kens

引用次数: 0

Contributors 贡献者

IF 0.1

Journal of Supreme Court History Pub Date : 2022-12-05 DOI: 10.1111/jsch.12310

引用次数: 0

“Lost Laws” to “Eat Anywhere”: D.C. v. Thompson and the Road to Brown 从“失落的法律”到“随便吃”:华盛顿诉汤普森案和通往布朗案的道路

IF 0.1

Journal of Supreme Court History Pub Date : 2022-12-05 DOI: 10.1111/jsch.12307

Charles J. Sheehan

{"title":"“Lost Laws” to “Eat Anywhere”: D.C. v. Thompson and the Road to Brown","authors":"Charles J. Sheehan","doi":"10.1111/jsch.12307","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jsch.12307","url":null,"abstract":"On January 27, 1950, a woman invited three friends to lunch. Eighty-six-year-old Mary Church Terrell asked William Jernigan, Geneva Brown, and David Scull to meet at Thompson’s Cafeteria, a few blocks from the White House, at 14th Street and New York Avenue, NW.1 As they presented their trays to the cashier, the manager at Thompson’s, one of a national chain head quartered in Chicago, told the group they would not be served (only Scull was white). “Why not?” asked Jernigan. “Because we don’t serve colored people here,” replied the manager. Terrell pressed. “Is Washington in the United States? Doesn’t the Consti tution of the United States apply here?”2 Thompson’s would not budge and Terrell’s party found itself back on the street. But the would-be hostess had something better than a bowl of soup with friends. Terrell had a case. Challenges to hydra-headed Jim Crow flared across the nation. America was two classes. One enjoyed the best offerings of transportation, public schools, and public accommodations. The other suffocated under generations of custom and law, enduring inferior treatment and shunted to the margins. In chambers of state and local governments and federal courtrooms, ripples of resistance to segregation were loosed. Largely hidden from public view by more widely covered segregation clashes, one civil rights battle— over the right to eat anywhere in the nation’s capital city—was fought long and fiercely. Within the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, some judges strained to preserve the city’s entrenched custom of seg regation and others pressed for its extinction. When Terrell asked John R. Thompson Co. for racial equality, she could not have known she had sparked the Supreme Court case— District of Columbia v. John R. Thompson Co.—that would help set the course for justices about to decide Brown v. Board of Education.","PeriodicalId":41873,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Supreme Court History","volume":"47 3","pages":"284-304"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2022-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48226598","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

A Forgotten First: Everett J. Waring, First Black Supreme Court Advocate, and the Case of Jones v. United States 被遗忘的第一次:埃弗雷特·j·韦林，第一位黑人最高法院辩护律师，以及琼斯诉美国案

IF 0.1

Journal of Supreme Court History Pub Date : 2022-12-05 DOI: 10.1111/jsch.12306

John G. Browning

{"title":"A Forgotten First: Everett J. Waring, First Black Supreme Court Advocate, and the Case of Jones v. United States","authors":"John G. Browning","doi":"10.1111/jsch.12306","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jsch.12306","url":null,"abstract":"In reflecting upon her historic confirma tion as the first Black woman on the nation’s highest court, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson acknowledged that she stood “on the shoul ders” of many “true pathbreakers.”1 While Justice Jackson undoubtedly had in mind Black Supreme Court advocates turned mem bers of the federal judiciary like Constance Baker Motley (first Black female federal judge) and Thurgood Marshall, one cannot ignore the rich legacy left by nineteenth cen tury Black lawyers who appeared before the Court. While the history of lawyers generally has been too long regarded as “a White man’s history”2 and Black lawyers’ “names and contributions remained unknown,”3 the history of Black Supreme Court advocates has been particularly neglected.4 Occasional mentions are made of pioneers like John Swett Rock (who in 1865 became the first Black lawyer admitted to practice before the U.S. Supreme Court) or Emmanuel M. Hewlett and Cornelius J. Jones (early Black Supreme Court advocates who on December 13, 1895, argued Gibson v. Mississippi and Smith v. Mississippi, respectively). But for too long, the question of “who was the first Black lawyer to ague before the United States Supreme Court?” has gone unanswered—or worse, incorrectly answered.5 This article seeks to rectify historical oversight and give due credit to this forgotten first: Everett J. Waring of Maryland, who in 1890 argued the case of Jones v. United States. The case he brought transcended garden variety criminal defense and the mis treatment of Black workers to raise important questions about sovereignty and jurisdiction in the early days of U.S. imperialism that still resonate today. But in order to appreciate Waring’s achievement, and place it in histor ical perspective, we must first examine the complicated circumstances that launched his","PeriodicalId":41873,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Supreme Court History","volume":"47 3","pages":"265-283"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2022-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46749040","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Anatomy of a Presidential Campaign from the Supreme Court Bench: John McLean, Levi Woodbury, and the Election of 1848 从最高法院法官席剖析总统竞选:约翰·麦克莱恩、莱维·伍德伯里和1848年大选

IF 0.1

Journal of Supreme Court History Pub Date : 2022-12-05 DOI: 10.1111/jsch.12305

Rachel A. Shelden

{"title":"Anatomy of a Presidential Campaign from the Supreme Court Bench: John McLean, Levi Woodbury, and the Election of 1848","authors":"Rachel A. Shelden","doi":"10.1111/jsch.12305","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jsch.12305","url":null,"abstract":"Imagine The Washington Post headline: “In the next presidential election, the most promising candidates for a nomination in clude Elena Kagan for the Democrats and Samuel Alito for the Republicans.” The idea sounds preposterous today, and yet, in the 1848 election, two associate justices of the Supreme Court, representing different par tisan constituencies, were front-runners for a presidential nomination: John McLean of Ohio and Levi Woodbury of New Hampshire. Nor was their experience unique: in the first one hundred years of the nation, nearly a quarter of Supreme Court justices considered or were considered for a presidential run, with candidates from every major political party. These presidential campaigns did not represent judicial corruption, nor were they simply about ambition or vanity; judges ran for president because enough Americans be lieved they would be good candidates. Polit ical leaders, partisan newspapers, and even other judges advocated for the benefits of particular justices as presidential nominees. In fact, the idea of a Supreme Court jus tice becoming president seemed completely unremarkable to politicos; political support ers treated judges the same way they did governors, congressmen, or cabinet members who ran for office. Party leaders traded daily letters analyzing, promoting, or detracting from the candidacies of these men with only an occasional reference to their positions on the Bench. A few noted modest hesitation about a judge’s impartiality, but the vast majority of partisans expressed no concern about the idea of a Supreme Court justice as a presidential candidate. The sheer ordinariness of running a Supreme Court justice for president was representative of how Americans understood","PeriodicalId":41873,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Supreme Court History","volume":"47 3","pages":"241-264"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2022-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45175779","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0