严谨的浪漫主义者:安东尼·刘易斯在最高法院的报道

L. Greenhouse
{"title":"严谨的浪漫主义者:安东尼·刘易斯在最高法院的报道","authors":"L. Greenhouse","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2559452","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Tony Lewis called himself “a romantic about the Supreme Court.” If he had not been a romantic when he took up the beat for the New York Times in 1957, he surely would have become one as, for the next seven years, he chronicled the Warren Court’s progressive constitutional revolution at the peak of its energy and transformative power. To list just some of the landmark opinions the Court issued during those seven years is to prove the point: Cooper v. Aaron, Mapp v. Ohio, Baker v. Carr, Engel v. Vitale, Gideon v. Wainwright, Brady v. Maryland, School District of Abington Township, Pennsylvania v. Schempp, New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, Reynolds v. Sims, Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States. “Historic Change in the Supreme Court” was the headline on a New York Times Magazine article of Tony’s that ran in the midst of it all, in June 1962, an article to which I shall return, because it reveals as much about its author as it did about its subject.You may have done a double-take when I said that Tony covered the Court for seven years – only seven years. As one who came to the beat fourteen years after he left it, and who stayed for nearly three decades, I also find that hard to believe, to the extent that I feel the need to keep checking my notes for accuracy every time I mention it. The reason his seven-year tenure sounds so unbelievably short is that its impact was so unbelievably great. He explained what was happening at the Court in muscular and declarative prose that any intelligent reader could understand. But he did so much more than that. He placed the decisions in the context of contemporary politics and the framework of constitutional history while assessing their significance. He transformed journalism about the Supreme Court from a score-keeping account of winners and losers to a rich narrative of the Court’s role in a democracy grappling with profound questions about the meaning of justice for all.","PeriodicalId":82026,"journal":{"name":"Missouri law review","volume":"79 1","pages":"907"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Rigorous Romantic: Anthony Lewis on the Supreme Court Beat\",\"authors\":\"L. Greenhouse\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2559452\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Tony Lewis called himself “a romantic about the Supreme Court.” If he had not been a romantic when he took up the beat for the New York Times in 1957, he surely would have become one as, for the next seven years, he chronicled the Warren Court’s progressive constitutional revolution at the peak of its energy and transformative power. To list just some of the landmark opinions the Court issued during those seven years is to prove the point: Cooper v. Aaron, Mapp v. Ohio, Baker v. Carr, Engel v. Vitale, Gideon v. Wainwright, Brady v. Maryland, School District of Abington Township, Pennsylvania v. Schempp, New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, Reynolds v. Sims, Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States. “Historic Change in the Supreme Court” was the headline on a New York Times Magazine article of Tony’s that ran in the midst of it all, in June 1962, an article to which I shall return, because it reveals as much about its author as it did about its subject.You may have done a double-take when I said that Tony covered the Court for seven years – only seven years. As one who came to the beat fourteen years after he left it, and who stayed for nearly three decades, I also find that hard to believe, to the extent that I feel the need to keep checking my notes for accuracy every time I mention it. The reason his seven-year tenure sounds so unbelievably short is that its impact was so unbelievably great. He explained what was happening at the Court in muscular and declarative prose that any intelligent reader could understand. But he did so much more than that. He placed the decisions in the context of contemporary politics and the framework of constitutional history while assessing their significance. He transformed journalism about the Supreme Court from a score-keeping account of winners and losers to a rich narrative of the Court’s role in a democracy grappling with profound questions about the meaning of justice for all.\",\"PeriodicalId\":82026,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Missouri law review\",\"volume\":\"79 1\",\"pages\":\"907\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Missouri law review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2559452\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Missouri law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2559452","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

托尼·刘易斯称自己是“最高法院的浪漫主义者”。如果他在1957年为《纽约时报》撰报时不是一个浪漫主义者,那么在接下来的七年里,他肯定会成为一个浪漫主义者,因为他记录了沃伦法院(Warren Court)在其能量和变革力量达到顶峰时的进步宪法革命。列举法院在这七年中发表的一些具有里程碑意义的意见就是为了证明这一点:库珀诉亚伦案、马普诉俄亥俄州案、贝克诉卡尔案、恩格尔诉维塔莱案、吉迪恩诉温赖特案、布雷迪诉马里兰州案、阿宾顿镇学区案、宾夕法尼亚州诉Schempp案、纽约时报公司诉沙利文案、雷诺兹诉西姆斯案、亚特兰大汽车旅馆之心公司诉美国案。1962年6月,托尼在《纽约时报》杂志上发表了一篇文章,标题是“最高法院的历史性变革”。这篇文章就在这一切发生的过程中发表。我将再次提到这篇文章,因为它既揭示了文章的主题,也揭示了文章的作者。当我说托尼报道了法院7年——只有7年的时候,你可能是多看了一眼。作为一个在离开这个圈子十四年后才加入这个圈子,并在这个圈子里待了近三十年的人,我也很难相信这一点,以至于我觉得有必要在每次提到它的时候不断检查我的笔记,以确保它的准确性。他的7年任期听起来如此短暂,是因为其影响之大令人难以置信。他以一种任何聪明的读者都能理解的、有力的、陈述性的文笔解释了宫廷里发生的事情。但他做的远不止这些。他把这些决定放在当代政治和宪法历史的框架中,同时评估它们的意义。他将有关最高法院的新闻报道从对赢家和输家的记分报道转变为对法院在民主制度中所扮演角色的丰富叙述,这些民主制度正在努力解决有关人人享有正义的意义的深刻问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Rigorous Romantic: Anthony Lewis on the Supreme Court Beat
Tony Lewis called himself “a romantic about the Supreme Court.” If he had not been a romantic when he took up the beat for the New York Times in 1957, he surely would have become one as, for the next seven years, he chronicled the Warren Court’s progressive constitutional revolution at the peak of its energy and transformative power. To list just some of the landmark opinions the Court issued during those seven years is to prove the point: Cooper v. Aaron, Mapp v. Ohio, Baker v. Carr, Engel v. Vitale, Gideon v. Wainwright, Brady v. Maryland, School District of Abington Township, Pennsylvania v. Schempp, New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, Reynolds v. Sims, Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States. “Historic Change in the Supreme Court” was the headline on a New York Times Magazine article of Tony’s that ran in the midst of it all, in June 1962, an article to which I shall return, because it reveals as much about its author as it did about its subject.You may have done a double-take when I said that Tony covered the Court for seven years – only seven years. As one who came to the beat fourteen years after he left it, and who stayed for nearly three decades, I also find that hard to believe, to the extent that I feel the need to keep checking my notes for accuracy every time I mention it. The reason his seven-year tenure sounds so unbelievably short is that its impact was so unbelievably great. He explained what was happening at the Court in muscular and declarative prose that any intelligent reader could understand. But he did so much more than that. He placed the decisions in the context of contemporary politics and the framework of constitutional history while assessing their significance. He transformed journalism about the Supreme Court from a score-keeping account of winners and losers to a rich narrative of the Court’s role in a democracy grappling with profound questions about the meaning of justice for all.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信