Today in Supreme Court History: April 11, 1862

4/11/1862: Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes's birthday.

Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes

Comments

[Dan Schiavetta]

Winner of the Charles Evans Hughes lookalike contest!

[wolfefan]

Congratulations! I came here to say that Hughes looks exactly what I think a Chief Justice of that era should look like, and that his mustache is magnificent. I would consider a constitutional amendment requiring that all CJs have a mustache and beard approaching Hughes-ian stature.

[Dan Schiavetta]

The more I look at that facial hair, though, the more I’m reminded of our miniature schnauzer. I’m beginning to think he should have a ping pong ball in his teeth.

[CJColucci]

. Miniature schnauzer indeed. I can't seem to find confirmation, but I've heard that Hughes, despite his imposing Zeus/Jehovah looks, was pretty short, and supposedly even joked about it. Though he doesn't look like someone who would be funny.

[Dan Schiavetta]

So many things we don’t know! ????

[Moderation4ever]

Interesting person. Says he was on SCOTUS resigned in an unsuccessful run at the Presidency and was then reappoint Chief Justice by President Hoover. Wonder if any of the justices on the Court today would ever think of doing this. Probably not, a lifetime appointment is hard to leave.

[Bob from Ohio]

Hughes was a successful politician first, governor of NY. We don't put such people on the S/C anymore.

Supreme court justices now have very narrow legal only experiences. Roberts might have been a decent politician, maybe. None of the others have the skills.

[Krychek_2]

I would argue that in general, the successful politicians (as well as people who actually practiced law) tended to make far better justices than the ones coming from academia and the courts of appeal, in part because they have real world experience rather than academic ivory towers. If you've actually seen how policies affect real people, and you understand that what is supposed to be the theory often doesn't work out in actual practice, that means something.

[Bob from Ohio]

We need to diversify S/C experiences. Amy was non-Ivy at least. Jackson also at least had some different career choices, though still double Harvard and clerking.

[apedad]

But isn't that what you guys want; judges/justices who follow the law?

Wouldn't a politician-judge be more proned to "activism?"

[Bob from Ohio]

I don't want 9, but one can't hurt.

Its a diversity of education and experience that is needed.

[Moderation4ever]

Not necessarily. A justice with political experience would understand the nature of the other branches. Presidents usually come from Congress or a governorship. So, they understand better other branches and levels of government.

Citizens United is a good example. This case was decided by nine justices who never had to raise money or defend against well financed opposition. Had any of them had that experience they might have thought more about limiting money in a constitutional manner.

[David Nieporent]

Or maybe, like the politicians that supported it, they'd have taken the side of politicians over the public.

[Cal Cetín]

"Wouldn't a politician-judge be more proned to "activism?""

The current court has a lot of people without explicitly political experience, etc. yet they've quite frequently been enthusiastically activist.

So since there's no point in locking the barn door at this point, why not appoint some political animals to the court?

Also, Hughes served about a year on the World Court (the League of nations' "Permanent" Court of International Justice) before quitting to join the Supreme Court of the United States, because when the chips were down, he preferred the USA! USA!

[Shamie Ervin iv]

Yes, Mr. Professor, the Constitution is what the judges say it is.

AND, I enjoy seeing a photo of this distinguished-looking judge.

I also take pleasure, mostly because of all of you distinguished professors sharing your knowledge and wit, visiting the VC every day.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Pierson v. Ray is an April 11 decision. The proprietors apparently figured a birthday was more important. Or perhaps they didn't do their homework.

It would be interesting to see a list of law professors who might be persuaded by Today In Supreme Court History's performance to choose the underlying textbook.

Carry on, scholars!

[DaivdBehar]

Hi, keep us posted on your interviews and training of you diverse replacement.