The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
The Pleasantly Shaded Docket
From Daniel M. Gonen, Judging in Chambers: The Powers of a Single Justice of the Supreme Court, 76 U. Cin. L. Rev. 1159 (2008):
On a late-summer day in 1970, three men wearing business suits and carrying briefcases hiked six miles into the wilderness of central Washington State. As their appearance might have suggested, these were not ordinary hikers. The trio consisted of two civil-rights lawyers from Portland, Oregon, and their law clerk. They had set out into the woods that day to find Justice William O. Douglas and to apply to him for a temporary restraining order on behalf of their clients.
The Supreme Court had ended its term months earlier, and Justice Douglas was in Washington on a ten-day camping trip near his summer home in Goose Prairie, more than ten miles from the nearest telephone. With assistance from U.S. Forest Rangers, who had spotted Justice Douglas's campsite by plane, the lawyers were able to track down Justice Douglas and his party. They presented their case to the Justice in a fifteen-minute oral argument, and left a 1.5-inch [thick] petition for him to review.
Justice Douglas indicated a particular tree stump and told the lawyers that they would find his decision there the next day. Only one of the original three was physically able to make the hike back the next day, but sure enough, a single sheet of paper was waiting for him on the designated stump. In a one-paragraph opinion, Justice Douglas denied the application.
{This story is drawn from Phil Cogswell, Lawyers Hike 6 Miles in Woods to Find Justice Douglas, Oregonian, Sept. 1, 1970, at 6. Cynthia Rapp, one of the foremost experts on the in-chambers opinions of Supreme Court Justices, deserves credit for rescuing this story from historical obscurity. See Cynthia Rapp, Introduction to 1 A Collection of In Chambers Opinions by the Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, at vii (Cynthia Rapp ed., 2004).}
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"Today in Supreme Court history" needs more stories like this one.
Yes, but which day, or would it be both days? Having only the first day would leave everyone hanging. Having only the second day would be like telling a punch line and making people guess the joke.
But you are right. It's the crazy stuff that makes history memorable. I had one really boring history teacher and one really interesting one. The bore just read from the same textbook we were supposed to have read the night before. The fun one told us of William the Conqueror's death and burial fiasco, and everyone remembered that some English king had also been king of Normandy. I doubt anyone remembered anything from the bore.
I'd absosmurfly vote for both days. Last line of the first day's post: "tune in tomorrow for Douglas's decision!"
Lucky the lawyers weren't trying to keep pace with Douglas on his 184-mile hike along the C&O Canal towpath, from Cumberland, MD, to Georgetown.
Douglas was a douche and a bad Justice, and of course should have allowed one of his colleagues to hear in chambers applications while he was on one of his long vacations (and honestly Congress should have told him to take shorter vacations).