The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Today in Supreme Court History: July 11, 1921
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
Organized Village of Kake v. Egan, 80 S.Ct. 33 (decided July 11, 1959): Brennan grants restraining order preventing Alaska from enforcing statute criminalizing fish traps against Native American tribe because Secretary of Interior had granted exemption and its livelihood depended on them. (Question on direct appeal was whether the Secretary’s authority superseded Alaska’s. The Alaska Supreme Court ended up ruling against the Native Americans, and the Court affirmed in 1962, 369 U.S. 60, in which Frankfurter, in one of his last majority opinions, derided traps as a “lazy man’s device”, though he extended Brennan’s stay to the end of that fishing season.)
Rockefeller v. Socialist Workers Party, 400 U.S. 1201 (decided July 11, 1970): Harlan grants stay of the District Court’s order striking down on Equal Protection grounds requirement that the 12,000 voters needed for petition for statewide ballot include at least 50 voters from each county because it overvalued votes in less populous counties (i.e., giving those counties disproportionate veto power over who gets onto the ballot) (the least populous county, Hamilton, had only 1/500th the population of the most, Kings/Brooklyn) (order was affirmed by the Court without opinion on October 12 of that year, 400 U.S. 806, though the District Court’s decision shows that the Socialist Party lost on other issues)
In Organized Village of Kake v. Egan, are you sure that was the outcome?
Oyez shows:
Question
Should the State of Alaska be enjoined from enforcing its own law, which conflicts with federally issued fishing permits?
Conclusion (8 - 1)
No. In a 8-1 decision Justice Felix Frankfurter wrote for the majority affirming the Alaska court. The Supreme Court held that there was no statutory authority granting the Secretary of the Interior the power to regulate contrary to state law. In addition, the permits did not trump state law. (HOWEVER) In order to prevent undue hardship, the Court ordered that the Native American tribes be allowed to continue using the traps through the end of the 1962 fishing season. Justice William O. Douglas wrote a partial dissent, agreeing that the Alaska law should prevail, but disagreeing with allowing the tribes to continue to use traps through the end of the 1962 season.
Isn't that what I said?
I guess I'm mixing up the 1959 and 1962 decisions.
Not a problem. I was very young then, myself!
"The disposition of these cases four months before the 1962 fishing season starts gives ample notice that new ways of earning a livelihood must be found other than by lazy man's device of the fish trap. [Footnote 2/6]"
Douglas wrote the "lazy man" comment in his partial dissent.
Thanks!
Rockefeller just came up the other year in CA8 after the DC blocked Nebraska's county-based signature requirement.
What baffles me about Kake is that the native communities in question had voted overwhelmingly to ban fish traps: Angoon's vote was 49 to 9 and Kake's 123 to 6 against traps. An organization chartered to speak for Alaskan tribes (the Alaskan Native Brotherhood) also strongly opposed these traps. I think it was really a dick-swinging contest between Alaska and the Secretary of the Interior.
Also of note: The US Navy had destroyed Angoon in 1882 over a dispute about blankets. The Navy accidentally killed a shaman, Angoon took hostages and demanded 200 blankets as compensation, but when the Navy showed up Angoon just released the hostages. Commander Merriman then demanded 400 blankets from the village as tribute but only got 81, so he blew them up.
In the '70s the US paid off the village with $90 grand for the bombardment.
I wonder if he also derided factories, cars, and even shovels as devices for the lazy. Does he think they were using traps to have more time to carve ice statues for rich tourists?
See Hunter S. Thompson, "Marlon Brando and the Indian Fish-In", as to the effect of 300-foot nets on (fish) spawning. Native Americans lost that case too.
I expect he was furious with his clerks for writing his opinion with a typewriter instead of fashioning quills, ink, and parchment from scratch. What's almost funny is he used a footnote to defend this choice of phrase, based on a state legislative hearing that established fish traps are a "labor-saving device." Well, yes.
The rumors were a big reason Taft nominated Edward Douglass White as Chief Justice was that he was pretty old.
Taft wanted the job himself someday. Turns out Taft was no spring chicken when he finally got the job. He had it for less time.
Taft was a solicitor general, appellate judge, governor, POTUS, and secretary of war. I guess he has some good experience.
Wikipedia has a clip of his voice.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Howard_Taft
Interesting clip. It seems as though a lot of people, at least a lot of elite folk who become high public officials, sounded like that in those days. I'm not sure what it is. It's not a regional accent, since people from many areas of the country sounded like that, but something in the timbre or coloration.
Yes. Though the hard R’s betray his Midwestern upbringing.
“Wikipedia has a clip of his voice.”
Hey, that was great!
Also, a great dis aimed at his third-party opponent Teddy Roosevelt. I guess by that time the magic had gone out of their relationship.