Today in Supreme Court History: September 15, 1857

9/15/1857: Chief Justice William Howard Taft's birthday.

Chief Justice William Howard Taft

 

Comments

[Dan Schiavetta]

Matter of Disbarment of Peter T. Roman, 487 U.S. 1261 (decided September 15, 1988): Stole client funds, forged signatures, lied to the court about funds being distributed, 526 So. 2d 60. From his website we see he’s been back in action, though Westlaw has no reported cases from him since the disbarment date. His bio talks more about his life as a globe-trotting martial arts master than it does about his legal experience, which I suppose is understandable. http://www.romanromanlaw.com/firm-overview/peter-t-roman

[Dr. Ed 2]

People like this should be in prison.

[Magister]

In prison now, almost four decades later? But the link captcrisis provides also says he "is a member of the Trial Lawyers section of The Florida Bar and is admitted to practice in all Florida Courts and in Federal Court", so either the disbarment was not permanent or he's misrepresenting himself.

[Noscitur a sociis]

It’s generally possible to be reinstated even after a notionally permanent disbarment. The Florida Bar has him listed as eligible to practice.

[Malika the Maiz]

He did serve about a year in jail, further time on probation and made restitution.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Taft was almost 64 when he was appointed Chief Justice. This led to a short tenure.

Wikipedia has a clip of his voice: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Howard_Taft

Chief Justice Taft's long term influence was court reform. He supported the Judges Bill and the building of a separate court building. At the time, the Supreme Court had its chambers in the U.S. Capitol. The Supreme Court Historical Society summarizes the legislation:

https://supremecourthistory.org/history-of-the-courts/taft-court-1921-1930/

[Syd Henderson]

The woman who wrote "Team of Rivals" also wrote a joint biography of TR and Taft which was intended originally to be just TR but Taft played such a big role from 1901 to 1912 it works. Although it's a lot more exciting when Roosevelt is on stage, I might have liked Taft better as a friend. Less exhausting.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Taft had a very busy career.

[Syd Henderson]

Taft was older than Theodore Roosevelt and outlived him by twelve years, which sounds odd given TR’s famous robustness until you read about the expedition in the Amazon rain forest where they traced one of the tributaries to find out where it came out. (The tributary was renamed Rio Roosevelt by the expedition commander, who was NOT Roosevelt. Roosevelt sustained an infection that almost ended his life and I’m pretty sure shortened it. Then there was the assassination attempt...

[JoeFromtheBronx]

On September 15, 2011, SCOTUS handed down an order:

BUCK, DUANE EDWARD v. THALER, "the application for stay of execution of sentence of death presented to Justice Scalia and by him referred to the Court is granted pending the disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari."

An expert witness regarding future dangerousness was found to have in multiple cases problematically mixed in race.

The justices eventually rejected his appeal, Alito with Scalia and Breyer (sic) separately noting that this time the defense was primarily to blame.

The Supreme Court later decided in his favor on an inefficiency of counsel claim. Alito and Thomas dissented; Scalia had died.

He was resentenced to life with the possibility of parole in 2035.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

I know it’s customary to refer to these parole-eligible sentences as life sentences, but wouldn’t it be more accurate to mention the minimum sentence (years until parole eligibility)? So if he’s parole-eligible in 15 years, announce the sentence as “between 15 years and life”? Admit it’s an indeterminate sentence.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Fair enough -- because his death sentence was tossed out by other rulings and California didn't have a life without parole sentence back then, Charles Manson routinely got parole hearings, although he died in prison some 46 years later.

And the other wild card is that a future Governor (or President) can always pardon someone who wasn't executed. For example, Jimmy Carter commuted the sentences of the four Puerto Rican Nationalists who shot five Congressmen (nearly killing one) inside the House Chamber back in 1954.

[Malika the Maiz]

Carter's commutation announcement of the Puerto Rican nationalists can be found here:

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/puerto-rican-nationalists-announcement-the-presidents-commutation-sentences

The Tl/DR is they had all served 25 years or more.

[Dr. Ed 2]

For shooting five Congressmen and scaring the daylights out of the rest?

Look at what some of the Jan 6th folk are being sentenced to, for merely being in the building....

[Malika the Maiz]

As part of a violent mob?

[ducksalad]

If someone is sentenced to 15 years but eligible for parole in 6 years, why not announce it as 6 to 15 years?

I guess one reason is that being on parole is not exactly the same as having a completed a sentence and being free and clear. You'll be under the supervision of the penal system for 15 years, and can be returned to prison without a full trial and/or for reasons that wouldn't apply to someone not on parole.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Good point, why not “6-15 years” if that’s what the sentence means?

Or "6-15 years, with supervision if released before 15 years"?

[Malika the Maiz]

For once I think Ed has the answer: "Charles Manson routinely got parole hearings, although he died in prison some 46 years later." Parole is a possibility, and the "customary" way of referring to it captures that better than your proposal.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

“Charles Manson routinely got parole hearings, although he died in prison some 46 years later.”

There's a reason for that: He was Charles Manson.

[Malika the Maiz]

Thanks for this, very interesting. Buck was truly a bad guy:

"On the morning of July 30, 1995, Duane Buck arrived at the home of his former girlfriend, Debra Gardner. He was carrying a rifle and a shotgun. Buck entered the home, shot Phyllis Taylor, his stepsister, and then shot Gardner’s friend Kenneth Butler. Gardner fled the house, and Buck followed. So did Gardner’s young children. While Gardner’s son and daughter begged for their mother’s life, Buck shot Gardner in the chest. Gardner and Butler died of their wounds. Taylor survived.

Police officers arrived soon after the shooting and placed Buck under arrest. An officer would later testify that Buck was laughing at the scene. He remained “happy”
and “upbeat” as he was driven to the police station, “[s]miling and laughing” in the back of the patrol car."

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/15-8049_f2ah.pdf

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Those sentenced to die are regularly truly bad people though not always. The process continues to be filled with problems.

Speaking for myself, I think long prison terms generally are the best way to go. A tiny subset -- the Mansons of the world -- might need to be isolated for life.

[Malika the Maiz]

His lawyer did seem to make some questionable moves:

"In determining whether Buck was likely to pose a danger in the future, Dr. Quijano considered seven “statistical factors.” The fourth factor was “race.” His report read, in relevant part: “4. Race. Black: Increased probability. There is an overrepresentation of Blacks among the violent offenders.” Id., at 19a.

Despite knowing Dr. Quijano’s view that Buck’s race was competent evidence of an increased probability of future violence, defense counsel called Dr. Quijano to the
stand and asked him to discuss the “statistical factors” he had “looked at in regard to this case.” Id., at 145a–146a. Dr. Quijano responded that certain factors were “know[n]to predict future dangerousness” and, consistent with his report, identified race as one of them. Id., at 146a. “It’s a sad commentary,” he testified, “that minorities, Hispanics and black people, are overrepresented in the Criminal
Justice System.”

Also, I don't think statistical overrepresentation in the aggregate justifies a prediction about any individual in that aggregate (and even if it did I don't see how current Equal Protection jurisprudence could allow it).

[Krayt]

“Poor” people, independent of race, are also known to commit crimes at higher rates. Is “you are poor” a valid reason to deny parole, even once?

[F.D. Wolf]

President Theodore Roosevelt made three appointments to the Supreme Court: Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. in 1902, William R. Day in 1903, and William Henry Moody in 1906. On all three occasions, he had offered the appointment to Taft. The first two times Taft demurred, citing unfinished business in his role as Governor-General of the Philippines. The third time was a little different.

On the morning of March 3, 1906, the day after his 70th birthday, Justice Henry Billings Brown went to the White House and informed President Roosevelt that he intended to retire at the end of the term. As a successor, Brown suggested Secretary of War Taft. Roosevelt responded that Taft was not available because he was going to be President soon. As an alternative, Brown suggested Philander Knox who had been Attorney General under McKinley and Roosevelt, but had resigned two years earlier to accept an appointment to the Senate. Roosevelt did first offer the job the job to Knox, but he declined, feeling it would be inappropriate to leave the Senate less than two years after he had been appointed and subsequently elected. (Knox would later serve as Secretary of State in the Taft administration).

Roosevelt then offered the position to Taft, who was noncommittal. There were a variety of factors weighing on Taft, who was seemingly always having to forego his lifelong dream of serving on the Supreme Court. For one, he was the most likely GOP presidential nominee in 1908, which, given Roosevelt's immense popularity, made Taft most likely the next President. Taft's wife Nellie adamantly opposed his taking the Court appointment. She already pictured herself as First Lady, a much more attractive prospect than wife of the junior justice. Also, there was much speculation that Chief Justice Fuller would soon resign, and Taft could possibly have that job instead. (If he had had a choice between being Chief Justice or being President, there can be little doubt that Taft would have chosen the former.) Ultimately, Taft declined, citing his duties in the War Department. (Erroneous newspaper reports circulated that Taft had accepted the position, prompting Chief Justice Fuller and Justice Holmes to write warm letters of welcome to Taft.)

Taft lobbied for his old friend and former Sixth Circuit colleague Horace Harmon Lurton. Attorney General Moody objected to Lurton because he was a Democrat and because there were already three justices on the Court from the Sixth Circuit. The final nail for Lurton, as far as Roosevelt was concerned, was that as an appellate judge, Lurton had ruled against the government in every Interstate Commerce case except one. Ultimately, Roosevelt appointed Moody. (Lurton would not have to wait too long to serve on the Court, becoming the first of Taft's six Court appointees three years later.)

[F.D. Wolf]

Lurton had ruled against the government in every Interstate Commerce case except one.

Oops. I omitted an important word. This should have read "Interstate Commerce Commission case".

[Syd Henderson]

Nellie Taft was well on the way to being a great first lady when she had a stroke. She still was a very good one. I’ve seen her described as sort of a precursor of Eleanor Roosevelt and Jacqueline Kennedy (at least before the stroke). I hope she liked being the wife of a Chief Justice. She survived her husband by thirteen years.

[Dr. Ed 2]

" Lurton had ruled against the government in every Interstate Commerce case except one."

He was a Pre-FDR Democrat, back when the party was still the legacy of the Jacksonian Democracy. When FDR took office in 1933, these people almost instantly became Republicans -- I have seen research about (then) small towns in Midcoast Maine where the entire town were registered Democrats in 1932 and were registered Republicans in 1934.

The other thing Taft shows us is how much more important SCOTUS is today than it was then. I don't think that Taft would have turned down the earlier appointment offers today. Look at vanity -- and how the popular press views court rulings post-Warren to how they were viewed before.

[Sarcastr0]

When FDR took office in 1933, these people almost instantly became Republicans — I have seen research about (then) small towns in Midcoast Maine where the entire town were registered Democrats in 1932 and were registered Republicans in 1934.

Remember, Ed never lies.

[Stupid Government Tricks]

Remember, Sarcastr0 never has anything substantial to say. He'd rather insult someone than prove that their comment was a lie.

[Sarcastr0]

Some things you don't need to go through the trouble to prove they are lies.

This is true of everything Dr. Ed asserts, with one exception: when he says 'not many people know.' That's when he asserts things everyone knows.

[David Nieporent]

This is true of everything Dr. Ed asserts, with one exception: when he says ‘not many people know.’ That’s when he asserts things everyone knows.

That is not correct. Half the time it's something everyone knows; half the time it's just not true.

[Malika the Maiz]

The irony, it burns!

[Malika the Maiz]

"The other thing Taft shows us is how much more important SCOTUS is today than it was then. I don’t think that Taft would have turned down the earlier appointment offers today. Look at vanity — and how the popular press views court rulings post-Warren to how they were viewed before."

Um, did Ed even read this part?

"here were a variety of factors weighing on Taft, who was seemingly always having to forego his lifelong dream of serving on the Supreme Court. For one, he was the most likely GOP presidential nominee in 1908, which, given Roosevelt’s immense popularity, made Taft most likely the next President. Taft’s wife Nellie adamantly opposed his taking the Court appointment. She already pictured herself as First Lady, a much more attractive prospect than wife of the junior justice. Also, there was much speculation that Chief Justice Fuller would soon resign, and Taft could possibly have that job instead. (If he had had a choice between being Chief Justice or being President, there can be little doubt that Taft would have chosen the former.) "

[JoeFromtheBronx]

One thing Taft had to deal with is weight.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Yes, Ed did.

And Ed's point is that that 1908 was very different from, say, 1958.

[Malika the Maiz]

“how much more important SCOTUS is today than it was then”

“If he had had a choice between being Chief Justice or being President, there can be little doubt that Taft would have chosen the former.”