The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Today in Supreme Court History: October 5, 1953
10/5/1953: Chief Justice Earl Warren takes the oath.

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
Maryland v. Kulbicki, 136 S.Ct. 2 (decided October 5, 2015): Court grants cert, reverses Maryland high court, and dismisses ineffective assistance of counsel claim; method of comparing lead in bullets in defendant’s truck vs. in victim’s brain relied on by prosecution was later discredited but was still state of the art at time of conviction
The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts has become generous in granting new trials on the grounds of newly discovered evidence when old science is discredited. States courts may have some institutional embarrassment over the Fells Acres child abuse cases. The convictions were likely the result of children being told by interrogators that they had been subjected to Satanic rituals. The system refused to admit fault. 1980s trials were to be judged by 1980s science (or lack of science).
Thanks
And almost all of jurisprudence since then can be thought of as attempts to maintain or dismantle the Warren Court legacy.
The Warren Court era was an exceptional period in Court history. It was not particularly more partisan than other periods, but for most of its history the Court has acted as a brake on badly-needed reforms, to the point of injustice or even absurdity, just as partisan as the Warren Court, only pushing in the opposite direction.
I’d say judicial politics partisanized around the Warren Court, meaning the court was only partisan in retrospect.
Though in the post FDR alignment any Court of the era would have had that happen.
The Taney Court somewhat dismantled the Marshall Court legacy.
It did not have as much of a chance as it could in part since the Whig Party never had enough power to over them the chance.
If President Harrison did not die, for instance, a new national bank could have been created. The Taney Court would then have a chance to overrule McCulloch v. Maryland, which it never paid much attention to along with the Democratic presidents of the era.
The Supreme Court granted some cases yesterday.
The new term starts next week. The election will have a significant effect, including (as Chris Geidner noted) regarding the official U.S. position in multiple important cases.
Whenever I listen to oral arguments from the Warren Court, Chief Justice Warren's voice suggests a certain gravitas, especially when he announces the case ready to be argued.
And I was born in 195*
Chief Justice Fred Vinson died unexpectedly of a heart attack on September 8, 1953. Congress had recessed in August and would not be back in session until January. President Eisenhower wanted the full complement of justices when the Court's term began in October, so he gave Earl Warren a recess appointment. (Had he not, Justice Hugo Black, as the senior justice, would have served as acting chief, which might have made for an interesting term.)
The Court had granted certiorari in Brown v. Board of Education while Vinson was still Chief, though, of course, the case was heard and decided under Warren (who would write the opinion for a unanimous Court). Historians debate how things might have been different in the case if Vinson had still been Chief. Even VInson's colleagues on the Court disagreed on the question of how Vinson would have voted.
Well, Frankfurter supposedly said that the timing of Vinson's death was the first piece of evidence he had ever seen to prove the existence of God.
As the second round of the MLB playoffs begins, the Major League Trilogy is an appropriate movie series to note.
Major League is a fun film about the lowly Cleveland Indians (now the Guardians) getting to the playoffs with a bunch of lovable supposed losers. Bob Uecker is amusing as the announcer.
Uecker (IRL a Brewers announcer), now 90, is still going on strong. His call of the Alonso home run can be found here:
https://sny.tv/articles/mets-howie-rose-bob-uecker-brewers-radio-pete-alonso-home-run
The second film is a somewhat tired sequel.
The third film appropriately had such B talent as Scott Bakula and Ted McGinley (famous for late-season replacements) and was enjoyable on a "straight to video" level. That film involves the Twins, particularly its minor league team.
Major League is definitely worth watching.
"What league did you play in last year?"
"California Penal."
As a ritual I rewatch the first one — which is so eminently quotable — every year at the start of the season. I pretend the sequels do not exist.
I am a big fan of the first one. I have never seen the second. I didn't even realize there was a third.
Best delivery of a single word in a 1990s film: Charlie Sheen: "check!"
They are still the Cleveland Indians, I do not use the fake temporary name.
Go Tribe!
They won't get to the World Series, they don't have "Reservations"