The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Today in Supreme Court History: June 10, 1916
6/10/1916: Justice Charles Evans Hughes resigns.

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
Multiple justices over the years considered political office while still on the Supreme Court. Some, back to the days of John Jay, resigned. Justice Byrnes resigned to serve in the Roosevelt Administration. Douglas had hopes he would be choice to run as vice president. Goldberg resigned to serve in President Johnson's Administration.
Since then, it was much more unlikely that justices would resign for such reasons. They overall tended to have much less (or none) political experience with a long serving court of appeals judge often put forth as the ideal candidate.
The results is a mixed bag. For instance, there was some value to have experienced politicians on the Supreme Court, which provided them with a view of the law that affected their judgments.
These late posts are getting annoying. This wasn't here this morning, now it shows up as having been posted earlier than articles which I had read. Two of them did that over the weekend.
“We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is,” said that Judge
vs
The “Higher Law” Background of American Constitutional Law
by Edward S. Corwin
THis illustrates why REASON doesn't get originalism: Why would we have a Constitution at all if it is only what the judge says it is and judges don't agree across time and space
But I despair of anyone over 21 seeing this that doesn't already see it
Right. That is why it is WRITTEN. But those words often leave some ambiguity, or play in the joints. And therein lies the opening for human nature to conceive those phrases in ways that suit their proclivities and interests. Hard to see a way around that.