|
The Warren Court refers to the Supreme Court of the United States between 1953 and 1969, when Earl Warren served as Chief Justice. Warren's predecessor Fred M. Vinson (b. 1890) had died on September 8, 1953 after 2,633 days in this position (see here). Warren led a liberal majority that used judicial power in dramatic fashion, to the consternation of conservative opponents. The Warren Court expanded civil rights, civil liberties, judicial power, and the federal power in dramatic ways.〔Sunstein, Cass ''Breyer's Judicial Pragmatism'' University of Chicago Law School. November, 2005. pg. 3-4. ("To many people, the idea of judicial deference to the elected branches lost much of its theoretical appeal in the 1950s and 1960s, when the Supreme Court, under the leadership of Chief Justice Earl Warren, was invalidating school segregation (Brown v. Bd. of Educ.), protecting freedom of speech (Brandenburg v. Ohio) striking down poll taxes (Harper v. Bd. of Elections), requiring a rule of one person, one vote (Reynolds v. Sims), and protecting accused criminals against police abuse (Miranda v. Arizona)."〕 The court was both applauded and criticized for bringing an end to racial segregation in the United States, incorporating the Bill of Rights (i.e. including it in the 14th Amendment Due Process clause), and ending officially sanctioned voluntary prayer in public schools. The period is recognized as a high point in judicial power that has receded ever since, but with a substantial continuing impact.〔Sunstein at 4 ("Is it possible to defend the Warren Court against the charge that its decisions were fatally undemocratic? The most elaborate effort came from John Hart Ely, the Warren Court's most celebrated expositor and defender, who famously argued for what he called a "representation-reinforcing" approach to judicial review. Like Thayer, Ely emphasized the central importance for democratic self-rule. But Ely famously insisted that if self-rule is really our lodestar, then unqualified judicial deference to legislatures is utterly senseless. Some rights, Ely argued, are indispensable to self-rule, and the Court legitimately protects those rights not in spite of democracy but in its name. The right to vote and the right to speak are the central examples. Courts promote democracy when they protect those rights.")〕〔Sunstein at 4 ("Ely went much further. He argued that some groups are at a systematic disadvantage in the democratic process, and that when courts protect 'discrete and insular minorities,' they are reinforcing democracy too.")〕 Prominent members of the Court during the Warren era besides the Chief Justice included Justices William J. Brennan, Jr., William O. Douglas, Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter, and John Marshall Harlan II.〔Schwartz, Bernard (1996) ''The Warren Court: A Retrospective'' Oxford University Press, pg. 5. ISBN 0-19-510439-0 ((preview ))〕 ==Warren's leadership== One of the primary factors in Warren's leadership was his political background, having served two and a half terms as Governor of California (1943–1953) and experience as the Republican candidate for vice president in 1948 (as running mate of Thomas E. Dewey). Warren brought a strong belief in the remedial power of law. According to historian Bernard Schwart, Warren's view of the law was pragmatic, seeing it as an instrument for obtaining equity and fairness. Schwartz argues that Warren's approach was most effective "when the political institutions had defaulted on their responsibility to try to address problems such as segregation and reapportionment and cases where the constitutional rights of defendants were abused."〔Schwartz (1996), pg. 6.〕 A related component of Warren's leadership was his focus on broad ethical principles, rather than narrower interpretative structures. Describing the latter as "conventional reasoning patterns," Professor Mark Tushnet suggests Warren often disregarded these in groundbreaking cases such as ''Brown v. Board of Education'', ''Reynolds v. Sims'' and ''Miranda v. Arizona'', where such traditional sources of precedent were stacked against him. Tushnet suggests Warren's principles "were philosophical, political, and intuitive, not legal in the conventional technical sense."〔Tushnet, Mark ''The Warren Court: in Historical and Political Perspective.'' (1996). pp 40-42.〕 Warren's leadership was characterized by remarkable consensus on the court, particularly in some of the most controversial cases. These included ''Brown v. Board of Education'', ''Gideon v. Wainwright'', and ''Cooper v. Aaron'', which were unanimously decided, as well as ''Abington School District v. Schempp'' and ''Engel v. Vitale'', each striking down religious recitations in schools with only one dissent. In an unusual action, the decision in ''Cooper'' was personally signed by all nine justices, with the three new members of the Court adding that they supported and would have joined the Court's decision in ''Brown v. Board''.〔(Introduction to Cooper v. Aaron )〕 Fallon says that, "Some thrilled to the approach of the Warren Court. Many law professors were perplexed, often sympathetic to the Court's results but skeptical of the soundness of its constitutional reasoning. And some of course were horrified."〔Richard H. Fallon, ''The Dynamic Constitution: An Introduction to American Constitutional Law'' (2005) p 23〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Warren Court」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|