Supreme Court Law Clerks' Recollections of Brown V. Board of Education

By Fassett, John David; Pollock, Earl E. et al. | St. John's Law Review, Summer 2004 | Go to article overview

Supreme Court Law Clerks' Recollections of Brown V. Board of Education


Fassett, John David, Pollock, Earl E., Prettyman, E. Barrett, Jr., Sander, Frank E. A., Barrett, John Q., St. John's Law Review


INTRODUCTION

On May 17, 1954, the Supreme Court of the United States decided in Brown υ. Board of Education that state and federal laws segregating public school children by race were unconstitutional.1 In Brown, which actually is the name of just one of the five lower court decisions on school segregation that the Supreme Court reviewed 50 years ago,2 Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote for a Supreme Court that was unanimous. The Court in Brown explicitly rejected its own almost 60-year-old precedent approving "separate but equal" public institutions and facilities for persons of differing races.3 Brown is generally regarded as among the most, if not as itself the most, significant Supreme Court decision in United States history.4

The justices of the Supreme Court recognized, during the two Terms in which they considered Brown and its companion school segregation cases, that the issues they raised were, in much of the United States, extremely controversial. The justices therefore agreed among themselves not to discuss their deliberations on these cases with others-not even their own law clerks. As a result, most of the thirty-six young lawyers who worked as law clerks at the Supreme Court during its 1952 and 1953 Terms were not privy to very much of the justices' thinking, work, discussions and draft opinions concerning school segregation-the legal and human processes that actually produced the Brown decision. But few "total secrecy" systems actually live up to their ideal, and this one had exceptions.

On April 28, 2004, the Robert H. Jackson Center in Jamestown, New York,5 assembled, for a group discussion, four former Supreme Court law clerks: John David Fassett, Earl E. Pollock, E. Barrett Prettyman, Jr. and Frank E.A. Sander. These attorneys had been, fifty years earlier and to varying degrees, "in the loop" of the justices' thinking about and deciding of Brown v. Board of Education. After leaving their Supreme Court clerkships (two of them just a month or two after the Brown decision), these men built distinguished careers in different cities and generally did not see each other or keep in touch. Although they were interviewed individually over the years about Brown by historians and others,6 these former law clerks did not, until this discussion, gather as a group and share, compare and assemble their recollections-against the backdrop of years of personal and societal experience and much historical scholarship and analysis-of Brown.

The result, on April 28th of this year and now in this publication,7 is an extraordinary and unprecedented discussion. The participants, who are the most knowledgeable "insiders" who still are in positions to guide us, explain how the justices of the Supreme Court came to decide Brown v. Board of Education as they did, individually and as a Court. This discussion is the best first-person account (to date) of the decision making process inside the Court. The discussion illuminates particularly well the process and chronology of developments by which Chief justice Warren wrote his Brown opinion and other justices decided not to write separately and also not to dissent, resulting in the unanimous Court of May 17, 1954.

BIOGRAPHICAL BACKGROUND ON THE PARTICIPANTS

John David Fassett, a graduate of the University of Rochester and Yale Law School, is the retired CEO and Chairman of the Board of United Illuminating Company in New Haven, Connecticut. he began to work as a law clerk to justice Stanley F. Reed in june 1953 and served through the Supreme Court's October Term 1953.

Earl E. Pollock, a graduate of the University of Minnesota and the Northwestern University School of Law, retired in 1992 from his partnership in the Chicago law firm of law firm of Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal. he became a law clerk to Chief justice Fred M. Vinson in summer 1953 and, following the Chief justice's sudden death that September, a law clerk to Chief justice Earl Warren for the Supreme Court's October Terms 1953 and 1954.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Supreme Court Law Clerks' Recollections of Brown V. Board of Education
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.