Comments on: “Ask the Author” with Jeff Rosen: Part 2 http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/ask-the-author-with-jeff-rosen-part-2/ The Supreme Court of the United States blog Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:56:34 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: B. Harris Mitchell http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/ask-the-author-with-jeff-rosen-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-10919 B. Harris Mitchell Thu, 01 Feb 2007 10:55:19 +0000 http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/ask-the-author-with-jeff-rosen-part-2/#comment-10919 As a Canadian lawyer--and therefore less informed than I might want to be -- I was fascinated by your recent PBS joint interview with the similarly adept ABC legal correspondent whose name just for now escapes me. Particularly striking was your deep sense of respect for the 19th century Justice Harlan -- the more so in the context of the moving description of a nervous Thurgood Marshall leaning on Harlan's Plessy dissent for support on the morning that he was to argue Brown. In the interview, you described Harlan as an anomaly on the Court at the time. I took the time to read the Plessy dissent following your interview. What was it that so equipped Harlan to be so --apparently --independent? Did his ideas, as expressed in Plessy represent a mainstream school of thought at the time? And, if it did, did that thought find voice elsewhere in contemperaneous American popular legal thought? And finally, if it did represent a mainstream of legal thought at the time of Plessy, did it continue to be one until Brown and afterwards? As a Canadian lawyer–and therefore less informed than I might want to be — I was fascinated by your recent PBS joint interview with the similarly adept ABC legal correspondent whose name just for now escapes me.

Particularly striking was your deep sense of respect for the 19th century Justice Harlan — the more so in the context of the moving description of a nervous Thurgood Marshall leaning on Harlan’s Plessy dissent for support on the morning that he was to argue Brown.

In the interview, you described Harlan as an anomaly on the Court at the time.

I took the time to read the Plessy dissent following your interview.

What was it that so equipped Harlan to be so –apparently –independent? Did his ideas, as expressed in Plessy represent a mainstream school of thought at the time? And, if it did, did that thought find voice elsewhere in contemperaneous American popular legal thought? And finally, if it did represent a mainstream of legal thought at the time of Plessy, did it continue to be one until Brown and afterwards?

]]> By: Dennis Bedard http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/ask-the-author-with-jeff-rosen-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-10918 Dennis Bedard Tue, 30 Jan 2007 01:33:49 +0000 http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/ask-the-author-with-jeff-rosen-part-2/#comment-10918 "Unlike former Chief Justice Rehnquist, the new chief seems to be much more willing to make public appearances and eager to educate the citizenry about the workings of the Court and of the judiciary;" Oh really? It is time to stop treating Rehnquist as if he were some anti social judicial scrooge sitting atop Mount Olympus with his nose in the air. First, Rehnquist wrote a book about the history of the Supreme Court for laymen. I read it. It was outstanding and informative; and I am a lawyer. He wrote another book about the fate of civil liberties during times of war. When Rehnquist died, there were tributes to his civility and sense of humor. I think Chief Justice Roberts will be one of this country's great justices; but to slight William Rehnquist because he did appear on TV as much is simply, well, an injustice. “Unlike former Chief Justice Rehnquist, the new chief seems to be much more willing to make public appearances and eager to educate the citizenry about the workings of the Court and of the judiciary;” Oh really? It is time to stop treating Rehnquist as if he were some anti social judicial scrooge sitting atop Mount Olympus with his nose in the air. First, Rehnquist wrote a book about the history of the Supreme Court for laymen. I read it. It was outstanding and informative; and I am a lawyer. He wrote another book about the fate of civil liberties during times of war. When Rehnquist died, there were tributes to his civility and sense of humor. I think Chief Justice Roberts will be one of this country’s great justices; but to slight William Rehnquist because he did appear on TV as much is simply, well, an injustice.

]]>