Chief justice of the United States from 1888 to 1910
Melville Fuller
|
---|
|
|
|
In office
October 8, 1888 ? July 4, 1910
|
Nominated by
| Grover Cleveland
|
---|
Preceded by
| Morrison Waite
|
---|
Succeeded by
| Edward Douglass White
|
---|
|
|
Born
| Melville Weston Fuller
(
1833-02-11
)
February 11, 1833
Augusta, Maine
, U.S.
|
---|
Died
| July 4, 1910
(1910-07-04)
(aged 77)
Sorrento, Maine
, U.S.
|
---|
Resting place
| Graceland Cemetery
,
Chicago, Illinois
, U.S.
|
---|
Political party
| Democratic
|
---|
Spouses
| -
Calista Reynolds
(
m.
1858; died 1864)
-
Mary Coolbaugh
(
m.
1866; died 1904)
|
---|
Children
| 10
|
---|
Education
| Bowdoin College
(
AB
)
Harvard University
|
---|
Signature
| |
---|
|
Melville Weston Fuller
(February 11, 1833 ? July 4, 1910) was an American politician, attorney, and jurist who served as the eighth
chief justice of the United States
from 1888 until his death in 1910. Staunch conservatism marked his tenure on the
Supreme Court
, exhibited by his tendency to support unfettered
free enterprise
and to oppose broad federal power. He wrote major opinions on the
federal income tax
, the
Commerce Clause
, and
citizenship law
, and he took part in important decisions about
racial segregation
and the
liberty of contract
. Those rulings often faced criticism in the decades during and after Fuller's tenure, and many were later overruled or abrogated. The legal academy has generally viewed Fuller negatively, although a
revisionist
minority has taken a more favorable view of his jurisprudence.
Born in
Augusta, Maine
, Fuller established a legal practice in
Chicago
after graduating from
Bowdoin College
. A
Democrat
, he became involved in politics, campaigning for
Stephen A. Douglas
in the
1860 presidential election
. During the
Civil War
, he served a single term in the
Illinois House of Representatives
, where he opposed the policies of President
Abraham Lincoln
. Fuller became a prominent attorney in Chicago and was a delegate to several Democratic national conventions. He declined three separate appointments offered by President
Grover Cleveland
before accepting the nomination to succeed
Morrison Waite
as chief justice. Despite some objections to his political past, Fuller won
Senate
confirmation in 1888. He served as chief justice until his death in 1910, gaining a reputation for collegiality and able administration.
Fuller's jurisprudence was conservative, focusing strongly on states' rights, limited federal power, and economic liberty. His majority opinion in
Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.
(1895) ruled a federal income tax to be unconstitutional; the
Sixteenth Amendment
later superseded the decision. Fuller's opinion in
United States v. E. C. Knight Co.
(1895) narrowly interpreted Congress's authority under the Commerce Clause, limiting the reach of the
Sherman Act
and making government prosecution of
antitrust
cases more difficult. In
Lochner v. New York
(1905), Fuller agreed with the majority that the Constitution forbade states from enforcing wage-and-hour restrictions on businesses, contending that the
Due Process Clause
prevents government infringement on one's liberty to control one's property and business affairs. Fuller joined the majority in the now-reviled case of
Plessy v. Ferguson
(1896), in which the Court articulated the doctrine of
separate but equal
and upheld
Jim Crow laws
. He argued in the
Insular Cases
that residents of the
territories
are entitled to constitutional rights, but he dissented when, in
United States v. Wong Kim Ark
(1898), the majority ruled in favor of
birthright citizenship
.
Many of Fuller's decisions did not stand the test of time. His views on economic liberty were squarely rejected by the Court during the
New Deal
era, and the
Plessy
opinion was unanimously reversed in
Brown v. Board of Education
(1954). Fuller's historical reputation has been generally unfavorable, with many scholars arguing that he was overly deferential to corporations and the wealthy. While a resurgence of conservative legal thought has brought Fuller new defenders, an increase in racial awareness has also led to new scrutiny of his vote in
Plessy
. In 2021,
Kennebec County
commissioners voted unanimously to remove a statue of Fuller from public land with the aim of dissociating the county from racial segregation.
Early life
[
edit
]
Melville Weston Fuller was born on February 11, 1833, in
Augusta, Maine
, the second son of Frederick Augustus Fuller and his wife, Catherine Martin (
nee
Weston
).
[1]
: 903
His maternal grandfather,
Nathan Weston
, served on the
Supreme Court of Maine
, and his paternal grandfather was a
probate judge
.
[2]
: 4
His father practiced law in Augusta.
[3]
: 1471?1472
Three months after Fuller was born, his mother sued successfully for divorce on grounds of adultery; she and her children moved into Judge Weston's home.
[3]
: 1472
In 1849, the sixteen-year-old Fuller enrolled at
Bowdoin College
, from which he graduated
Phi Beta Kappa
in 1853.
[4]
: 120
He studied law in an uncle's office before spending six months at
Harvard Law School
.
[5]
: 339
While he did not receive a degree from Harvard, his attendance made him the first chief justice to have received formal academic legal training.
[5]
: 339
Fuller was admitted to the Maine bar in 1855 and clerked for another uncle in
Bangor
.
[6]
: 199
Later that year, he moved back to Augusta to become the editor of
The Age
, Maine's primary Democratic newspaper, in partnership with another uncle.
[7]
: 30
Fuller was elected to Augusta's common council in March 1856, serving as the council's president and as the
city solicitor
.
[3]
: 1472
Career
[
edit
]
In 1856, Fuller left Maine for
Chicago
,
Illinois
.
[7]
: 35
The city presented Fuller, a steadfast
Democrat
, with greater opportunities and a more favorable political climate.
[2]
: 5
In addition, a broken engagement likely encouraged him to leave his hometown.
[7]
: 32
Fuller accepted a position with a local law firm, and he also became involved in politics.
[2]
: 6
Although Fuller opposed slavery, he considered it an issue for the states rather than the federal government.
[7]
: 41
He supported the
Kansas?Nebraska Act
, which repealed the
Missouri Compromise
and allowed Kansas and Nebraska to determine the slavery issue themselves.
[7]
: 42
Fuller opposed both
abolitionists
and
secessionists
, arguing instead for compromise.
[2]
: 6
He campaigned for
Stephen A. Douglas
both in his successful 1858 Senate campaign against
Abraham Lincoln
and in his unsuccessful bid against Lincoln in the
1860 presidential election
.
[6]
: 199
When the
American Civil War
broke out in 1861, Fuller supported military action against the
Confederacy
.
[2]
: 6
However, he opposed the
Lincoln Administration
's handling of the war, and he decried many of Lincoln's actions as unconstitutional.
[6]
: 199
Fuller was elected as a Democratic delegate to the failed 1862 Illinois constitutional convention.
[2]
: 7
He helped develop a
gerrymandered
system for congressional apportionment, and he joined his fellow Democrats in supporting provisions that prohibited African-Americans from voting or settling in the state.
[2]
: 7
He also advocated for court reform and for banning banks from printing of paper money.
[2]
: 7
Although the convention adopted many of his proposals, voters rejected the proposed constitution in June 1862.
[2]
: 7
In November 1862, Fuller was narrowly elected to a seat in the
Illinois House of Representatives
as a Democrat.
[2]
: 8
The majority-Democrat legislature clashed with Republican governor
Richard Yates
and opposed the wartime policies of President Lincoln.
[2]
: 8
Fuller spoke in opposition to the
Emancipation Proclamation
, arguing that it violated state sovereignty.
[7]
: 55?56
He supported the
Corwin Amendment
, which would have prevented the federal government from outlawing slavery.
[2]
: 8
Fuller opposed Lincoln's decision to suspend the writ of
habeas corpus
, believing it violated civil liberties.
[2]
: 8
Yates ultimately adjourned the legislature over the vehement objections of Fuller and the Democrats.
[7]
: 56
The frustrated Fuller never sought legislative office again, although he continued taking part in Democratic party politics.
[2]
: 9
Fuller maintained a successful legal practice, arguing on behalf of many corporations and businessmen.
[2]
: 11
He represented the city of Chicago in a land dispute with the
Illinois Central Railroad
.
[2]
: 11
In 1869, he took on what became his most significant case: defending Chicago clergyman
Charles E. Cheney
, whom the
Episcopal Church
was attempting to remove because he disagreed with church teaching on
baptismal regeneration
.
[7]
: 69?70
Believing the
ecclesiastical court
to be biased against Cheney, Fuller filed suit in
Chicago Superior Court
, arguing that Cheney possessed a property right in his position.
[2]
: 12
The Superior Court agreed and entered an injunction against the ecclesiastical court's proceedings.
[2]
: 12
On appeal, the
Supreme Court of Illinois
reversed the injunction, holding that the civil courts could not review church disciplinary proceedings.
[7]
: 70
The ecclesiastical court found Cheney guilty, but he refused to leave his pulpit.
[2]
: 12
The matter returned to the courts, where Fuller argued that only the local congregation had the right to remove Cheney.
[2]
: 12
The Supreme Court of Illinois ultimately agreed, holding that the congregation's property was not under the purview of Episcopal Church leadership.
[3]
: 1476
Fuller's defense of Cheney garnered him national prominence.
[2]
: 13
Beginning in 1871, Fuller also litigated before the
Supreme Court of the United States
, arguing numerous cases.
[2]
: 13
His legal practice involved many areas of law, and he became one of Chicago's most highly paid lawyers.
[2]
: 13?14
He remained involved in the politics of the Democratic Party, serving as a delegate to the party convention in 1872, 1876, and 1880.
[2]
: 9
Fuller supported a
strict construction
of the
U.S. Constitution
.
[2]
: 14?15
He firmly opposed the printing of paper money,
[7]
: 77
and he spoke out against the Supreme Court's 1884 decision in
Juilliard v. Greenman
upholding Congress's power to issue it.
[2]
: 15
He was a supporter of
states' rights
and generally advocated for
limited government
.
[2]
: 16
Fuller strongly supported President
Grover Cleveland
, a fellow Democrat, who agreed with many of his views.
[2]
: 18
Cleveland successively attempted to appoint Fuller to chair the
United States Civil Service Commission
, to serve as
Solicitor General
, and to be a United States Pacific Railway Commissioner, but Fuller declined each nomination.
[4]
: 122
Nomination to Supreme Court
[
edit
]
On March 23, 1888, Chief Justice
Morrison Waite
died, creating a Supreme Court vacancy for President Cleveland to fill.
[2]
: 16
The
Senate
was narrowly under Republican control, so it was necessary for Cleveland to nominate someone who could obtain bipartisan support.
[2]
: 16
Cleveland also sought to appoint a candidate who was sixty years of age or younger, since an older nominee would likely be unable to serve for very long.
[7]
: 104?105
He considered Vermont native
Edward J. Phelps
, the ambassador to the United Kingdom, but the politically influential Irish-American community, which viewed him as an
Anglophile
, opposed him.
[8]
: 885?886
Furthermore, the sixty-six-year-old Phelps was thought to be too old for the job, and the Supreme Court already had one justice from New England.
[7]
: 106
Senator
George Gray
was considered, but appointing him would create a vacancy in the closely divided Senate.
[2]
: 17
Cleveland eventually decided that he wanted to appoint someone from Illinois, both for political reasons and because the court had no justices from the
Seventh Circuit
, which included Illinois.
[2]
: 17
Fuller, who had become a confidant of Cleveland, encouraged the President to appoint
John Scholfield
, who served on the Illinois Supreme Court.
[7]
: 106?107
Cleveland offered the position to Scholfield, but he declined, apparently because his wife was too rustic for urban life in Washington, D.C.
[7]
: 107
Fuller was considered because of the efforts of his friends, many of whom had written letters to Cleveland in support of him.
[7]
: 107?110
At fifty-five years old, Fuller was young enough for the position, and Cleveland approved of his reputation and political views.
[7]
: 108, 111
In addition, Illinois Republican senator
Shelby Cullom
expressed support, convincing Cleveland that Fuller would likely receive bipartisan support in the Senate.
[7]
: 112
Cleveland thus offered Fuller the nomination, which he accepted reluctantly.
[9]
: 113?114
Fuller was formally nominated on April 30.
[2]
: 18
Public reaction to Fuller's nomination was mixed: Some newspapers lauded his character and professional career, while others criticized his comparative obscurity and his lack of experience in the federal government.
[2]
: 19?20
The nomination was referred to the
Senate Judiciary Committee
, chaired by Vermont Republican
George F. Edmunds
.
[7]
: 115
Edmunds was displeased that his friend Phelps had not been appointed, so he delayed committee action and endeavored to sink Fuller's nomination.
[2]
: 20
The Republicans seized upon Fuller's time in the Illinois Legislature, when he had opposed many of Lincoln's wartime policies.
[7]
: 116
They portrayed him as a
Copperhead
? an anti-war Northern Democrat ? and published a tract claiming that "[t]he records of the Illinois legislature of 1863 are black with Mr. Fuller's unworthy and unpatriotic conduct".
[2]
: 20
Some Illinois Republicans, including Lincoln's son
Robert
, came to Fuller's defense, arguing that his actions were imprudent but not an indicator of disloyalty.
[2]
: 20
[7]
: 116?117
Fuller's detractors claimed he would reverse the Supreme Court's ruling in the recent legal-tender case of
Juilliard
; his defenders replied he would be faithful to precedent.
[2]
: 20?21
Vague allegations of professional improprieties were levied, but an investigation failed to substantiate them.
[2]
: 21?22
The Judiciary Committee took no action on the nomination, and many believed that Edmunds was attempting to hold it off until after the
1888 presidential election
.
[2]
: 22
Cullom demanded an immediate vote, fearing that delay on Fuller's nomination could harm Republicans' prospects of
winning Illinois
.
[2]
: 22
The committee reported the nomination without recommendation on July 2, 1888.
[10]
: 33
The full Senate took up Fuller's nomination on July 20.
[2]
: 22
Several prominent Republican senators, including
William M. Evarts
of New York,
William Morris Stewart
of Nevada, and Edmunds, spoke against the nomination, arguing that Fuller was a disloyal Copperhead who would misinterpret the
Reconstruction Amendments
and roll back the progress made by the Civil War.
[2]
: 22
Illinois's two Republican senators, Cullom and
Charles B. Farwell
defended Fuller's actions and character.
[2]
: 22
Cullom read an anti-Lincoln speech that Phelps, Edmunds's choice for the position, had given.
[7]
: 120
He accused Edmunds of hypocrisy and insincerity, saying he was simply resentful that Phelps had not been chosen.
[7]
: 120
The Democratic senators did not participate in the debate, aiming to let the Republicans squabble among themselves.
[7]
: 120?121
When the matter came to a vote, Fuller was confirmed 41 to 20, with 15 absences.
[11]
Ten Republicans, including
Republican National Committee
chair
Matthew Quay
and two senators from Fuller's home state of Maine, joined the Democrats in supporting Fuller's nomination.
[2]
: 23
Fuller took the judicial oath on October 8, 1888, formally becoming Chief Justice of the United States.
[2]
: 24
[12]
Chief justice
[
edit
]
Fuller served twenty-two years as chief justice, remaining in the center chair until his death in 1910.
[13]
Although he lacked legal genius, his potent administrative skills made him a capable manager of the court's business.
[4]
: 123
[14]
: 372
Hoping to increase the Court's collegiality, Fuller introduced the practice of the justices' shaking hands before their private conferences.
[15]
: 223
He successfully maintained more-or-less cordial relationships among the justices, many of whom had large egos and difficult tempers.
[16]
: 61?63
His collegiality notwithstanding, Fuller presided over a divided court: the justices split 5?4 sixty-four times during his tenure, more often than in subsequent years.
[17]
: 43
Fuller himself, however, wrote few dissents, disagreeing with the majority in only 2.3 percent of cases.
[16]
: 63
Fuller was the first chief justice to lobby Congress directly in support of legislation, successfully urging the adoption of the
Circuit Courts of Appeals Act of 1891
.
[4]
: 134
The act established intermediate
appellate courts
, which reduced the Supreme Court's substantial backlog and allowed it to decide cases in a timely manner.
[4]
: 134?135
As chief justice, Fuller was generally responsible for assigning the authorship of the court's majority opinions.
[18]
: 1499?1500
He tended to use this power modestly,
[17]
: 43
often assigning major cases to other justices while retaining duller ones for himself.
[3]
: 1480
According to legal historian
Walter F. Pratt
, Fuller's writing style was "nondescript";
[19]
: 219
his opinions were lengthy and contained numerous quotations.
[16]
: 61
Justice
Felix Frankfurter
opined that Fuller was "not an opinion writer whom you read for literary enjoyment",
[8]
: 889
while the scholar
G. Edward White
characterized his style as "diffident and not altogether successful".
[18]
: 1497?1498
In 1893, Cleveland offered to appoint Fuller to be
secretary of state
.
[15]
: 224
He declined, saying he enjoyed his work as chief justice and contending that accepting a political appointment would harm the Supreme Court's reputation for impartiality.
[17]
: 45
Remaining on the Court, he accepted a seat on an 1897 commission to arbitrate the
Venezuelan boundary dispute
, and he served ten years on the
Permanent Court of Arbitration
.
[15]
: 224
Fuller's health declined after 1900,
[6]
: 201
and scholar
David Garrow
suggests that his "growing enfeeblement" inhibited his work.
[20]
: 1012
In what biographer Willard King calls "[p]erhaps the worst year in the history of the Court" ? the term from October 1909 to May 1910 ? two justices died and one became fully incapacitated; Fuller's weakened state compounded the problem.
[7]
: 309
Fuller died that July.
[7]
: 309
President
William Howard Taft
nominated Associate Justice
Edward Douglass White
to replace him.
[16]
: 67?68
Jurisprudence
[
edit
]
Fuller's jurisprudence is generally identified as conservative.
[2]
: 1?2
[17]
: 41
He favored states' rights over federal power, attempting to prevent the national government from asserting broad control over economic matters.
[21]
: 42
Yet he was also skeptical of the states' powers: he agreed with the concept of
substantive due process
and used it to strike down state laws that, in his view, unduly encroached upon the free market.
[3]
: 1481?1482
[21]
: 42?43
Fuller took no interest in preventing racial inequality, although his views on other civil rights issues were less definitive.
[14]
: 372
Much of Fuller's jurisprudence has not stood the test of time: many of his decisions have been reversed by Congress or overruled by later Supreme Court majorities.
[17]
: 41
Summarizing Fuller's views of the law, scholar Irving Schiffman wrote in 1969 that "he was a conservative,
laissez-faire
Justice, less reactionary than some of his brethren, more compassionate than others, but a spokesman for what now seems a far-off and bygone judicial age".
[3]
: 1481
Federal power
[
edit
]
Income tax
[
edit
]
According to legal scholar Bernard Schwartz, Fuller's most noteworthy decision was his 1895 opinion in
Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.
[22]
: 184
In 1894, Congress passed the
Wilson?Gorman Tariff Act
, which contained a
rider
that levied a two-percent tax on incomes exceeding $4,000 a year.
[23]
: 285
Since it imposed the nation's first peacetime income tax, this provision was deeply controversial, provoking acrimonious debate along geographic, societal, and political lines.
[2]
: 117?118
Its challengers took the tax to court, where they argued that it was a
direct tax
that had not been apportioned evenly among the states, in violation of
a provision of the Constitution
.
[3]
: 1487
(In practice, apportioning income tax by state would be impossible, so a ruling on this basis would doom federal income taxes.
[2]
: 118
) When the matter reached the Supreme Court, it unexpectedly agreed with the challengers and, by a 5?4 vote, struck down the income tax.
[24]
: 805
The majority opinion, written by Fuller, held that the
Framers
intended the term "direct tax" to include property and that income was itself a form of property.
[25]
: 200?203
Fuller thus ruled the entire act to be unconstitutional.
[26]
: 68
The decision provoked withering criticism from each of the four dissenters, including a paroxysm of ire by Justice
John Marshall Harlan
that one scholar characterized as "one of the most spectacular displays ever staged by a member of the Court".
[3]
: 1487
[26]
: 68?69
Harlan wrote that the decision "strikes at the very foundation of national authority", while Justice
Henry Billings Brown
opined it "approaches the proportion of a national calamity".
[26]
: 68?69
Each dissenter decried the majority's perceived infidelity to
precedent
.
[27]
: 162, 173
The
Pollock
decision was distinctly unpopular.
[28]
: 173
Much of the public questioned whether Fuller's constitutional analysis was truly in good faith: many felt that the Court was more committed to protecting the wealthy than to following any particular legal philosophy.
[5]
: 346
Former Oregon governor
Sylvester Pennoyer
even called for the
impeachment
of the justices in the majority.
[24]
: 806
While the public outcry soon waned, support for a federal income tax grew substantially in subsequent years.
[29]
: 64
The
Sixteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
, ratified in 1913, abrogated
Pollock
by allowing Congress to levy income taxes without apportionment;
[30]
: 1723
it marked only the third time in American history that a
Supreme Court decision was reversed via constitutional amendment
.
[29]
: 59
However, the Supreme Court has never formally overruled
Pollock's
reasoning; to the contrary, Chief Justice
John Roberts
cited it in the 2012
Affordable Care Act
case
National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius
.
[24]
: 813
Law professor Erik M. Jensen noted in 2014 that most legal academics agree that
Pollock
was "obviously dead wrong";
[24]
: 807
scholar
Calvin H. Johnson
called the decision "a terrible example of judicial bad behavior" that should be "reverse[d] in full".
[30]
: 1734
Jensen takes a minority position, agreeing with
Pollock
[24]
: 807
and extending it to argue for the unconstitutionality of
flat taxes
[31]
: 2334, 2407?2414
and
wealth taxes
.
[32]
In any event, Fuller's
Pollock
opinion remains relevant in contemporary public policy.
[33]
: 8?9
Interstate commerce
[
edit
]
Fuller was suspicious of attempts to assert broad federal power over interstate commerce.
[34]
: 186
Questions about the scope of Congress's
Commerce Clause
authority commonly arose in the context of the
Sherman Act
, a major 1890 federal
antitrust law
.
[2]
: 128?129
In the first such case,
United States v. E. C. Knight Co.
(1895), Fuller led the Court in limiting the federal government's powers.
[35]
: 154?155
The
Department of Justice
had filed suit under the Sherman Act against the
American Sugar Refining Company
, arguing that it was a monopoly because it controlled over ninety percent of the American sugar refining market.
[36]
: 111
Writing for an eight-justice majority, Fuller concluded Congress could not proscribe such monopolies because they only implicated manufacturing and thus did not fall under the Commerce Clause.
[2]
: 129
Stating that "[c]ommerce succeeds to manufacture and is not a part of it," he maintained that the sugar-refining trust had no direct impact on interstate commerce.
[37]
: 373
Fuller feared that a broader interpretation of the Commerce Clause would impinge upon states' rights, and he thus held the Sugar Trust could only be broken up by the states in which it operated.
[2]
: 130
The case displays Fuller's tendency to support a limited federal government.
[2]
: 130
The legal academy generally views
Knight
as an unduly restrictive interpretation of the Commerce Clause,
[37]
: 366?367
although legal scholar
Richard Epstein
has argued that it aligns with founding-era precedents.
[38]
: 1399?1400
The Court's expansive Commerce Clause decisions during the
New Deal
period essentially abrogated
Knight
.
[2]
: 134
Fuller participated in several other major antitrust cases.
[2]
: 129
In the 1904 case of
Northern Securities Co. v. United States
, a majority broke up the
Northern Securities Company
, a railroad
holding company
, believing it to be a monopoly.
[2]
: 132
Fuller dissented, joining opinions written by Justices Edward Douglass White and
Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
[39]
: 336, 341
The dissenters argued that simply holding stock in a company did not count as interstate commerce, and so they would have held that the Sherman Act did not apply to holding companies.
[2]
: 132?133
The justices were unanimous in
Swift & Co. v. United States
(1905), which gave the Court's blessing to antitrust enforcement against meat-packing companies.
[2]
: 133?134
Although meat-packing did not directly involve interstate commerce, the Court held that the Commerce Clause still applied because the meat products would eventually be sold across state lines.
[2]
: 133?134
Citing
Swift
and other cases, legal historian
James W. Ely
has argued that Fuller was not opposed to federal antitrust laws per se, but only to expansive readings of the Commerce Clause.
[2]
: 134
In another antitrust case,
Loewe v. Lawlor
(1908), Fuller wrote for a unanimous Court that labor unions were subject to the Sherman Act.
[34]
: 187
The ruling was commonly thought to evince antipathy toward organized labor.
[26]
: 218?219
Its broad interpretation of the antitrust laws appeared difficult to reconcile with
Knight
,
[40]
: 43
and law professor
David P. Currie
wrote that the apparent contradiction "suggests that [Fuller] may not have been guided exclusively by neutral legal principles".
[41]
: 901
Fuller's attempts to limit the national government's power did not always meet with the support of his fellow justices.
[34]
: 186
He dissented from the Court's 1903 decision in
Champion v. Ames
, in which five justices upheld a federal ban on transporting lottery tickets across state lines.
[42]
: 75?76
In his opinion, Fuller demurred that the majority's reasoning gave Congress "the absolute and exclusive power to prohibit the transportation of anything or anybody from one state to another.
[26]
: 158
He feared that the law violated the principles of federalism and states' rights protected by the
Tenth Amendment
.
[43]
: 47
The ruling in
Ames
was among the first to grant the federal government a de facto
police power
to protect the welfare of the public.
[43]
: 45
It proved a historically significant step toward expanding congressional authority, and legal scholar John Semonche wrote that by resisting it, Fuller "sought to put his finger in the dike".
[26]
: 158
The chief justice also dissented in
McCray v. United States
, a 1904 case that approved the use of the federal
taxing power
for regulatory purposes.
[42]
: 73
McCray
effectively allowed Congress to regulate intrastate commercial activity by simply levying taxes on it; the decision curtailed Fuller's opinion in
Knight
and showed his support for
federalism
could not always garner the support of a majority of the Court.
[2]
: 140?141
Substantive due process
[
edit
]
Fuller's tenure on the Supreme Court, in the words of Schiffman, "witnessed the final passing of judicial tolerance of legislative experimentation and the final acceptance of the doctrine of substantive due process".
[3]
: 1481
Soon after his arrival on the Court, the chief justice began joining with his colleagues to gradually erode the states' powers to regulate economic activity.
[3]
: 1481
In
Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. v. Minnesota
(1890), for instance, Fuller and five other justices voted to strike down the railroad rates set by a Minnesota commission.
[36]
: 108
The ruling held that the
Due Process Clause
contained a substantive component that subjected the states' regulatory decisions to judicial review.
[2]
: 85
With Fuller's support, the Court in
Allgeyer v. Louisiana
(1897) unanimously expanded that component, concluding the Due Process Clause protected a
right to enter into contracts
.
[3]
: 1482
[36]
: 115
Allgeyer
was the first case in the Court's history in which a state law was struck down on freedom-of-contract grounds,
[3]
: 1482
and its implications stretched well beyond the insurance context in which it arose.
[2]
: 96
According to Semonche, the decision heralded a "new and sweeping" interpretation of the Due Process Clause "that would haunt the Justices and American society for the next four decades".
[26]
: 91
The era of substantive due process reached its zenith in the 1905 case of
Lochner v. New York
.
[44]
: 181
Lochner
involved a
New York
law that capped hours for bakery workers at sixty hours a week.
[45]
: 520
In a decision widely viewed to be among the Supreme Court's worst,
[45]
: 516
a five-justice majority held the law to be unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause.
[14]
: 588?589
The opinion, written by Justice
Rufus W. Peckham
and joined by Fuller, maintained that the liberty protected by that clause included a right to enter labor contracts without being subject to unreasonable governmental regulation.
[46]
: 1496?1497
Peckham rejected the state's argument that the law was intended to protect workers' health, citing the "common understanding" that baking was not unhealthy.
[14]
: 590
He maintained that bakers could protect their own health, arguing that the law was in fact a labor regulation in disguise.
[2]
: 98
In a now-famous dissent, Justice Holmes accused the majority of substituting its own economic opinions for the requirements of the Constitution.
[46]
: 1500
Most scholars agree that the majority in
Lochner
engaged in
judicial activism
, substituting its own views for those of the democratically elected branches of government.
[47]
: 874
The Fuller Court was not exclusively hostile to labor regulation: in
Muller v. Oregon
(1908), for example, it unanimously upheld an
Oregon
law capping women's working hours at ten hours a day.
[2]
: 100?101
Nonetheless, Fuller's decision to join the majority in the
Lochner
case, which the Court ultimately abandoned in
West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish
(1937),
[45]
: 541
is a major reason for the low estimation in which history has held him.
[48]
: 109
Judicial authority
[
edit
]
Because of his support for property rights, Fuller favored a broad conception of the judicial role, endorsing doctrinal developments that expanded the federal courts' power to issue
injunctions
.
[34]
: 185
In the case of
In re Debs
(1895), for instance, Fuller and his fellow justices bolstered the judiciary's authority to enjoin deprivations of
public rights
.
[36]
: 112
The case stemmed from an 1894
strike
by the
American Railway Union
against the
Pullman Company
.
[49]
: 260
A Chicago federal court issued an injunction against the union's leaders, ordering them to stop facilitating the strike.
[2]
: 135
[49]
: 260?261
Union president
Eugene V. Debs
and other union officials defied the order, and the court sentenced them to prison for
contempt
.
[49]
: 261
Debs challenged the conviction before the Supreme Court, but it unanimously denied him relief.
[50]
: 102
Broadly construing the federal government's powers, the Court held the judicial branch had the power to enjoin anything that obstructed interstate commerce.
[49]
: 261
The
Debs
case opened the door to injunctions in labor cases,
[51]
: 49?50
and it substantially expanded the courts'
equitable authority
.
[36]
: 112
The case of
Ex parte Young
(1908) similarly demonstrated Fuller's support for extending the courts' ability to issue injunctions.
[34]
: 185
The case involved the
Eleventh Amendment
, which proscribes the federal courts from hearing lawsuits brought against states.
[14]
: 1110
In
Young
, Fuller and seven other justices endorsed a way to sidestep that prohibition: suing an
official
of the state instead of the state itself.
[36]
: 128
The landmark
[52]
: 412
decision aided the Fuller Court in its quest to strike down state economic regulations, but its reasoning has permitted the federal judiciary to hear challenges to state laws in a wide variety of other contexts.
[53]
: 164
Although some modern scholars have criticized the ruling in
Young
, attorney Rochelle Bobroff noted in 2009 that it "remains one of the most powerful tools to compel states to comply with federal law".
[54]
: 819?820
Ely characterized the decision as "a milestone in the Fuller Court's transformation of federal judicial power",
[2]
: 184
and legal historian
Edward A. Purcell Jr.
said that it "helped create a newly powerful and activist federal judiciary that emerged at the turn of the twentieth century and continued to operate into the twenty-first".
[55]
: 932
Fuller wrote the majority opinion in
United States v. Shipp
(1909),
[26]
: 232
a singular decision in which the justices insisted that the authority of the Court be heeded.
[56]
: 348
A Tennessee court sentenced
Ed Johnson
, an African-American man, to death for rape.
[26]
: 231
His attorneys petitioned the Supreme Court for relief, arguing that racial bias had tainted the jury pool and that the threat of mob violence made the
venue
unfair.
[26]
: 231
The Court agreed to issue a
stay of execution
, which prevented the death sentence from being carried out pending a ruling on Johnson's appeal.
[56]
: 193?196
But John Shipp, the sheriff, removed almost all the guards from Johnson's prison, allowing a
lynch mob
to enter the jail and kill Johnson.
[26]
: 231
Shipp, his deputies, and members of the mob were charged with contempt of court on the basis that they had spurned the Court's stay order.
[2]
: 185
In the only criminal trial conducted in the Supreme Court's history,
[57]
: 128
the justices sat as a jury to determine the defendants' guilt.
[58]
: 422?423
Fuller, writing for a five-justice majority, found Shipp and several other defendants guilty of contempt.
[56]
: 333?334
In his opinion, the chief justice wrote Shipp had "not only made the work of the mob easy, but in effect aided and abetted it", acting "in utter disregard of this court's mandate and in defiance of this court's orders".
[56]
: 332?334
While the decision did not signal a sudden benevolence toward civil rights claims,
[57]
: 128
Mark Curriden and Leroy Phillips write it constituted "the only proactive step the U.S. Supreme Court has ever taken to combat mob rule directly and demand that the public respect its authority and the authority of the rule of law".
[56]
: 348
Race
[
edit
]
In the words of legal scholar
John V. Orth
, Fuller "preside[d] comfortably over a Court that turned a blind eye to racial injustice".
[14]
: 372
In the infamous
[59]
: 15
case of
Plessy v. Ferguson
(1896), he joined six of his colleagues in upholding a
Louisiana
law that required the
racial segregation
of railroad passengers.
[60]
: 321, 333
[61]
: 35
The majority opinion, penned by Justice Brown, rejected the claim that the law violated the
Equal Protection Clause
, maintaining instead that "
separate but equal
" distinctions were constitutional.
[60]
: 321
[62]
: 397
Citing "the nature of things", the majority asserted that equal protection did not require the "commingling" of blacks and whites.
[62]
: 398
Brown also argued that the Louisiana law did not suggest that blacks were inferior,
[60]
: 321
stating that it was based on "the established usages, customs and traditions of the people".
[63]
: 127?128
Justice Harlan dissented, using in the process the now-famous phrase "Our Constitution is color-blind."
[64]
: 10
The
Plessy
decision placed the Court's imprimatur on
Jim Crow laws
.
[65]
: 24
It instituted a half-century of what
Louis H. Pollak
called "humiliation-by-law",
[61]
: 35
which continued until the Court reversed course in
Brown v. Board of Education
(1954).
[64]
: 9?10
Fuller's decision to join the majority in
Plessy
has contributed significantly to his poor historical reputation.
[48]
: 109
The Fuller Court was no more liberal in other cases involving race: to the contrary, it curtailed even the limited progress toward equality made under Fuller's predecessors.
[66]
: 198?200
For instance, Fuller joined the unanimous majority in
Williams v. Mississippi
(1898), which rejected a challenge to
poll taxes
and
literacy tests
that in effect disenfranchised Mississippi's African-American population.
[36]
: 117
Even though a lower court had admitted the arrangement was intended "to obstruct the exercise of suffrage by the negro race", the Supreme Court refused to strike it down, reasoning that the provisions passed constitutional muster because they did not explicitly single out African-Americans.
[67]
: 96
The
Williams
majority distanced itself from the Court's previous ruling in
Yick Wo v. Hopkins
(1886), in which the
Waite Court
had struck down a law that, while neutral on its face, discriminated against a racial minority.
[66]
: 199
[67]
: 96?97
In a 2021 book,
Vernon Burton
and Armand Derfner characterized
Williams
as one "of the most disgraceful decisions in Supreme Court history", writing it "abandoned
Yick Wo
" and "erased the
Fifteenth Amendment
".
[67]
: 96?97
Fuller was among the seven justices who joined the majority opinion in
Berea College v. Kentucky
(1908),
[36]
: 129
a segregation case in which the Court refused to apply its freedom-of-contract principles in defense of racial equality.
[67]
: 104?106
The decision involved the Commonwealth of Kentucky's
Day Law
, which required private colleges to segregate their students.
[60]
: 335, 337
In its challenge to the statute,
Berea College
cited
Lochner
and other similar cases to argue the law was "an arbitrary interference with the rights of the people in the conduct of their private business and in the pursuit of their ordinary occupations".
[68]
: 731
[69]
: 755
Such reasoning seemed likely to persuade the Court, given its history of striking down laws that interfered with the business decisions of private entities.
[70]
: 447?448
But the justices were not convinced, upholding the law on the basis that, because corporations had no right to be granted a
charter
, states could impose otherwise unconstitutional restrictions on them.
[60]
: 337
Again dissenting, Justice Harlan criticized the law's infringement on the economic-freedom principles that the Court had articulated in other cases.
[68]
: 732
The majority's reasoning stood in conspicuous conflict with its support for corporate rights in other contexts
[2]
: 159
and
Donald Lively
wrote the ruling "illuminated the evolving duality of Fourteenth Amendment standards".
[71]
: 94
Citizenship, immigration, and the territories
[
edit
]
As a result of the
Spanish?American War
, the United States took control of
Puerto Rico
and the
Philippines
, raising knotty legal issues about their status under the Constitution.
[72]
: 430
The Supreme Court addressed these disputes in a series of rulings in the so-called
Insular Cases
.
[73]
: 489
In
Downes v. Bidwell
(1901), a fractured Court ruled 5?4 that the people living in the territories were not entitled to the rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
[74]
: 225?229
Fuller, writing for the four dissenters, argued that Congress had no power to hold the territories "like a disembodied shade" free from all constitutional limits.
[75]
: 792
He contended that the Constitution could not tolerate unrestricted congressional power over the territories, writing that it rejected that proposition in a way "too plain and unambiguous to permit its meaning to be thus influenced".
[76]
: 72
Fuller's opinion was in line both with his strict-constructionist views and his party's opposition to American imperialism.
[2]
: 176
While the Court has never adopted Fuller's position,
[74]
: 182
scholars such as
Juan R. Torruella
have argued that it correctly interpreted the Constitution.
[76]
: 73, 94?95
Fuller joined the majority in another of the Insular Cases:
DeLima v. Bidwell
(1901).
[3]
: 1490
The Court held ? again by a 5?4 vote ? that Puerto Rico did not constitute a foreign country for purposes of federal tariff law.
[75]
: 793?794
Put together,
Downes
and
DeLima
meant that the territories were neither domestic nor foreign under American law.
[75]
: 795
The Court was similarly unclear in
Gonzales v. Williams
(1904).
[77]
: 7
In a unanimous opinion by Fuller, the Justices ruled that Puerto Ricans were not aliens under federal law, but they refused to decide whether the people of Puerto Rico were American citizens.
[77]
: 23
In
Late Corporation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. United States
(1890), a case involving Congress's power over the
Utah Territory
, a six-justice majority upheld an anti-
polygamy
law that dissolved the charter of
the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
and seized its property.
[36]
: 109
[78]
: 31
Fuller penned a dissent, in which he maintained that Congress had no authority to order the confiscation of property.
[78]
: 34?35
Rejecting the majority's broader interpretation of federal power, Fuller expressed fear that the decision would afford Congress "absolute power" over the denizens of the territories.
[2]
: 178
[78]
: 35
Ultimately, Fuller's position was vindicated: Congress later passed a joint resolution restoring the church's property.
[7]
: 148
Fuller was rarely amenable to the claims of
Chinese immigrants
.
[79]
: 312
In the 1889
Chinese Exclusion Case
, for instance, he joined Justice
Stephen Field
's opinion
[79]
: 312
that unanimously rejected a challenge to the
Chinese Exclusion Act
.
[80]
: 31
Although treaties with China allowed for immigration, the Court held that Congress was not bound by them, ruling that the Act abrogated all treaty obligations to the contrary.
[80]
: 31
In
Fong Yue Ting v. United States
(1893), a majority held Congress had total authority over aliens and that they could be expelled on any basis.
[73]
: 487?488
Three justices, including Fuller, dissented, arguing that aliens were at least entitled to some Constitutional protections.
[81]
: 14
According to Ely, Fuller's dissent shows that he "occasionally demonstrated concern over civil liberties".
[34]
: 187
But he also dissented in
United States v. Wong Kim Ark
(1898),
[79]
: 313
in which the Court ruled that the
Fourteenth Amendment
ensured
birthright citizenship
? automatic citizenship for all children born on American soil.
[82]
: 1248?1249
Writing for himself and Justice Harlan, Fuller claimed Chinese aliens were not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States because they retained allegiance to the Chinese emperor.
[4]
: 146
Based on that fact, he concluded their children had no claim to American citizenship.
[4]
: 146
The
Wong Kim Ark
decision has taken on additional significance as prominent Republican politicians, including
Donald Trump
, have called for the reversal of birthright citizenship.
[82]
: 1187?1188
Personal life
[
edit
]
Fuller was married twice, first to Calista Reynolds, whom he wed in 1858.
[2]
: 10
They had two children before she died of
tuberculosis
in 1864.
[6]
: 199
Fuller remarried in 1866, wedding Mary Ellen Coolbaugh, the daughter of
William F. Coolbaugh
.
[3]
: 1475
The couple had an additional eight children,
[1]
: 904
and they remained married until her death in 1904.
[7]
: 299
A member of the
Chicago Literary Club
, Fuller was interested in poetry and other forms of literature; his personal library held over six thousand books.
[6]
: 199?200
During his confirmation, Fuller's
mustache
produced what law professor Todd Peppers called "a curious national anxiety".
[83]
: 147
No Chief Justice had ever before had a mustache, and numerous newspapers debated the propriety of Fuller's facial hair.
[83]
: 142
The
New York Sun
praised it as "uncommonly luxuriant and beautiful", while the
Jackson Standard
quipped that "Fuller's mustache is a good quality for a Democratic politician?it shuts his mouth."
[83]
: 141?143
After Fuller's confirmation, the
Sun
switched course: it denounced his "deplorable moustaches", speculating they would distract attorneys and "detract from the dignity" of the Court.
[83]
: 143?144
The column triggered further debate in the nation's newspapers, with much of the press coming to Fuller's defense.
[83]
: 144
The commentary notwithstanding, Fuller kept the mustache.
[2]
: 23?24
Death
[
edit
]
While at his summer home in
Sorrento, Maine
, Fuller died on July 4, 1910, of a
heart attack
.
[15]
: 224
Upon hearing of his death, President Taft praised Fuller as "a great judge";
Theodore Roosevelt
said "I admired the Chief Justice as a fearless and upright judge, and I was exceedingly attached to him personally."
[13]
James E. Freeman
, who later served as the Episcopal
Bishop of Washington
, conducted the funeral service.
[7]
: 329
Fuller was buried at
Graceland Cemetery
in Chicago.
[14]
: 371
Legacy
[
edit
]
Fuller's time on the Supreme Court has often been roundly criticized
[48]
: 109
or overlooked altogether.
[84]
: 150
His support of the widely execrated
Plessy
and
Lochner
decisions has been particularly responsible for his low historical reputation.
[48]
: 109
Many Fuller Court decisions were later overruled;
[85]
: 205
its positions on economic regulation and labor fared particularly poorly.
[17]
: 37
Fuller's rulings were often favorable to corporations, and some scholars have claimed that the Fuller Court was biased towards big business and against the working class.
[86]
: 148?151
Fuller wrote few consequential majority opinions, leading Yale professor
John P. Frank
to remark that "[i]f the measure of distinction is influence on the life of our own times, Fuller's score is as close to zero as any man's could be who held his high office so long".
[85]
: 202
In addition, as
William Rehnquist
? himself a chief justice ? noted, Fuller's more assertive colleagues Holmes and Harlan overshadowed him in the eyes of history.
[87]
: 796
Yet the Fuller Court's jurisprudence was also a key source of the legal academy's criticism.
[17]
: 37
Asserting that its justices "ignored the Fundamental Law", Princeton professor
Alpheus T. Mason
argued that "[t]he tribunal Fuller headed was a body dominated by fear?the fear of populists, of socialists, and communists, of numbers, majorities and democracy".
[88]
: 607
However, the growth of conservative legal thought in the late 20th century has brought Fuller new supporters.
[48]
: 109
A 1993 survey of judges and legal academics found that Fuller's reputation, while still categorized as "average", had risen from the level recorded in a 1970 assessment.
[89]
: 402, 428
In a 1995 book, James W. Ely argued that the traditional criticisms of the Fuller Court are flawed, maintaining that its decisions were based on principle instead of partisanship.
[90]
: 101?102
He noted that Fuller and his fellow justices rendered rulings that generally conformed with contemporaneous public opinion.
[2]
: 213?214
Both
Bruce Ackerman
and
Howard Gillman
defended the Fuller Court on similar grounds, arguing that the justices' decisions fit in with the era's zeitgeist.
[91]
: 47
Lawrence Reed
of the
Mackinac Center for Public Policy
wrote in 2006 that Fuller was "a model Chief Justice", favorably citing his economic jurisprudence.
[92]
While these
revisionist
ideas have become influential in the scholarly academy, they have not attained universal support: many academics continue to favor more critical views of the Fuller Court.
[93]
: 514
Yale professor
Owen M. Fiss
, himself sympathetic to the revisionists' views,
[93]
: 513?514
noted in 1993 that "by all accounts", the Fuller Court "ranks among the worst".
[79]
: 3
In a 1998 review of Ely's book, law professor John Cary Sims argued that Fuller and his fellow justices failed to fulfill their obligation to go "against the prevailing political winds" instead of simply deferring to the majority.
[90]
: 102?103
George Skouras, writing in 2011, rejected the ideas of Ely, Ackerman, and Gillman, agreeing instead with the
Progressive
argument that the Fuller Court favored corporations over vulnerable Americans.
[91]
: 57?58
Fuller's legacy came under substantial scrutiny amidst
racial unrest in 2020
, with many condemning him for his vote in
Plessy
.
[94]
Statue
[
edit
]
In 2013, a statue of Fuller, donated by a cousin,
[95]
was installed on the lawn in front of Augusta's
Kennebec County Courthouse
.
[96]
With
Black Lives Matter
protests and other attention in 2020, focus on the
Plessy
decision led to debate about the appropriateness of the statue's placement.
[97]
In August 2020, the
Maine Supreme Judicial Court
requested that the statue be removed, citing
Plessy
.
[96]
Kennebec County
commissioners held a public hearing in December; a majority of participants favored the statue's removal.
[94]
In February 2021, the county commissioners voted unanimously to move the statue from county property, citing a desire to dissociate the county from racial segregation.
[98]
Commissioners appointed a committee to identify a new home for the statue.
[99]
In April 2021, the original donor offered to take the statue back, agreeing to pay the costs for removing it.
[100]
County commissioners accepted the offer later that month; they agreed that the statue could remain in front of the courthouse for up to a year while the original donor attempted to find a new location where it can be displayed.
[100]
In February 2022, the statue was removed and placed in storage.
[101]
See also
[
edit
]
References
[
edit
]
- ^
a
b
Biskupic, Joan
; Witt, Elder (1997).
Guide to the U.S. Supreme Court
. Vol. 2 (3rd ed.). Washington, DC:
Congressional Quarterly
.
ISBN
978-1-56802-130-0
.
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
k
l
m
n
o
p
q
r
s
t
u
v
w
x
y
z
aa
ab
ac
ad
ae
af
ag
ah
ai
aj
ak
al
am
an
ao
ap
aq
ar
as
at
au
av
aw
ax
ay
az
ba
bb
bc
bd
be
bf
bg
bh
bi
bj
bk
bl
bm
bn
bo
bp
bq
br
bs
bt
bu
bv
Ely, James W.
(1995).
The Chief Justiceship of Melville W. Fuller, 1888?1910
. Columbia, SC:
University of South Carolina Press
.
ISBN
978-1-57003-018-5
.
Archived
from the original on November 30, 2018
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
k
l
m
n
o
Schiffman, Irving (1969). "Melville W. Fuller". In Friedman, Leon; Israel, Fred L. (eds.).
The Justices of the United States Supreme Court, 1789?1969: Their Lives and Major Opinions
. Vol. 2. New York, NY:
Chelsea House Publishers
.
ISBN
978-0-8352-0217-6
.
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
Steamer, Robert J. (1986).
Chief Justice: Leadership and the Supreme Court
. Columbia, SC:
University of South Carolina Press
.
ISBN
978-0-87249-482-4
.
- ^
a
b
c
Umbreit, Kenneth Bernard (1938).
Our Eleven Chief Justices: A History of the Supreme Court in Terms of Their Personalities
(2nd ed.). New York, NY:
Harper & Brothers
.
OCLC
45219167
.
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
f
Hall, Timothy L. (2001).
Supreme Court Justices: A Biographical Dictionary
. New York, NY:
Facts on File
. pp. 198?201.
ISBN
978-0-8160-4194-7
.
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
March 28,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
k
l
m
n
o
p
q
r
s
t
u
v
w
x
y
z
aa
ab
King, Willard L. (1950).
Melville Weston Fuller, Chief Justice of the United States, 1888?1910
. New York, NY:
Macmillan
.
OCLC
8989401
.
Archived
from the original on January 24, 2021
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
Frankfurter, Felix
(November 1953).
"Chief Justices I Have Known"
.
Virginia Law Review
.
39
(7): 883?905.
doi
:
10.2307/1069773
.
JSTOR
1069773
.
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
April 26,
2021
– via HeinOnline.
- ^
Abraham, Henry Julian
(2008).
Justices, Presidents, and Senators: A History of the U.S. Supreme Court Appointments from Washington to Bush II
. Lanham, MD:
Rowman & Littlefield
.
ISBN
978-0-7425-5895-3
.
Archived
from the original on January 20, 2021
. Retrieved
March 16,
2021
.
- ^
McMillion, Barry J. (February 23, 2021).
"Supreme Court Nominations, 1789 to 2020: Actions by the Senate, the Judiciary Committee, and the President"
.
Congressional Research Service
.
Archived
from the original on March 18, 2021
. Retrieved
April 20,
2021
.
- ^
"Fuller Confirmed"
.
Harrisburg Daily Independent
. July 20, 1888. p. 1.
Archived
from the original on July 10, 2021
. Retrieved
July 10,
2021
.
- ^
"Justices 1789 to Present"
.
Supreme Court of the United States
.
Archived
from the original on February 28, 2020
. Retrieved
February 9,
2020
.
- ^
a
b
"Melville W. Fuller, Chief Justice, Dead"
.
The New York Times
. July 5, 1910. p. 5.
Archived
from the original on September 16, 2021
. Retrieved
September 16,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
Hall, Kermit L.
, ed. (1992).
Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States
. New York, NY:
Oxford University Press
.
ISBN
978-0-19-517661-2
.
Archived
from the original on February 25, 2021
. Retrieved
March 15,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
c
d
Cushman, Clare, ed. (2013).
Supreme Court Justices: Illustrated Biographies
. Thousand Oaks, CA:
CQ Press
. pp. 220?224.
ISBN
978-1-60871-832-0
.
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
March 15,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
c
d
Dickson, Del, ed. (2001).
The Supreme Court in Conference (1940?1985)
. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
ISBN
978-0-19-512632-7
.
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
Morris, Jeffrey B. (1981).
"The Era of Melville Weston Fuller"
.
Yearbook
.
1981
. Supreme Court Historical Society: 37?51.
Archived
from the original on November 8, 2021
. Retrieved
November 8,
2021
– via HeinOnline.
- ^
a
b
White, G. Edward
(2006).
"The Internal Powers of the Chief Justice: The Nineteenth-Century Legacy"
.
University of Pennsylvania Law Review
.
154
(6): 1463?1510.
doi
:
10.2307/40041345
.
JSTOR
40041345
.
Archived
from the original on July 31, 2021
. Retrieved
July 31,
2021
– via Penn Law Legal Scholarship Repository.
- ^
Pratt, Walter F.
(1980).
"Rhetorical Styles on the Fuller Court"
.
American Journal of Legal History
.
24
(3): 189?220.
doi
:
10.2307/844665
.
JSTOR
844665
.
Archived
from the original on September 22, 2019
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via Duke Law Scholarship Repository.
- ^
Garrow, David J.
(2000).
"Mental Decrepitude on the U.S. Supreme Court: The Historical Case for a 28th Amendment"
.
University of Chicago Law Review
.
67
(4): 995?1087.
doi
:
10.2307/1600454
.
JSTOR
1600454
.
Archived
from the original on January 28, 2021
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via Chicago Unbound.
- ^
a
b
Ely, James W.
(1998).
"Melville W. Fuller Reconsidered"
.
Journal of Supreme Court History
.
1998
(1): 35?49.
doi
:
10.1353/sch.1998.0040
.
Archived
from the original on September 6, 2021
. Retrieved
November 8,
2021
– via HeinOnline.
- ^
Schwartz, Bernard (1995).
A History of the Supreme Court
. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
ISBN
978-0-19-984055-7
.
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
March 16,
2021
.
- ^
McManus, Edgar J.; Helfman, Tara (2014).
Liberty and Union: A Constitutional History of the United States, concise edition
. New York, NY:
Routledge
.
ISBN
978-1-136-75716-7
.
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
April 8,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
Jensen, Erik M. (July 2014).
"Did the Sixteenth Amendment Ever Matter? Does it Matter Today?"
.
Northwestern University Law Review
.
108
(3): 799?824.
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via SSRN.
- ^
Jones, Francis R. (October 25, 1895).
"Pollock v. Farmers' Loan and Trust Company"
.
Harvard Law Review
.
9
(3): 198?211.
doi
:
10.2307/1321669
.
JSTOR
1321669
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via JSTOR.
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
k
Semonche, John E. (1978).
Charting the Future: The Supreme Court Responds to a Changing Society, 1890?1920
. Westport, CT:
Greenwood Press
.
ISBN
978-0-313-20314-5
.
- ^
Johnson, Calvin H. (2007).
"The Four Good Dissenters in
Pollock
"
.
Journal of Supreme Court History
.
32
(2): 162?177.
doi
:
10.1111/j.1540-5818.2007.00159.x
.
S2CID
144943526
.
Archived
from the original on August 11, 2021
. Retrieved
November 8,
2021
– via HeinOnline.
- ^
Tomlins, Christopher L., ed. (2005).
The United States Supreme Court: The Pursuit of Justice
. Boston, MA:
Houghton Mifflin
.
ISBN
978-0-618-32969-4
.
- ^
a
b
Urofsky, Melvin I.
, ed. (2006).
The Public Debate over Controversial Supreme Court Decisions
. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
ISBN
978-1-56802-937-5
.
- ^
a
b
Johnson, Calvin H. (December 30, 2002).
"Purging Out
Pollock
: The Constitutionality of Federal Wealth or Sales Taxes"
(PDF)
.
Tax Notes
: 1723?1734.
Archived
(PDF)
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via The University of Texas at Austin School of Law.
- ^
Jensen, Erik M. (December 1997).
"The Apportionment of "Direct Taxes": Are Consumption Taxes Unconstitutional?"
.
Columbia Law Review
.
97
(8): 2334?2419.
doi
:
10.2307/1123374
.
JSTOR
1123374
.
S2CID
150973582
.
Archived
from the original on September 22, 2020
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons.
- ^
Jensen, Erik M. (November 2019).
"An Unapportioned Wealth Tax Has Constitutional Problems"
.
ABA Tax Times
.
39
(1).
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via SSRN.
- ^
Ball, Milan N. (September 28, 2020).
"The Federal Taxing Power: A Primer"
.
Congressional Research Service
.
Archived
from the original on March 2, 2021
. Retrieved
February 10,
2020
.
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
f
Ely, James W.
(1994). "Melville Weston Fuller". In
Urofsky, Melvin I.
(ed.).
The Supreme Court Justices: A Biographical Dictionary
. New York, NY:
Garland Publishing
.
ISBN
978-0-8153-1176-8
.
Archived
from the original on November 8, 2021
. Retrieved
August 16,
2021
.
- ^
Hyneman, Charles S. (1963).
The Supreme Court on Trial
. New York, NY: Atherton Press.
OCLC
420358
.
Archived
from the original on August 18, 2021
. Retrieved
August 18,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
Finkelman, Paul
;
Urofsky, Melvin I.
(2003).
Landmark Decisions of the United States Supreme Court
. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
ISBN
978-1-56802-720-3
.
- ^
a
b
Fisher, Joe A. (May 1973).
"The Knight Case Revisited"
.
The Historian
.
35
(3). Taylor & Francis: 365?383.
doi
:
10.1111/j.1540-6563.1973.tb00505.x
.
JSTOR
24443014
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via JSTOR.
- ^
Epstein, Richard A.
(November 1987).
"The Proper Scope of the Commerce Power"
.
Virginia Law Review
.
73
(8): 1387?1455.
doi
:
10.2307/1073233
.
JSTOR
1073233
.
Archived
from the original on December 13, 2020
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via Chicago Unbound.
- ^
Bader, William D. (2020). "Theodore Roosevelt". In
Gormley, Ken
(ed.).
The Presidents and the Constitution
. Vol. 1. New York, NY:
New York University Press
.
doi
:
10.18574/nyu/9781479802098.001.0001
.
ISBN
978-1-4798-3990-2
.
S2CID
250101451
.
- ^
Ross, William G. (1994).
A Muted Fury: Populists, Progressives, and Labor Unions Confront the Courts, 1890?1937
. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press
.
ISBN
978-1-4008-6357-0
.
Archived
from the original on November 8, 2021
. Retrieved
August 16,
2021
.
- ^
Currie, David P. (1985).
"The Constitution in the Supreme Court: Full Faith and the Bill of Rights, 1889?1910"
.
University of Chicago Law Review
.
52
(4): 867?902.
doi
:
10.2307/1599519
.
JSTOR
1599519
.
Archived
from the original on September 4, 2021
. Retrieved
September 4,
2021
– via Chicago Unbound.
- ^
a
b
Regan, Richard (2015).
A Constitutional History of the U.S. Supreme Court
. Washington, DC:
CUA Press
.
ISBN
978-0-8132-2721-4
.
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
March 16,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
Margulies, Herbert F. (1995?1996).
"Pioneering the Federal Police Power:
Champion v. Ames
and the Anti-Lottery Act of 1895"
.
Journal of Southern Legal History
.
4
: 45?60.
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
April 26,
2021
– via HeinOnline.
- ^
Hall, Kermit L.
; Patrick, John J. (2006).
The Pursuit of Justice: Supreme Court Decisions that Shaped America
. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
ISBN
978-0-19-531189-1
.
- ^
a
b
c
Paul, Ellen Frankel (2005).
"Freedom of Contract and the "Political Economy" of
Lochner v. New York
"
(PDF)
.
NYU Journal of Law & Liberty
.
1
(1): 515?569.
Archived
(PDF)
from the original on September 18, 2020
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via NYU Law.
- ^
a
b
Bernstein, David E.
(2005).
"
Lochner v. New York
: A Centennial Retrospective"
.
Washington University Law Review
.
83
(5): 1469?1527.
Archived
from the original on February 22, 2017
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via Washington University Open Scholarship.
- ^
Sunstein, Cass R.
(1987).
"Lochner's Legacy"
.
Columbia Law Review
.
87
(5): 873?919.
doi
:
10.2307/1122721
.
JSTOR
1122721
.
Archived
from the original on August 6, 2021
. Retrieved
August 28,
2021
– via Chicago Unbound.
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
Epstein, Richard A.
(1996).
"Book Review (reviewing James W. Ely, The Chief Justiceship of Melville W. Fuller, 1888?1910 (1995))"
.
American Journal of Legal History
.
40
: 109?110.
doi
:
10.2307/845465
.
JSTOR
845465
.
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via Chicago Unbound.
- ^
a
b
c
d
Schultz, David; John R. Vile, eds. (2005).
The Encyclopedia of Civil Liberties in America
. Abingdon: Routledge. pp. 260?261.
ISBN
978-0-7656-8063-1
.
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
March 28,
2021
.
- ^
Taylor, Michael J. C. (Spring 2012).
"Between Law and Conscience:
Jones v. Van Zandt
and the Constitutional Obligation of Obedience"
.
Regent Journal of Law & Public Policy
.
4
(1): 77?111.
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
April 26,
2021
– via HeinOnline.
- ^
Kerian, Jon R. (1961).
"Injunctions in Labor Disputes: The History of the Norris?LaGuardia Act"
.
North Dakota Law Review
.
37
(1): 49?65.
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via UND Scholarly Commons.
- ^
Chemerinsky, Erwin
(1999).
Federal Jurisdiction
. Gaithersburg, MD:
Aspen Law & Business
.
ISBN
978-0-7355-0037-2
.
- ^
Tanenhaus, David Spinoza, ed. (2008).
Encyclopedia of the Supreme Court of the United States
. Vol. 2. Detroit, MI:
Macmillan Reference USA
.
ISBN
978-0-02-866126-1
.
Archived
from the original on November 8, 2021
. Retrieved
August 16,
2021
.
- ^
Bobroff, Rochelle (Summer 2009).
"Ex Parte Young as a Tool to Enforce Safety-Net and Civil-Rights Statutes"
.
University of Toledo Law Review
.
40
(4): 819?842.
Archived
from the original on September 6, 2021
. Retrieved
November 8,
2021
– via HeinOnline.
- ^
Purcell, Edward A. Jr
(Summer 2009).
"Ex Parte Young and the Transformation of the Federal Courts, 1890?1917"
.
University of Toledo Law Review
.
40
(4): 931?970.
Archived
from the original on September 6, 2021
. Retrieved
September 6,
2021
– via DigitalCommons@NYLS.
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
Curriden, Mark; Phillips, Leroy (1999).
Contempt of Court: The Turn-of-the-Century Lynching that Launched 100 Years of Federalism
. New York, NY:
Faber and Faber
.
ISBN
978-0-571-19952-5
.
- ^
a
b
Francis, Megan Ming (2014).
Civil Rights and the Making of the Modern American State
. New York, NY:
Cambridge University Press
.
ISBN
978-1-139-99254-1
.
Archived
from the original on November 8, 2021
. Retrieved
August 16,
2021
.
- ^
Canellos, Peter S. (2021).
The Great Dissenter: The Story of John Marshall Harlan, America's Judicial Hero
. New York, NY:
Simon and Schuster
.
ISBN
978-1-5011-8820-6
.
- ^
Thomas, Clarence
(1997).
"The Virtue of Defeat:
Plessy v. Ferguson
in Retrospect"
.
Journal of Supreme Court History
.
1997
: 15?24.
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
April 26,
2021
– via HeinOnline.
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
Klarman, Michael J.
(1998).
"The Plessy Era"
.
Supreme Court Review
.
1998
: 303?414.
doi
:
10.1086/scr.1998.3109701
.
JSTOR
3109701
.
S2CID
147074451
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via JSTOR.
- ^
a
b
Pollak, Louis H.
(Winter 2005).
"Race, Law & History: The Supreme Court from "Dred Scott" to "Grutter v. Bollinger"
"
.
Daedalus
.
134
(1): 29?41.
doi
:
10.1162/0011526053124488
.
JSTOR
20027958
.
S2CID
57560611
.
- ^
a
b
Oberst, Paul (1973).
"The Strange Career of Plessy v. Ferguson"
.
Arizona Law Review
.
15
: 389?418.
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
April 26,
2021
– via HeinOnline.
- ^
Maidment, Richard A. (August 1973).
"Plessy v. Ferguson Re-Examined"
.
Journal of American Studies
.
7
(2): 125?132.
doi
:
10.1017/S0021875800013396
.
JSTOR
27553046
.
S2CID
145390453
– via JSTOR.
- ^
a
b
Wisdom, John Minor
(Winter 1996).
"
Plessy v. Ferguson
? 100 Years Later"
.
Washington and Lee Law Review
.
53
(1): 9?20.
Archived
from the original on August 7, 2020
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via Washington and Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons.
- ^
Davis, Abraham L.; Graham, Barbara Luck (1995).
The Supreme Court, Race, and Civil Rights: From Marshall to Rehnquist
. Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE Publications
.
ISBN
978-1-4522-6379-3
.
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
April 8,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
Goldstein, Leslie F. (2013).
"How Equal Protection Did and Did Not Come to the United States, and the Executive Branch Role Therein"
.
Maryland Law Review
.
73
: 190?223.
Archived
from the original on August 3, 2021
. Retrieved
August 3,
2021
– via Digital Commons@UM Carey Law.
- ^
a
b
c
d
Burton, Orville Vernon
; Derfner, Armand (2021).
Justice Deferred: Race and the Supreme Court
. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press
.
ISBN
978-0-674-97564-4
.
Archived
from the original on November 8, 2021
. Retrieved
August 3,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
Bernstein, David
(1990).
"The Supreme Court and "Civil Rights," 1886?1908"
.
Yale Law Journal
.
100
(3): 725?744.
doi
:
10.2307/796668
.
JSTOR
796668
.
Archived
from the original on August 5, 2021
. Retrieved
August 5,
2021
– via Yale Law School Legal Scholarship Repository.
- ^
Epstein, Richard A.
(Fall 1989).
"Race and the Police Power: 1890 to 1937"
.
Washington and Lee Law Review
.
46
(4): 741?761.
Archived
from the original on November 8, 2021
. Retrieved
August 5,
2021
– via Washington and Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons.
- ^
Schmidt, Benno C.
(1982).
"Principle and Prejudice: The Supreme Court and Race in the Progressive Era. Part 1: The Heyday of Jim Crow"
.
Columbia Law Review
.
82
(3): 444?524.
doi
:
10.2307/1122071
.
ISSN
0010-1958
.
JSTOR
1122071
. Retrieved
August 5,
2021
– via JSTOR.
- ^
Lively, Donald E.
(1992).
The Constitution and Race
. New York, NY:
Praeger Publishing
.
ISBN
978-0-275-93914-4
.
- ^
Warren, Charles
(1922).
The Supreme Court in United States History
. Vol. 3. Boston, MA:
Little, Brown
.
OCLC
313219951
.
Archived
from the original on August 4, 2016
. Retrieved
April 20,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
Urofsky, Melvin I.
;
Finkelman, Paul
(2002).
A March of Liberty: A Constitutional History of the United States
. Vol. 1 (2 ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
ISBN
978-0-19-512635-8
.
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
April 20,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
Malavet, Pedro A. (Fall 2010).
"The Inconvenience of a "Constitution [that] follows the flag … but doesn't quite catch up with it": From
Downes v. Bidwell
to
Boumediene v. Bush
"
.
Mississippi Law Journal
.
80
: 181?257.
Archived
from the original on April 26, 2021
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via UF Law Scholarship Repository.
- ^
a
b
c
Vignarajah, Krishanti (Spring 2010).
"The Political Roots of Judicial Legitimacy: Explaining the Enduring Validity of the Insular Cases"
.
University of Chicago Law Review
.
77
(2): 781?845.
JSTOR
20722465
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via JSTOR.
- ^
a
b
Torruella, Juan R.
(Fall 2013).
"Ruling America's Colonies: The "Insular Cases"
"
.
Yale Law & Policy Review
.
32
(1): 57?95.
JSTOR
23736226
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via JSTOR.
- ^
a
b
Erman, Sam (Summer 2008).
"Meanings of Citizenship in the U.S. Empire: Puerto Rico, Isabel Gonzalez, and the Supreme Court, 1898 to 1905"
(PDF)
.
Journal of American Ethnic History
.
27
(4): 5?33.
doi
:
10.2307/27501851
.
JSTOR
27501851
.
S2CID
130446696
.
Archived
(PDF)
from the original on December 14, 2010
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
c
Rothera, Evan C. (2016).
"The Tenacious Twin Relic: Republicans, Polygamy, and
The Late Corporation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. United States
"
.
Journal of Supreme Court History
.
41
: 21?38.
doi
:
10.1111/jsch.12091
.
S2CID
148549941
.
Archived
from the original on November 8, 2021
. Retrieved
November 8,
2021
– via HeinOnline.
- ^
a
b
c
d
Fiss, Owen M.
(1993).
Troubled Beginnings of the Modern State, 1888?1910
. New York, NY: Macmillan.
ISBN
978-0-02-541360-3
.
Archived
from the original on November 8, 2021
. Retrieved
March 16,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
Kraut, Julia Rose (2020).
Threat of Dissent: A History of Ideological Exclusion and Deportation in the United States
. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
ISBN
978-0-674-97606-1
.
- ^
Price, Polly J. (2018).
"A Chinese Wall at the Nation's Borders: Justice Stephen Field and the Chinese Exclusion Case"
.
Journal of Supreme Court History
.
43
(1): 7?26.
doi
:
10.1111/jsch.12167
.
S2CID
148732719
.
Archived
from the original on September 6, 2021
. Retrieved
November 8,
2021
– via HeinOnline.
- ^
a
b
Berger, Bethany R. (2016).
"Birthright Citizenship on Trial:
Elk v. Wilkins
and
United States v. Wong Kim Ark
"
.
Cardozo Law Review
.
37
: 1185?1258.
Archived
from the original on March 18, 2020
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via OpenCommons@UConn.
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
Peppers, Todd (2020).
"Chief Justice Melville Weston Fuller and the Great Mustache Debate of 1888"
.
Journal of Supreme Court History
.
45
(2): 140?150.
doi
:
10.1111/jsch.12238
.
S2CID
225605782
.
Archived
from the original on September 30, 2020
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via Washington and Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons.
- ^
Taylor, John B. (1998).
"Hail to the Chief: A Bibliographical Essay on Six Chief Justices of the United States"
.
Journal of Supreme Court History
.
1998
(1): 133?165.
doi
:
10.1111/j.1540-5818.1998.tb00129.x
.
S2CID
145215355
.
Archived
from the original on September 6, 2021
. Retrieved
November 8,
2021
– via HeinOnline.
- ^
a
b
Frank, John P.
(1951).
"Melville Weston Fuller"
.
Yale Law Journal
.
60
: 202?206.
doi
:
10.2307/793644
.
JSTOR
793644
.
Archived
from the original on December 4, 2020
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via Yale Law School Legal Scholarship Repository.
- ^
Thomson, James A. (1997).
"Swimming in the Air: Melville W. Fuller and the Supreme Court 1888?1910"
.
Cumberland Law Review
.
27
(1): 139?197.
Archived
from the original on November 8, 2021
. Retrieved
November 8,
2021
– via HeinOnline.
- ^
Rehnquist, William H.
(February 2003).
"Remarks of the Chief Justice: My Life in the Law Series"
.
Duke Law Journal
.
52
(4): 787?805.
JSTOR
1373198
. Retrieved
March 3,
2021
– via JSTOR.
- ^
Mason, Alpheus Thomas
(1951).
"Review of "Melville Weston Fuller, Chief Justice of the United States, 1888?1910"
"
.
Cornell Law Quarterly
.
36
(3): 606?608.
Archived
from the original on April 10, 2021
. Retrieved
April 26,
2021
– via HeinOnline.
- ^
Ross, William G. (Winter 1996).
"The Ratings Game: Factors That Influence Judicial Reputation"
.
Marquette Law Review
.
79
(2): 402?452.
Archived
from the original on September 4, 2021
. Retrieved
September 4,
2021
– via Marquette Law Scholarly Commons.
- ^
a
b
Sims, John Cary (1998).
"The Chief Justiceship of Melville W. Fuller, 1888?1910"
.
Western Legal History: The Journal of the Ninth Judicial Circuit Historical Society
.
11
: 101?103.
Archived
from the original on September 6, 2021
. Retrieved
November 8,
2021
– via HeinOnline.
- ^
a
b
Skouras, George (2011).
"On the Formation of the American Corporate State: The Fuller Supreme Court, 1888?1910"
.
Journal Jurisprudence
.
9
: 37?58.
Archived
from the original on April 10, 2021
. Retrieved
April 26,
2021
– via HeinOnline.
- ^
Reed, Lawrence W.
(March 10, 2006).
"Melville W. Fuller: A Model Chief Justice"
.
Mackinac Center for Public Policy
.
Archived
from the original on January 12, 2021
. Retrieved
March 1,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
Schmitt, James D. (2013). "American Jurisprudence in the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries". In Hadden, Sally E;
Brophy, Alfred L.
(eds.).
A Companion to American Legal History
. Hoboken, NJ:
Wiley?Blackwell
.
ISBN
978-1-118-53376-5
.
Archived
from the original on July 14, 2021
. Retrieved
July 2,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
Wolman, Jordan (December 6, 2020).
"Courthouse statue has Kennebec County officials searching for an answer"
.
The Maine Monitor
.
Archived
from the original on January 17, 2021
. Retrieved
March 1,
2021
.
- ^
Lowell, Jessica (February 16, 2021).
"Kennebec commissioners vote to move Augusta's Melville Fuller statue"
.
Kennebec Journal
. Archived from
the original
on March 18, 2021
. Retrieved
August 3,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
Schroeder, Nick (February 9, 2021).
"Vote to remove Maine statue of Supreme Court justice who upheld segregation laws comes next week"
.
Bangor Daily News
.
Archived
from the original on February 21, 2021
. Retrieved
March 2,
2021
.
- ^
Lowell, Jessica.
"Officials hear from public on proposal to move judge's statue"
.
Portland Press Herald
.
Archived
from the original on December 2, 2020
. Retrieved
March 6,
2021
.
- ^
Dineen, Hannah (February 16, 2021).
"Statue of Justice Melville Fuller to be moved from front of Kennebec County Courthouse"
.
News Center Maine
.
Archived
from the original on February 16, 2021
. Retrieved
March 1,
2021
.
- ^
Lowell, Jessica (April 8, 2021).
"Donor of controversial Augusta statue may take his gift back"
.
Kennebec Journal
.
Archived
from the original on April 8, 2021
. Retrieved
April 8,
2021
.
- ^
a
b
Lowell, Jessica (April 20, 2021).
"Kennebec County commissioners vote to return controversial statue to donor"
.
Kennebec Journal
.
Archived
from the original on April 21, 2021
. Retrieved
April 22,
2021
.
- ^
"Statue of segregationist justice removed from court grounds"
.
AP News
. February 15, 2022
. Retrieved
February 24,
2023
.
External links
[
edit
]
|
---|
|
---|
- John Jay
(
1789?1795
,
cases
)
- John Rutledge
(
1795
,
cases
)
- Oliver Ellsworth
(
1796?1800
,
cases
)
- John Marshall
(
1801?1835
,
cases
)
- Roger B. Taney
(
1836?1864
,
cases
)
- Salmon P. Chase
(
1864?1873
,
cases
)
- Morrison Waite
(
1874?1888
,
cases
)
- Melville Fuller
(
1888?1910
,
cases
)
- Edward Douglass White
(
1910?1921
,
cases
)
- William Howard Taft
(
1921?1930
,
cases
)
- Charles Evans Hughes
(
1930?1941
,
cases
)
- Harlan F. Stone
(
1941?1946
,
cases
)
- Fred M. Vinson
(
1946?1953
,
cases
)
- Earl Warren
(
1953?1969
,
cases
)
- Warren E. Burger
(
1969?1986
,
cases
)
- William Rehnquist
(
1986?2005
,
cases
)
- John Roberts
(
2005?present
,
cases
)
| |
|
|
---|
*
Also served as Chief Justice of the United States
| |
|
|
---|
International
| |
---|
National
| |
---|
Academics
| |
---|
People
| |
---|
Other
| |
---|