Podcasts about Abe Fortas

Air Date 1/13/2024 The Supreme Court began to lose its legitimacy in the eyes of many when President Obama wasn't allowed to fill the open seat left by the death of Antonin Scalia but, in truth, the scandal and manipulation of the nation's highest court go back much, much farther than that. However, in a bygone age, scandal was handled much differently than today, putting our current state of disfunction and hyper-partisanship into sharp focus. Be part of the show! Leave us a message or text at 202-999-3991 or email Jay@BestOfTheLeft.com Transcript BestOfTheLeft.com/Support (Members Get Bonus Clips and Shows + No Ads!) Join our Discord community! OUR AFFILIATE LINKS: ExpressVPN.com/BestOfTheLeft GET INTERNET PRIVACY WITH EXPRESS VPN! BestOfTheLeft.com/Libro SUPPORT INDIE BOOKSHOPS, GET YOUR AUDIOBOOK FROM LIBRO! SHOW NOTES Ch. 1: Ralph explains the need for resignations and reform on the Supreme Court - Ralph Nader Radio Hour - Air Date 12-30-23 I think they are reaching a point—the six-justice majority— of getting a huge backlash… I don't call for the impeachment of Justices very easily. In case after case these Justices come down on the side of artificial entities called corporations Ch. 2: Astonishing Corruption at The Supreme Court? - LegalEagle - Air Date 5-6-23 Ethics? Never heard of it Ch. 3: Supreme Court's Corrupt Financial Ties To Billionaire Exposed During Senate Hearing - The Majority Report - Air Date 5-3-23 Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) used a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Supreme Court ethics on Tuesday to discuss the financial ties between Justice Clarence Thomas and conservative billionaire Harlan Crow. Ch. 4: EXPOSED: Supreme Court Corruption CAUGHT Red Handed - The Kyle Kulinski Show - Air Date 4-27-23 Looking at Neil Gorsuch's questionable property sale and Clarence Thomas' refusal to answer to congress Ch. 5: Clarence Thomas Grifting - The Muckrake Political Podcast - Air Date 12-19-23 They shift to another bombshell report about Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas's taking advantage of his position to enrich his lifestyle. Ch. 6: New Supreme Court ethics code 'does very little' to hold justices accountable, expert says - PBS NewsHour - Air Date 11-13-23 The nine Supreme Court justices handed down a surprise unanimous decision binding themselves to a new code of ethics. It comes after criticism over undisclosed perks for some of the justices. Ch. 7: How to Fix a Broken Supreme Court - Robert Reich - Air Date 7-18-23 Justice Roberts refused to testify in a hearing on SCOTUS ethics. Thomas and Alito accepted luxury vacations from GOP megadonors. Gorsuch sold property to the CEO of a law firm that argues cases before the Court. MEMBERS-ONLY BONUS CLIP(S) Ch. 8: Bombshell new report on the Supreme Court's abortion leak - All In with Chris Hayes - Air Date 12-15-23 New York Times investigative reporter Jodi Kantor joins Chris Hayes to discuss her behind-the-scenes look into the dismantling of Roe Ch. 9: Supreme Court Scandals: A Story of Justice - Now & Then - Air Date 4-26-23 Samuel Chase's impeachment over his pronounced Federalist leanings, Stephen J. Field's 1880s relationships with railroad magnates, and Abe Fortas' 1969 resignation following the revelation of his acceptance of consulting fees from a felonious financier FINAL COMMENTS Ch. 10: Final comments on John Roberts' year-end report and the slide away from the possibility of accountability Article: Chief Justice John Roberts' AI Report Reads Like an Old Robot Wrote It MUSIC (Blue Dot Sessions) SHOW IMAGE: Description: A close-up photograph of the entrance of the U.S. Supreme Court building. White stone columns partly lit by sun slightly obscure the dark wooden entryway door at the center in shadow. Credit: "Supreme Court of the United States Facade" by Leandro Paes Leme, Pexels | License | Changes: Cropped   Produced by Jay! Tomlinson Visit us at BestOfTheLeft.com

Get a load of this - this guy accepted a SALARY for TEACHING at a SCHOOL. Simply not Supreme Court justice material. Get the guy who sold a house to a billionaire instead.If you're not a 5-4 Premium member, you're not hearing every episode! To get exclusive Premium-only episodes, access to our Slack community, and more, join at fivefourpod.com/support.Read the book that inspired this episode: Battle for the Marble Palace by Michael BobelianMassive thanks to Workers Defense Project in Austin for opening their offices up to us for taping. You can show them some love here! https://workersdefense.org/en/5-4 is presented by Prologue Projects. Rachel Ward is our producer. Leon Neyfakh and Andrew Parsons provide editorial support. Our researcher is Jonathan DeBruin, and our website was designed by Peter Murphy. Our artwork is by Teddy Blanks at Chips NY, and our theme song is by Spatial Relations.Follow the show at @fivefourpod on most platforms. On Twitter, find Peter @The_Law_Boy and Rhiannon @AywaRhiannon. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On September 22, Showtime and Paramount+ will release the first episode of Deadlocked: How America Shaped the Supreme Court. And if you tune in, you might recognize a few faces and voices. Documentarian Dawn Porter joins Kate, Melissa, and Leah to talk about how the series came to be, and what she learned about the Supreme Court's evolution in the process.Follow @CrookedMedia on Instagram and Twitter for more original content, host takeovers and other community events.  Follow us on Instagram, Twitter, Threads, and Bluesky

On this day in 1969, Justice Abe Fortas stepped down from the Supreme Court due to his involvement in a financial scandal.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Heather and Joanne discuss the contentious issue of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas's financial ties to billionaire and conservative activist Harlan Crow. They also look at three earlier conflict-of-interest controversies involving Supreme Court justices: Samuel Chase's 1804 impeachment over his pronounced Federalist leanings, Stephen J. Field's 1880s relationships with railroad magnates, and Abe Fortas' 1969 resignation following the revelation of his acceptance of consulting fees from a felonious financier.  Is it ethical for professors to accept gifts from their students? Join CAFE Insider to listen to “Backstage,” where Heather and Joanne chat each week about the anecdotes and ideas that formed the episode. Head to: cafe.com/history Uncover history's impact on today's issues and get sharp insights into news at the intersection of law and politics with the weekly CAFE Brief newsletter. Sign up for free here: cafe.com/brief For references & supplemental materials, head to: cafe.com/now-and-then/supreme-court-scandals-a-story-of-justice/ Now & Then is presented by CAFE and the Vox Media Podcast Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Abe Fortas was a rising star on the Supreme Court. He argued a still-legendary case before it and then was appointed one of its justices. For many he was seen as the successor to Earl Warren. It was when he was nominated for Chief Justice that opposition cemented. He was too close to the President, too liberal on issues, and then there were disclosures of contributions he had received were revealed. After a drawn-out stalemate he withdrew his candidacy for Chief Justice. But it wouldn't stop there. Fortas also stepped down as an Associate Justice as the administration changed and political pressure increased. The Fortas case would be revealed later by insider and Watergate persona John Dean as part of an 'unpacking' plan that President Nixon had to reduce the left-lean of the Warren court, though it wasn't obvious at the time. But it's not that simple either. Fortas's case also has set a precedent for the danger of having a Justice with a close relationship to the Chief Executive. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Tonight on The Last Word: Jim Jordan suffers a setback in his clash with Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. Also, Chief Justice Roberts is asked to testify to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Supreme Court ethics amid new revelations about Justice Clarence Thomas. Plus, right-wing Republicans criticize President Biden's Ukraine policy. And the Missouri House passes a bill allowing guns in churches and buses. Barbara McQuade, Harry Litman, Timothy Snyder and Adam Winkler join Lawrence O'Donnell.

EPISODE 179: COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN A-Block (1:42) SPECIAL COMMENT: The Fox-Dominion Trial is delayed until Tuesday so the two sides can discuss settling out of court. DON'T SETTLE! I'm like everybody else who ever worked for Rupert Murdoch, dated Laura Ingraham, and was asked to co-host a show with Tucker Carlson! I need to see them all in the witness box, under oath, WEEPING. Seriously, America could use the catharsis of an on-the-record verdict that Fox is not and never has been a news organization but even that isn't enough to destroy it. It needs juries doubling the demanded damages in this case AND Smartmatic to literally bankrupt the place (and survive appeals, including the Supreme Court, where Fox's lawyers think they'd win. The late tea leaves aren't good. The delay and story of settlement discussions was broken by another Murdoch outlet, The Wall Street Journal, AND the promised Sunday night attack on Fox by Mark Levin against Dominion and the judge mysteriously never happened. We don't want them snatching peace from the jaws of war. (8:20) Even when Clarence Thomas discloses something, he does it dishonestly. The latest revelations of his utter disregard for the Supreme Court's disclosure regulations. And could the vague precedent Richard Nixon used to force Abe Fortas to resign from SCOTUS in 1969 rather than face possible indictment, work with Clarence? In the interim, where is the Senate Judiciary hearing? (16:25) Speaking of which: looks like the Texas judge in the appalling abortion pill ruling lied to the Senate during his confirmation process. Dick Durbin needs to get to work and get Matthew Kacsmaryk charged for perjury. B-Block (22:51) IN SPORTS: The Oakland A's may not have much of a team, but they do provide every visiting team's television crew with the entertainment that is a live Possum living in the wall of the booth. And a wonderful farewell to Spencer, the official dog of The Boston Marathon (26:49) THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD: They'll be using Marjorie Barney Rubble Greene in a House campaign 1800 miles away. Turns out Nikki Haley's campaign doesn't know you can't count the same donation twice. And MAGA turns on Junior Trump. Remember, Buddy, this is how the French Revolution started. C-Block (31:55) EVERY DOG HAS ITS DAY: Anastasia needs a foster near Devore, CA to save her life (32:55) THINGS I PROMISED NOT TO TELL: There must be 10,000 ceremonial first pitches at baseball games all around the country every year, and 9900 of them must be bad. Here is the advice I was given 17 years ago that can save you from being one of the bad ones. Best of all, it involves CHEATING.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The bread's a little flat, but David Waldman and Greg Dworkin are here to leaven our day with political insight and dry wit. Donald Trump, who excels at losing, is entering the hottest streak of his career, and doesn't plan to slack off until all Republicans become sick of winning. Courtroom artists will have many opportunities to capture Donald's true essence. Pundits looking at Alvin Bragg's case just see an outline, but that's because Bragg isn't obligated to fill it in yet. Trump also has months to make everything much worse. Behind the scenes, even Evangelicals are losing faith. ProPublica reveals that for decades Clarence Thomas accepted luxury vacations on a private jet and a superyacht from Republican megadonor Harlan Crow. The extent and frequency of these apparent gifts to Thomas has no known precedent in modern SCOTUS history… Greg compares Thomas' Rolodex with that of Abe Fortas. Look that up in your Funk & Wagnalls! Free the Tennessee Three! This isn't a good look for Tennessee Republicans. Montana Republicans plot a one-time election law change to screw over Democrat Jon Tester. James Comer enlists prosecutors to destroy their careers in order to irritate Joe Biden. Now, Wisconsin Republicans are looking into impeaching Judge Janet Protasiewicz, two days after her election. Why? Mostly because she won her election, but also because she won her election big. Also, because Republicans will be losing a lot more elections as they try to take away abortion rights. Way to go, Brandon! Brandon Johnson offered Chicagoans solutions, and solutions were what they were looking for.

January 17th, 2023, Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Episode Every state in our nation has a Judicial Code of Conduct. Every judge in each state is obligated to follow that state's Code. Since 1973, most Federal judges have been subject to The Code of Conduct for United States Judges. There is only group exempt from the duty to follow these codes. That group consists of the Justices of the United States Supreme Court. To be fair over the years, accusations of scandal have been rare within the Court. Until recently one had to go back to Abe Fortas who in 1969 was accused of accepting a retainer from a private foundation. Lately however claims of bias have been on the rise. Justices are known to receive monetary advances for book deals. There have been accusations of inappropriate public comments; premature information on upcoming decisions disclosed; even draft opinions leaked. As a result, public approval of the Court has sharply declined. A recent Gallup Poll showed 40% of the public approving of the Supreme Court while 59% disapproved.[1] This month we are asking should the United States Supreme Court adopt a Code of Conduct? Adopting such a Code might help to rehabilitate the Court's image. On the other hand, a Code could damage if not destroy the court's independence. Questions to Explore · What are implications of adopting a code; what are the implications of doing nothing? · Are existing safeguards enough? Justices must submit financial disclosure forms and that they are prohibited from accepting gifts that could influence their judicial decision-making. Are these safeguards adequate? · Voluntary recusal from a case is the chief remedy for judicial conflict of interest. Is that sufficient? Today's Panel · The Honorable Ed Spillane, Judge of the Municipal Court in College Station, Texas. Judge Spillane is the Presiding Judge with the Municipal Court in College Station, Texas. He has served in this position since May 2002. Prior to this, he served as an Assistant District Attorney for Brazos County for eight years and as an associate for the law firm Fulbright & Jaworski for two years. Judge Spillane received his undergraduate degree from Harvard University, and his law degree from the University of Chicago. · The Honorable Sherry Stephens, retired Judge with the Superior Court in Maricopa County, Arizona. Judge Stephens retired from the Maricopa County Superior Court bench where she served from 2001 through 2021. She served on the Criminal Department, the Civil Department, the Juvenile Department, Family Department, and as a special assignment judge. Prior to that she was with the Arizona Attorney General's Office, serving under five attorneys general. She worked as the Chief Counsel for the Organized Crime and Racketeering Section for twelve years. She also served as a Special Assistant United States Attorney on several cases. · Karl Thoennes, Court Administrator with the 2nd Judicial Circuit Court in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Karl began his career in the courts in Alaska in 1988, ultimately working as a division supervisor at the state's largest trial court in Anchorage. He was appointed as Court Administrator in Todd County, Minnesota in 1998, and then Stearns County, St. Cloud, two years later. In 2004 he was appointed as Administrator for the Second Judicial Circuit in South Dakota, the state's largest circuit by population. [1]Dallas Sun, 12/4/2022

DeadYawn comments: "I like that there's honesty without emotional exhibitionism on the Luke Ford show. Also I'm ashamed to admit I find the humour very funny." You might wonder why some people are so right so often. FIFA and Qatar exemplify how much of the world works. It's not always about merit or a level playing field, everything conducted legally and ethically, all for the good of the game. During the World Cup, the officiating won't be perfect. The incentives of the people running things won't be perfectly aligned with what they're running. All sorts of things happen behind closed doors that we won't know about, but if we are emotionally honest with ourselves and something doesn't feel right, it likely means people are lying to you or you have incomplete information. It makes no sense for Qatar to have a world cup, ergo, people are lying. If I research something in the news, and it doesn't make sense, in all likelihood, people are lying. If you are emotionally honest and something doesn't make sense to you, either you are not getting all relevant info or you are being lied to. You know people who are good at spotting lies? People who are honest. Are you bad at noticing when people are lying to you and manipulating you? You are not honest with yourself. If FTX or Bernie Madoff don't make sense, then either you are missing info or you are being lied to. SBF and Abe Fortas got away with a ton of bad things because they were aligned with the Left. SBF got great press because he was aligned with the Left. If he had been aligned with Right, would not have happened. The people who controlled the discourse gave SBF good press. If crypto makes no sense to you, either you are missing info or people are lying to you. I think Crypto bros are lying to you. Theranos made no sense, it was a scam. John Mearsheimer: "It has become clear that the Russians are having difficulties defeating the Ukrainians, in ways that most people didn't anticipate back when we first talked. What also changed is that the war has escalated and the Russians are behaving more ruthlessly towards the Ukrainians than they were initially. That the Russians are now tearing apart the electric grid, which is causing immense human suffering and doing grave economic damage to Ukraine, is evidence of this." https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/john-mearsheimer-on-putins-ambitions-after-nine-months-of-war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharisees https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_B._Shapiro https://torahinmotion.org/profile/dr-marc-shapiro https://www.scranton.edu/academics/cas/theology/marcshapiro.shtml A middle ground between Orthodoxy and Reform: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoFfpU_Qb9g https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Judaism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Judaism http://ieg-ego.eu/en/threads/crossroads/religious-and-confessional-spaces/andreas-braemer-reform-judaism-positive-historical-school-orthodoxy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthodox_Judaism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zecharias_Frankel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Raphael_Hirsch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Geiger https://torahinmotion.org/tim-torah/the-rise-of-reform-and-the-rabbinic-response-part-7mp3 Italian Jews & the body Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSFVD7Xfhn7sJY8LAIQmH8Q/join

You might wonder why some people are so right so often. FIFA and Qatar exemplify how much of the world works. It's not always about merit or a level playing field, everything conducted legally and ethically, all for the good of the game. During the World Cup, the officiating won't be perfect. The incentives of the people running things won't be perfectly aligned with what they're running. All sorts of things happen behind closed doors that we won't know about, but if we are emotionally honest with ourselves and something doesn't feel right, it likely means people are lying to you or you have incomplete information. It makes no sense for Qatar to have a world cup, ergo, people are lying. If I research something in the news, and it doesn't make sense, in all likelihood, people are lying. If you are emotionally honest and something doesn't make sense to you, either you are not getting all relevant info or you are being lied to. You know people who are good at spotting lies? People who are honest. Are you bad at noticing when people are lying to you and manipulating you? You are not honest with yourself. If FTX or Bernie Madoff don't make sense, then either you are missing info or you are being lied to. SBF and Abe Fortas got away with a ton of bad things because they were aligned with the Left. SBF got great press because he was aligned with the Left. If he had been aligned with Right, would not have happened. The people who controlled the discourse gave SBF good press. If crypto makes no sense to you, either you are missing info or people are lying to you. I think Crypto bros are lying to you. Theranos made no sense, it was a scam. Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSFVD7Xfhn7sJY8LAIQmH8Q/join https://odysee.com/@LukeFordLive, https://lbry.tv/@LukeFord, https://rumble.com/lukeford https://dlive.tv/lukefordlivestreams Superchat: https://entropystream.live/app/lukefordlive Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/lukeford/ Soundcloud MP3s: https://soundcloud.com/luke-ford-666431593 Code of Conduct: https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=125692 https://www.patreon.com/lukeford http://lukeford.net Email me: lukeisback@gmail.com or DM me on Twitter.com/lukeford Support the show | https://www.streamlabs.com/lukeford, https://patreon.com/lukeford, https://PayPal.Me/lukeisback Facebook: http://facebook.com/lukecford Feel free to clip my videos. It's nice when you link back to the original.

Very few Americans have had the impact on public policy as has Joseph Califano. Though his parents only graduated high school, he went to Harvard Law  and by age 30 was working at high levels of the John F. Kennedy Administration - and shortly after was the top domestic White House aide to Lyndon Johnson. In this conversation, he talks his meteoric rise through the Kennedy / Johnson years, seeing first-hand as the LBJ “Johnson Treatment” built the Great Society, the toll that Vietnam took on President Johnson, & his work as HEW Cabinet Secretary under President Carter to start a national anti-smoking campaign that's had immeasurable benefits to public health in the US. This is a great conversation with a true American Dream success story and political dynamo.IN THIS EPISODE…Growing up as an Italian-American kid in the era of Franklin Roosevelt…How a working class Brooklyn kid makes it to Harvard Law…Why he left a lucrative private law firm to enter the Kennedy Administration…He talks working in the early days of the Kennedy Administration with Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara…Memories from meetings with President Kennedy…Early impressions working up and close and personal with President Johnson…Why LBJ sequenced the 1964 Civil Rights Act ahead of other Great Society programs…Secretary Califano goes in depth describing “The Johnson Treatment”…Memories from the White House on the night Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated…The “race against expectations” that informed much of LBJ's time in office…Secretary Califano talks the difficulty in passing Fair Housing legislation…The role that Lady Bird Johnson played in helping making President Johnson more effective…The connection between Secretary Califano's son and safety caps on medicine bottles…Reflecting on a political misfire as President Johnson missed an opportunity to appoint a new Supreme Court Chief Justice…The toll that the Vietnam War took on President Johnson…President Johnson's courageous early foray for gun safety laws…The last conversation he had with President Johnson after he left office…His time in the Carter Cabinet as Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare…Why Democrats couldn't secure universal healthcare during the Democratic trifecta of the late 1970s…How he came to spearhead a national anti-smoking campaign…AND the AMA, Carolyn Agger, Brooklyn Prep, McGeorge Bundy, George Christian, Sterling Cottrell, Thomas Dewey, Everett Dirksen, Dwight Eisenhower, Abe Fortas, Gerald Ford, William Fulbright, the Harvard Law Review, the Hirshhorn Museum, Holy Cross, IBM, the JAG Corps, Lady Bird Johnson, Robert Kennedy, leak central, Russell Long, Mike Mansfield, Harry Middleton, Bill Moyers, John McGillicuddy, Harry McPherson, Richard Nixon, Dick Ottinger, PS 182, Claiborne Pell, Jake Pickle, a revolving son of a bitch, the Subversive Activity Control Board, Al Smith, sugar in gas tanks, Jack Valenti, Cyrus Vance, Earl Warren, Watts riots…& more!

Did you know that exactly one native Austinite was nominated for a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court? And not that long ago, historically speaking. 

We discuss Abe Fortas, the fiddle-playing, deal-making Supreme Court justice who resigned in order to avoid being impeached and removed from the Court.

This week on Everyday Injustice we speak with Michael Bobelian, author of the Marel Palace who chronicles the 1968 Court battle over Abe Fortas’s nomination to elevate him from associate to Chief Justice by LBJ. The discussion has interesting parallels to this current debate over Amy Barrett's nomination that went through last week. Bobelian argues that the Fortas battle marked the turning point in the way and manner in which these were conducted. He agrees that the media got their history wrong here - that Barrett's confirmation being confirmed was not the exception - that of Abe Fortas and Merrick Garland who were denied were. Among the other topics of discussion: the forgotten legacy of Abe Fortas who played a pivotal role at three moments in American history, why Democrats have ended up on the short-end of the stick in their court battles and the prospect for Democrats - should Biden win the presidency - reform the court. As Bobelian points out in his book, most efforts have been disastrous and it would be a tall order to do anything that calls for a constitutional amendment. For more information go to: davisvanguard.org

Part 1: The Perils of CronyismA summary of the Supreme Court's place in United States society through the lenses of white supremacy and the process of nominating new justices. It covers the development of African-American-driven civil rights case law as a pressure on American politics. Ultimately, Part 1 is about what lead to the Warren Court's famously liberal rulings, the effects those rulings had on the United States, and then the retirement of Earl Warren. President Lyndon Johnson's preference for promoting his loyal followers, including Abe Fortas, lead to a delay in Warren's retirement that allowed President Nixon choose Warren's successor. This, among social factors also explored, lead to a sharp right-wing turn for the Court.Timestamps:[00:00:00] Part 1 Introduction[00:01:55] Prologue[00:05:50] 1) The Beginnings of a Battle[00:41:42] 2) The Nature of the Court[01:18:03] 3) The Abiding Issue[01:46:08] 4) The Warren Court Leads[02:24:15] 5) The Black Seat[03:11:15] 6) The Perils of CronyismGod Save This Honorable Court: The Supreme Court Crisis, Part 1 by Louis M. Kohlmeier, Jr.This episode of Lex Phonographica was read by Mike Overby of Amicus Lectio. You can find the individual chapters on the Internet Archive. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Michael Bobelian has written a history of the nomination of Abe Fortas to be Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1968. In Battle for the Marble Palace: Abe Fortas, Earl Warren, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and the Forging of the Modern Supreme Court (Schaffner, 2019), he reminds us of the intense political battle over Lyndon Johnson's legacy nomination of then-associate justice Abe Fortas to the chief justiceship. Bobelian's account, relying upon a wealth of archival materials, including primary sources from presidential libraries, Senate hearings, and interviews, recreates the political world of Washington, D.C. in the 1960s, during the height of the Warren Court's influence. Bobelian assesses the motives for various actors, such as segregationist Strom Thurmond, moderate Robert Griffin, and liberals Abe Fortas and Earl Warren, in their roles in the nomination process. He makes the argument that the politicization of the nomination process did not begin with Robert Bork's nomination in 1987, but truly began with the nomination of Fortas. Bobelian also considers the political and popular responses to the then-novel consistently activist Warren Court and how the Fortas nomination and the opposition to it were motivated by combinations of jurisprudential ideology, institutional prerogatives, and the dynamics of personal relationships. Ian J. Drake is an Associate Professor of Political Science and Law at Montclair State University. His scholarly interests include American legal and constitutional history and political theory. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Michael Bobelian has written a history of the nomination of Abe Fortas to be Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1968. In Battle for the Marble Palace: Abe Fortas, Earl Warren, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and the Forging of the Modern Supreme Court (Schaffner, 2019), he reminds us of the intense political battle over Lyndon Johnson’s legacy nomination of then-associate justice Abe Fortas to the chief justiceship. Bobelian’s account, relying upon a wealth of archival materials, including primary sources from presidential libraries, Senate hearings, and interviews, recreates the political world of Washington, D.C. in the 1960s, during the height of the Warren Court’s influence. Bobelian assesses the motives for various actors, such as segregationist Strom Thurmond, moderate Robert Griffin, and liberals Abe Fortas and Earl Warren, in their roles in the nomination process. He makes the argument that the politicization of the nomination process did not begin with Robert Bork’s nomination in 1987, but truly began with the nomination of Fortas. Bobelian also considers the political and popular responses to the then-novel consistently activist Warren Court and how the Fortas nomination and the opposition to it were motivated by combinations of jurisprudential ideology, institutional prerogatives, and the dynamics of personal relationships. Ian J. Drake is an Associate Professor of Political Science and Law at Montclair State University. His scholarly interests include American legal and constitutional history and political theory. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Michael Bobelian has written a history of the nomination of Abe Fortas to be Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1968. In Battle for the Marble Palace: Abe Fortas, Earl Warren, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and the Forging of the Modern Supreme Court (Schaffner, 2019), he reminds us of the intense political battle over Lyndon Johnson’s legacy nomination of then-associate justice Abe Fortas to the chief justiceship. Bobelian’s account, relying upon a wealth of archival materials, including primary sources from presidential libraries, Senate hearings, and interviews, recreates the political world of Washington, D.C. in the 1960s, during the height of the Warren Court’s influence. Bobelian assesses the motives for various actors, such as segregationist Strom Thurmond, moderate Robert Griffin, and liberals Abe Fortas and Earl Warren, in their roles in the nomination process. He makes the argument that the politicization of the nomination process did not begin with Robert Bork’s nomination in 1987, but truly began with the nomination of Fortas. Bobelian also considers the political and popular responses to the then-novel consistently activist Warren Court and how the Fortas nomination and the opposition to it were motivated by combinations of jurisprudential ideology, institutional prerogatives, and the dynamics of personal relationships. Ian J. Drake is an Associate Professor of Political Science and Law at Montclair State University. His scholarly interests include American legal and constitutional history and political theory. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Michael Bobelian has written a history of the nomination of Abe Fortas to be Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1968. In Battle for the Marble Palace: Abe Fortas, Earl Warren, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and the Forging of the Modern Supreme Court (Schaffner, 2019), he reminds us of the intense political battle over Lyndon Johnson’s legacy nomination of then-associate justice Abe Fortas to the chief justiceship. Bobelian’s account, relying upon a wealth of archival materials, including primary sources from presidential libraries, Senate hearings, and interviews, recreates the political world of Washington, D.C. in the 1960s, during the height of the Warren Court’s influence. Bobelian assesses the motives for various actors, such as segregationist Strom Thurmond, moderate Robert Griffin, and liberals Abe Fortas and Earl Warren, in their roles in the nomination process. He makes the argument that the politicization of the nomination process did not begin with Robert Bork’s nomination in 1987, but truly began with the nomination of Fortas. Bobelian also considers the political and popular responses to the then-novel consistently activist Warren Court and how the Fortas nomination and the opposition to it were motivated by combinations of jurisprudential ideology, institutional prerogatives, and the dynamics of personal relationships. Ian J. Drake is an Associate Professor of Political Science and Law at Montclair State University. His scholarly interests include American legal and constitutional history and political theory. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Michael Bobelian has written a history of the nomination of Abe Fortas to be Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1968. In Battle for the Marble Palace: Abe Fortas, Earl Warren, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and the Forging of the Modern Supreme Court (Schaffner, 2019), he reminds us of the intense political battle over Lyndon Johnson’s legacy nomination of then-associate justice Abe Fortas to the chief justiceship. Bobelian’s account, relying upon a wealth of archival materials, including primary sources from presidential libraries, Senate hearings, and interviews, recreates the political world of Washington, D.C. in the 1960s, during the height of the Warren Court’s influence. Bobelian assesses the motives for various actors, such as segregationist Strom Thurmond, moderate Robert Griffin, and liberals Abe Fortas and Earl Warren, in their roles in the nomination process. He makes the argument that the politicization of the nomination process did not begin with Robert Bork’s nomination in 1987, but truly began with the nomination of Fortas. Bobelian also considers the political and popular responses to the then-novel consistently activist Warren Court and how the Fortas nomination and the opposition to it were motivated by combinations of jurisprudential ideology, institutional prerogatives, and the dynamics of personal relationships. Ian J. Drake is an Associate Professor of Political Science and Law at Montclair State University. His scholarly interests include American legal and constitutional history and political theory. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Michael Bobelian has written a history of the nomination of Abe Fortas to be Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1968. In Battle for the Marble Palace: Abe Fortas, Earl Warren, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and the Forging of the Modern Supreme Court (Schaffner, 2019), he reminds us of the intense political battle over Lyndon Johnson’s legacy nomination of then-associate justice Abe Fortas to the chief justiceship. Bobelian’s account, relying upon a wealth of archival materials, including primary sources from presidential libraries, Senate hearings, and interviews, recreates the political world of Washington, D.C. in the 1960s, during the height of the Warren Court’s influence. Bobelian assesses the motives for various actors, such as segregationist Strom Thurmond, moderate Robert Griffin, and liberals Abe Fortas and Earl Warren, in their roles in the nomination process. He makes the argument that the politicization of the nomination process did not begin with Robert Bork’s nomination in 1987, but truly began with the nomination of Fortas. Bobelian also considers the political and popular responses to the then-novel consistently activist Warren Court and how the Fortas nomination and the opposition to it were motivated by combinations of jurisprudential ideology, institutional prerogatives, and the dynamics of personal relationships. Ian J. Drake is an Associate Professor of Political Science and Law at Montclair State University. His scholarly interests include American legal and constitutional history and political theory. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Olha nós aqui traveis!Resolvemos fazer uma Bolhinha Extra para dar uma lavada na alma. Nesse episódio vamos mostrar como em democracias mais desenvolvidas, no caso, nos Estados Unidos, os casos de corrupção na Suprema Corte são exceção e não a regra. Conheça a história de Abe Fortas e tire suas próprias conclusões. 

In Michael Bobelian’s book on the U. S. Supreme Court, BATTLE FOR THE MARBLE PALACE, he argues that the doomed nomination of Associate Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas by President Lyndon Johnson, to be Chief Justice in 1968 was the turning point of a historic transformation of the confirmation process. Conservatives, unhappy with many of the court decisions under retiring Chief Justice Earl Warren reigning in McCarthyism and ending legal segregation, filibustered to keep Fortas from ascending to the Chief Justice seat.

On March 20, 1968, after an introduction delivered by Associate Justice Thurgood Marshall, Associate Justice Abraham "Abe" Fortas (1910-1982) delivered an address at the American University Washington College of Law Convocation on the 75th Anniversary of American University. Among other things, Fortas discussed the concept of precedent and stare decisis in relation to the Supreme Court's constitutional criminal procedure jurisprudence. Fortas reflects on Betts v. Brady and Gideon v. Wainwright, and how they reflected evolving social mores. And he uses them to explain and justify the Court's decision in Miranda v. Arizona.This recording is from the Michigan State University G. Robert Vincent Voice Library collection. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

On March 20, 1968, Associate Justice Thurgood Marshall (1908-93) introduced Associate Justice Abraham "Abe" Fortas (1910-1982) at the American University Washington College of Law Convocation on the 75th Anniversary of American University. This is a recording of Marshall's introduction.This recording is from the Michigan State University G. Robert Vincent Voice Library collection. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Remember when President Obama nominated Merrick Garland to replace the late Antonin Scalia as a Justice on the Supreme Court in 2016 only to have that nomination complete shut down Senate Republicans? Or remember when President Trump nominated Brett Kavanaugh to the Court resulting Kavanaugh's sexual history played out before the national media? My guest today writes about the Supreme Court for a living and has quite thoughtfully asked if the nomination process has always been so brutal? Michael Bobelian is the author of Battle for the Marble Palace: Abe Fortas, Earl Warren, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and the Forging of the Modern Supreme Court in which he identifies the 1968 nomination of Abe Fortas to become Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as the turning point when what had been a mundane procedural vote became a bitter partisan feud. Michael is himself a lawyer as well as a graduate of the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism. He covers the Supreme Court and other legal subjects for Forbe.com, and has contributed to numerous publications including Reuters, the LA Times, and NPR. Michael joined me for a fascinating Skype interview about the Fortas nomination and what that means for us today. Want to listen to new episodes a week earlier and get exclusive bonus content? Consider becoming a supporter of the podcast on Patreon! Like the podcast? Please subscribe and leave a review! Follow @CMTUHistory on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram & TikTok --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

Michael Bobelian, author of Battle for the Marble Palace joins Michael Isikoff and Daniel Klaidman on this episode of Skullduggery's Buried Treasure. The discuss the legacy of Abe Fortas, U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice from 1965 to 1969, how he's affected modern day politics, as well as his lasting effects on the Supreme Court. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

The Kavanaugh nomination and a bit of Supreme Court nomination history.  A discussion and at times debate with Chris Novembrino of Don't Worry About the Government podcast.  This one does get a bit opinionated.   

Well, well….and how was YOUR weekend? Our long national nightmare is now over and we’ve got a shiny new Bro-Judge installed on the Supreme Court. A “non-partisan” judge who starts waving around conspiracy theories at the drop of a hat (ie: let’s all blame the Clintons). Well, this is going to be fun. But don’t worry - we here at This is the President will be right here by your side. In today’s episode, we wanted to take a look at another controversial Supreme Court appointment - this one from 50 years ago. It was the summer of 1968 when President Johnson decided to throw his weight behind nominating his pal Abe Fortas as the Head Justice of the United States Supreme Court. Let’s just say that the Senate was not amused - so much so to the point that they forced Fortas to testify before them. The first time in history that a judge from the Supreme Court was called in this manner - sound familiar? Download this episode to listen in on Fortas advising President Johnson on exactly what type of book he needed to take his oath of office on and how the Johnson’s walked away with a little souvenir after that fateful day in Dallas, Texas in November, 1963. We’ll also hear from Senator Strom Thurmond with his opinions on Fortas and discuss the Abe Fortas Film Festival that Thurmond threw on the floor of the Senate. ALSO - Check out our newest segment - Amazon Reviews of Donald Trump products!

Legally Insane Supreme Court Rejects - Episode 47 With the Supreme Court Justice nomination currently in our news feeds. Matt and Tony share some insight on previous Supreme Court contenders who were rejected. In this episode you’ll hear learn about the history of Supreme Court Nominations and how Political Loyalty reigns supreme. Highlights: [07:40] – Bork tells the truth. [10:35] – Bork was part of the Saturday Night Massacre. [15:23] – Alex Walcot was defeated 24-9. [17:06] – Ebenezer Hoag insisted on rewarding merit instead of political  loyalty. [20:24] – Senatorial Courtesy. [26:45] – Abe Fortas takes a bribe. [37:35] – About 1/3rd of US Presidents have nominated judges. Of those, six nominations got through as lame ducks. The Takeaway – Don’t get Borked. Hollywood Improv Ticket Link: https://www.ticketweb.com/event/legally-insane-with-matt-ritter-hollywood-improv-the-lab-tickets/8497065?pl=hollyimprov&REFID=hollywoodimprov&_ga=2.105621379.1209749857.1534904708-TW.1.0.5b69e77d380c3 Twitter: @mattritter1 @toekneesam Website: www.cascademedia.com  

It was a year that at times left Lyndon Johnson feeling as though he was living in a continuous nightmare. Yet as Kyle Longley describes in his book LBJ's 1968: Power, Politics, and the Presidency in America's Year of Upheaval (Cambridge University Press, 2018), it was one in which he continued to engage with the many challenges confronting his presidency as he finished his term in office. That it would be his last year as president was not certain at the beginning of it, as he was expected by everyone to run for another term in the upcoming presidential election. Yet as Longley explains, health concerns and the divisions caused by the Vietnam War led Johnson to contemplate announcing during the State of the Union address that he would not seek another term. Even after he made his decision official in March, he continued to pursue an ambitious agenda that included new Great Society legislation, arms negotiations with the Soviets, and the nomination of his friend Abe Fortas as the next chief justice of the Supreme Court. Longley shows how a combination of Johnson's lame duck status and events beyond his control often combined to frustrate his intentions, while his desire to avoid a scandal by not publicizing information about the Nixon campaign's interference in the ongoing negotiations to end the war in Vietnam only paved the way for the even greater political crises in his successor's administration.

It was a year that at times left Lyndon Johnson feeling as though he was living in a continuous nightmare. Yet as Kyle Longley describes in his book LBJ’s 1968: Power, Politics, and the Presidency in America’s Year of Upheaval (Cambridge University Press, 2018), it was one in which he continued to engage with the many challenges confronting his presidency as he finished his term in office. That it would be his last year as president was not certain at the beginning of it, as he was expected by everyone to run for another term in the upcoming presidential election. Yet as Longley explains, health concerns and the divisions caused by the Vietnam War led Johnson to contemplate announcing during the State of the Union address that he would not seek another term. Even after he made his decision official in March, he continued to pursue an ambitious agenda that included new Great Society legislation, arms negotiations with the Soviets, and the nomination of his friend Abe Fortas as the next chief justice of the Supreme Court. Longley shows how a combination of Johnson’s lame duck status and events beyond his control often combined to frustrate his intentions, while his desire to avoid a scandal by not publicizing information about the Nixon campaign’s interference in the ongoing negotiations to end the war in Vietnam only paved the way for the even greater political crises in his successor’s administration. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It was a year that at times left Lyndon Johnson feeling as though he was living in a continuous nightmare. Yet as Kyle Longley describes in his book LBJ’s 1968: Power, Politics, and the Presidency in America’s Year of Upheaval (Cambridge University Press, 2018), it was one in which he continued to engage with the many challenges confronting his presidency as he finished his term in office. That it would be his last year as president was not certain at the beginning of it, as he was expected by everyone to run for another term in the upcoming presidential election. Yet as Longley explains, health concerns and the divisions caused by the Vietnam War led Johnson to contemplate announcing during the State of the Union address that he would not seek another term. Even after he made his decision official in March, he continued to pursue an ambitious agenda that included new Great Society legislation, arms negotiations with the Soviets, and the nomination of his friend Abe Fortas as the next chief justice of the Supreme Court. Longley shows how a combination of Johnson’s lame duck status and events beyond his control often combined to frustrate his intentions, while his desire to avoid a scandal by not publicizing information about the Nixon campaign’s interference in the ongoing negotiations to end the war in Vietnam only paved the way for the even greater political crises in his successor’s administration. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It was a year that at times left Lyndon Johnson feeling as though he was living in a continuous nightmare. Yet as Kyle Longley describes in his book LBJ’s 1968: Power, Politics, and the Presidency in America’s Year of Upheaval (Cambridge University Press, 2018), it was one in which he continued to engage with the many challenges confronting his presidency as he finished his term in office. That it would be his last year as president was not certain at the beginning of it, as he was expected by everyone to run for another term in the upcoming presidential election. Yet as Longley explains, health concerns and the divisions caused by the Vietnam War led Johnson to contemplate announcing during the State of the Union address that he would not seek another term. Even after he made his decision official in March, he continued to pursue an ambitious agenda that included new Great Society legislation, arms negotiations with the Soviets, and the nomination of his friend Abe Fortas as the next chief justice of the Supreme Court. Longley shows how a combination of Johnson’s lame duck status and events beyond his control often combined to frustrate his intentions, while his desire to avoid a scandal by not publicizing information about the Nixon campaign’s interference in the ongoing negotiations to end the war in Vietnam only paved the way for the even greater political crises in his successor’s administration. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It was a year that at times left Lyndon Johnson feeling as though he was living in a continuous nightmare. Yet as Kyle Longley describes in his book LBJ’s 1968: Power, Politics, and the Presidency in America’s Year of Upheaval (Cambridge University Press, 2018), it was one in which he continued to engage with the many challenges confronting his presidency as he finished his term in office. That it would be his last year as president was not certain at the beginning of it, as he was expected by everyone to run for another term in the upcoming presidential election. Yet as Longley explains, health concerns and the divisions caused by the Vietnam War led Johnson to contemplate announcing during the State of the Union address that he would not seek another term. Even after he made his decision official in March, he continued to pursue an ambitious agenda that included new Great Society legislation, arms negotiations with the Soviets, and the nomination of his friend Abe Fortas as the next chief justice of the Supreme Court. Longley shows how a combination of Johnson’s lame duck status and events beyond his control often combined to frustrate his intentions, while his desire to avoid a scandal by not publicizing information about the Nixon campaign’s interference in the ongoing negotiations to end the war in Vietnam only paved the way for the even greater political crises in his successor’s administration. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Abe Fortas was born in Memphis in 1910 and would go on to become a Supreme Court Justice of the United States. His journey to the nation's highest court took him far away from his hometown, but the impact of growing up poor in the South is evident in nearly everything he accomplished. For this episode, we interview Tim Huebner, Professor of History at Rhodes College, who recently published a remarkable article for the Journal of Supreme Court History entitled Memphis and the Making of Justice Fortas. It is perhaps the best examination of this city's impact on the man, and it is chock full of detail and fascinating anecdotes. If you're a Memphis history buff and care about equality and fairness, you'll love our conversation.