Felix Frankfurter Quotes
Save the Constitution from the Court and the Court from itself.
The Roosevelt administration had stemmed the tide of Hoover’s Great Depression but the nation had not yet recovered. The New Deal measures, most of which would be considered fundamental to good government 50 years later was being constantly thwarted by a Supreme Court with a strong arch conservative majority headed by James McReynolds, a virulent, overt, anti-Semitic racist, who hated FDR—see {616652} and {585241}. The situation was to many like that which existed before the Civil War when the Court rendered the Dred Scott decision that so harmed the nation. Frankfurter, not then a Supreme Court Justice, urged Roosevelt to do something lest the American Public lose all respect for the Court and our Constitutional system and have the nation harmed by not allowing reforms like child labor laws to go through. The court actually ruled by a narrow majority that the government could not pass laws making it illegal for 11 year old children to work in coal mines or factories. FDR attempted to add more justices turning the majority into a majority—“packing the Supreme Court”, but that politically backfired. Some of the reforms never went through while others needed Constitutional Amendments like the end to Prohibition.
Felix Frankfurter, 1882-1965, U. S. Supreme Court Justice, Letter to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, February 7, 1937
Sourced by: Eigen's Political and Historical Quotations
McReynolds vehemently dissented with the majority view in Perry v. United States that the government's action was wrong but that the plaintiff was not entitled to relief. His remarks were so vituperative that this, and other, comments, did not appear in the formal record of the court. See {616652} for an even worse private insult of FDR. McReynolds was a virulent ant-Semite and believed that all Backs were inferior to whites and Separate but Equal was fine policy for the nation and he was not sure the “equal” was necessary.
The justice so hated the President, that he not only made intemperate insulting remarks in private as this one but he even made intemperate insults in Supreme Court proceedings. See {585241}. McReynolds was an extreme racist and detested every thing that FDR and the New Deal stood for. Although an elderly man when FDR came into office, he lived long enough so that Roosevelt was never able to appoint his replacement. McReynolds was one of the reasons that FDR tried to pack the Supreme Court.
Cummings was arguing against a Constitutional amendment. His alternative led to Roosevelt's court packing schema.
Jefferson’s fears were later reinforced by John Marshall in Marbury v. Madison {606468}
Hatch was the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time.
This concept of balance of power and the equal role of the judiciary is actually quite rare. Even in Parliamentary democracies the parliament can override any court interpretation. In England, the upper legislative house, the House of Lords, actually serves as the nation’s highest or supreme court. And these “Law Lords” can override all regular judicial bodies.
The New Deal liberal Democrats had complained that the Supreme Court was making national policy and law and not interpreting law. They tried to pack the Supreme Court by adding more justices who would be more sympathetic to the New Deal. (See {587549}.) At the beginning of the 21st century it was the conservative Republicans who were making the same claim that the Supreme Court was making law and not interpreting it. The pattern seems to be when the court votes for your side, they are interpreting the law. When they vote for the other side, they are activist—making law improperly.
One of the conundrums of our constitutional system is who has the last word as to what the Constitution means. Essentially it is the judicial branch headed by the Supreme Court. But there are those who believe that the current popular majority should have a say in what is or is not constitutional. If so the legislative branch should have the last word. Still others say that the President is the only person elected by ALL the people, so his opinion most reflects the will of the public. And then there are most who argue that the Constitutional system was created just to avoid the power of currently popular majorities, and the courts should decide based on the Constitution itself. So the statement has very little meaning except that Phillips thinks that the courts have too much power. Whoever gets to decide what is or is not Constitutional will be accused of being “over” the Constitution by those who don’t like the decisions. In our system, that is the courts.
It is argued whether Scalia’s problem was that the Supreme Court was doing something new or radical or the country had changed. He had certainly lived through the greatest transformation of any society and culture on earth at a pace of change that far exceeds anything that has occurred before. Scalia is one who believes that the Constitution should not be interpreted in recognition of these changes, but should be immutable as it was written for the late 18th century. Most judges and legal scholars disagree and try to interpret the Constitution as the founders would have intended, knowing what we know, having the tools and powers we have, and facing the problems of the modern world. It represents a major legal and philosophical debate.
- Born: November 15, 1882
- Died: February 22, 1965
- Nationality: American
- Profession: Judge
Felix Frankfurter was an American lawyer, professor, and jurist who served as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Frankfurter served on the Supreme Court from 1939 to 1962 and was a noted advocate of judicial restraint in the judgments of the Court.