Guest Cliff Sloan, a professor at Georgetown Law Center and former Special Envoy for Guantanamo Closure, discusses the Supreme Court's decisions during World War II and their impact on civil rights. They explore the personal bonds between the justices and FDR, as well as the internal deliberations in notorious cases like Korematsu and Quirin. The podcast also dives into Roosevelt's role in Japanese internment, war-time violations of the Constitution, and the Guantanamo Bay decisions.
The Supreme Court's decisions during World War II were influenced by personal bonds with President Roosevelt and the justices' involvement in the war effort.
The justices of the Roosevelt Court had remarkably close relationships with FDR, shaping the dynamics of the Court during the war.
The Roosevelt Court's decisions during World War II were characterized by a dual nature, with some decisions upholding anti-constitutional actions and others expanding civil liberties.
Deep dives
The Supreme Court and World War II
During World War II, the Supreme Court issued notable opinions on Japanese exclusion and Nazi military commissions. The Court's decisions were influenced by the close personal bonds most justices had with President Roosevelt and their involvement in the war effort. These justices had been appointed by FDR himself, making his impact on the Supreme Court comparable to any president since George Washington. The Court delivered decisions protecting civil liberties during the war, such as recognizing a fundamental liberty interest in reproductive freedom and striking down racial discrimination in voting. However, there were also cases where the Court upheld actions that violated the Constitution, most notably in the persecution and incarceration of Japanese-American citizens. This cautionary tale highlights the danger of justices being unwilling to confront a revered president or his supporters, leading to catastrophic consequences.
The Supreme Court and FDR's Justices
During World War II, FDR appointed seven out of nine justices, forming the so-called Roosevelt Court. The justices had very close relationships with FDR, both personally and professionally. Some of them were part of FDR's inner circle and carried out non-judicial policy and political activities, supporting his war efforts. They gave speeches, participated in rallies, and had significant roles in governmental matters related to the war. These justices revered Roosevelt and were deeply involved in his wartime objectives. This unique composition, with justices having such personal ties to the president, influenced the Court's decisions during this period.
Close Bonds and Personal Relationships
The justices of the Roosevelt Court had remarkably close relationships with FDR. From Hugo Black and Felix Frankfurter to William O. Douglas and Robert Jackson, almost all of them were appointed by FDR and had strong personal connections with him. They were considered part of FDR's official and extended personal family in Washington. These relationships were characterized by trust, admiration, and shared activities. For example, Justice James Burns had a remarkable relationship with FDR, where he played a crucial role in overseeing war-related legislation and even worked directly from the White House. William O. Douglas was a close friend of FDR and had a charismatic presence, telling captivating stories and making great martinis. These personal connections played a significant role in shaping the dynamics of the Roosevelt Court during World War II.
The Dual Nature of the Roosevelt Court
The Roosevelt Court during World War II had a dual nature. On one hand, the Court issued infamous decisions upholding the incarceration of Japanese-American citizens and supporting Nazi military commissions. These decisions were driven by deference to FDR and his administration, as well as an unwillingness to confront the president during a time of war and national security concerns. On the other hand, the Court also issued landmark decisions expanding civil liberties in cases like Skinner v. Oklahoma, West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnett, and Smith v. Allwright. The Court recognized fundamental rights, expressed a commitment to constitutional democracy in contrast to totalitarian regimes, and protected marginalized groups. The Roosevelt Court's decisions during World War II present a complex and contradictory legacy.
The Impact of Personal Relationships on Decisions
The personal relationships between FDR and the justices of the Roosevelt Court had a significant impact on their decisions during World War II. The justices' close ties to FDR influenced their approach to cases involving war powers and national security, leading to a deferential stance towards the executive branch. However, in cases unrelated to direct war issues, such as cases involving civil liberties, reproductive freedom, and racial discrimination, the Court demonstrated a commitment to protecting constitutional rights. These different approaches highlight the delicate balance between national security concerns and the need to uphold civil liberties, underscoring the importance of an independent and vigilant judiciary even during times of war.
The Supreme Court during World War II issued some of the most notorious opinions in its history, including the Japanese exclusion case, Korematsu v. United States, and the Nazi saboteur military commission case, Ex parte Quirin. For a fresh take on these and related cases and a broader perspective on the Supreme Court during World War II, Jack Goldsmith sat down with Cliff Sloan, a professor at Georgetown Law Center and a former Special Envoy for Guantanamo Closure, to discuss his new book, which is called “The Court at War: FDR, His Justices, and the World They Made.”
They discussed how the Court's decisions during World War II were informed by the very close personal bonds of affection that most of the justices had with President Roosevelt and by the justices’ intimate attachment to and involvement with the war effort. They also discussed the fascinating internal deliberations in Korematsu, Quirin, and other momentous cases, and the puzzle of why the same court that issued these decisions also, during the same period, issued famous rights-expanding decisions in the areas of reproductive freedom, voting rights, and freedom of speech.