March 19, 1891 – Birthdate of SCOTUS Chief Justice Earl Warren

On this day in history, Earl Warren was born in Los Angeles, California. He sought the nomination for the U.S. President of the Republican party in 1952, but lost out to Dwight D. Eisenhower, who then nominated Warren under a recess appointment as the 14th Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution requires that the most senior federal officers must be confirmed by the Senate before assuming office, but while the Senate is in recess the President may act alone by making a recess appointment to fill “Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate.” To remain in effect, a recess appointment must be approved by the Senate by the end of the next session of Congress, or the position becomes vacant again.

President Eisenhower nominated Warren as Chief Justice on September 30, 1953, and he was confirmed by the Senate on March 1, 1954.

Warren is best-known for four landmark decisions enacted during his tenure: Brown v. Board of Education (347 U.S. 483, 1954), Gideon v. Wainwright (372 U.S. 335, 1963), Reynolds v. Sims (377 U.S. 533, 1964), and Miranda v. Arizona (384 U.S. 436, 1966).

Warren retired on June 23, 1969, after fifteen years of service, and died on July 9, 1974, at the age of eighty-three.

This article by two University of Chicago Law School professors, Geoffrey Stone and David A. Strauss, provides an excellent analysis of the legacy of the Warren Court. They make the case that “. . . the Constitution, as we know it today, is very much the work of the Warren Court,” and argue that “the Warren Court today does not have the reputation it deserves.”

Making an even stronger statement, Morton J. Horowitz, Charles Warren Professor of American Legal History at Harvard Law School, wrote in “The Warren Court And The Pursuit Of Justice,” 50 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 5 (1993), “From 1953, when Earl Warren became Chief Justice, to 1969, when Earl Warren stepped down as Chief Justice, a constitutional revolution occurred.” He elaborated:

The constitutional revolution embarked upon by the Warren Court was based on two general conceptions that may have been in conflict. The first was the idea of a living constitution: a constitution that evolves according to changing values and circumstances. The second was marked by the reemergence of the discourse of rights as a dominant constitutional mode.”

You can read the details of his reasoning here.