In Black America; The Truman Court, with Rawn James, Jr.

From the University of Texas at Austin, KUT Radio, this is In Black America. The recent sword aspect of Harry Truman's presidency is the effect that he had on the judiciary and in particular on the Supreme Court and it's something that we now take for granted. We expect our presidents to, if they have the opportunity, to put their imprint on the judicial brands and on the Supreme Court. But this was something novel at the time and that's what led me to research and write the Truman Court. Attorney Ron James Jr., former Assistant Attorney General for the District of Columbia, an author of the Truman Court, law and the limits of loyalty, published by University of Missouri Press. President Harry S. Truman filled four vacancies on the Supreme Court during his eight years as president.

Those he appointed included a Republican Senator, his Secretary of the Treasury, his Attorney General, and a judge from the seven District Court of Appeals. According to James in his book, Truman more than any other president before or since, quickly and completely changed the ideological and temperamental composition of the court. For shattering his successor, Truman lied on his Supreme Court to link constitutional credence to his own political agenda. I'm John L. Hanson Jr., and welcome to another edition of In Black America. On this week's program, the Truman Court, law and the limits of loyalty with author Ron James Jr., in Black America. By this court, and we're talking the 1952 term, which then becomes 53 and 64, by this point, the Thurgood Marshall's legal team, the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, have been pushing the court to overturn Tlessy for at least six years now. They've been actively accessing the court to do it. The problem, this was such an excellent thing the court did,

is the court did not affirm Tlessy, even as it essentially just ignored the NAACP's request to overturn Tlessy. They said, well, we can rule on these cases in front of the court. And we are right. We can rule on this case without affirming Tlessy or overturning it, because the court did not want, the justice did not want to overturn Tlessy without a 9- nothing decision to do so. No book written today could be more timely. The current hyperpolitical sensitivity to Supreme Court appointments, traces back to President Harry S. Truman. Attorney Ron James booked the Truman Court as an every microcosm of the Supreme Court we have today. James lays out in engaging detail, how President Truman successfully molded the high court into a judicial body that appeared to accurately support his administration political agenda. During his tenure as president, Truman was able to nominate three associate justice and a chief justice. In ruling that sparked controversy in their own time,

the Supreme Court repeatedly upheld Truman's most contentious policies, including action to restrict free speech, expand civil rights, and manage labor union unrest. But this book is more than a Truman Court. The justice was involved in all issues of the era, housing rights, racial justice, civil liberties, and the Cold War. Recently in black America spoke with Attorney Ron James Jr. Born in Miami floor, the third generation in Miami, which is hard to find. And my father's a retired naval officer, so I moved around, lived a whole bunch of different places. And I've been here in Washington, D.C. practicing law for about 20 years now. What sparked that initial interest in you practicing law? I think I started in undergraduate during my undergraduate time as a natural feeding. I went to Yale for undergraduate and it's kind of Yale is kind of a feeder for law schools. And I was really just interested in a couple of classes that I took as an undergraduate that were related to constitutional law

and civil rights and civil liberties. Now, this is not your first book. What was your first book that you had written? My first book was Routin Branch, Charles Hamilton Houston, Thurgood Marshall, and The Struggles to Insegregation. That was published in 2010. And my second book was The Double V. Power's protest in Harry Truman desegregated America's military, and that was published in 2013. And the first book were you 19? No, no, no. It seems like that long ago in some way. So much has changed since then. So what led you to write these two books regarding these attorneys, but also desegregation of the military? The second book, each book kind of was born of the previous one. So I was very much interested in Charles Hamilton Houston and Thurgood Marshall and how Charles Hamilton Houston laid the groundwork and was the architect for the legal effort to desegregate America

and his brilliant legal strategy that took decades to fulfill. And then in the course of that, I learned more about how the what we now call the civil rights movement began as the struggle to desegregate America's military. And that led me to look more into that. So then read and learn more about President Harry Truman. And so that's why I followed up with the double V how wars protest and Harry Truman desegregated America's military because we started off as an integrated military. And then we was segregated and then became integrated yet again. And today our military is the most diverse large institution in the United States. It's an incredible journey that I believe is both a mirror and a museum of who and what we are as a country. And in researching and learning about Harry Truman through the course of that book and even afterwards, because after look is published and you meet other Truman scholars and you discussed different things.

And so then I learned more and I learned that the least explored aspect of Harry Truman's presidency is the effect that he had on the judiciary and in particular on the Supreme Court. And it's something that we now take for granted we expect our president to if they have the opportunity to put their imprint on the judicial brands and on the Supreme Court. But this was something novel at the time. And that's what led me to research and write the Truman court for those that weren't paying attention in civic class give us a thumbnail of president Harry Truman. Harry Truman was Franklin Roosevelt's vice president during Franklin Roosevelt's fourth term in office, which was a very short lived term. Roosevelt died and Harry Truman became president of the United States prior to that he had been a senator from Missouri, and a senator of frankly not a great. Well, he was he was not a remarkable senator until the Truman committee during World War II in which he was able to investigate the how money was being spent in the military branches.

And that made him a senator of considerable note, actually. And so that's how he got on to Roosevelt's ticket. The other thing that's that I note in the Truman court is Harry Truman was one of the few Democrats to support FDR's court packing plant. And most Democrats, most Democrats opposed it. It was widely unpopular. Harry Truman supported it with lackluster support, but he did support it. FDR took note of everyone who supported and imposed his plan. Had Harry Truman not supported that ill-fated court packing plan, he would not have been Franklin Roosevelt would not have agreed to place him on the ticket as his vice presidential running mate. He became president. When did you have the impiphany that of all of the biographies written about President Truman, no one actually delved into his judiciary appointment? Well, I had to read about every single biography written about Harry Truman, those still in print, those out of print, and I read a whole lot of them and did not see this topic explored. I started even just hinted at even at some of our best Harry Truman biographies.

So then I started going looking back into some old law review articles that would go into it. And part of it was because the men whom he nominated successfully to the court did not go on to become major justices. So everyone remembers Franklin Roosevelt in the Supreme Court, not just because of the ill-fated court packing plan, but because when Franklin Roosevelt finally got the chance to nominate justices to the court, he nominated justices who became or he nominated attorneys, who became significant justices on the court. Franklin did not do that. Harry Truman nominated his friends to the Supreme Court, and he nominated three justices and one cheap justice. And that's part of why his judicial legacy has been ignored. I think that what it does is it ignores what an effect his putting his imprint on the judicial branch, the effect that has had on our executive branch and how we perceive the president's powers and responsibilities with respect to the Supreme Court.

I always find it interesting that I like to ask those who have written books, how they came up with their first chapter, you began this book with we must have still why was that significant for you to begin the story. This is just the steel seizure crisis, which I begin the first chapter deals with the steel seizure crisis and the last chapter deals with the steel seizure crisis. I kind of have a book end there, so to speak. And that is because that is just put it brief very briefly in the context there was the true administration see the deal industry and there's a great deal of arguments over price controls and a lot of technical stuff, but the short of it is that the true administration sees control of the skill industry and said that we're taking control of this because we're at war. The Korean War, however, the Korean War was the first war we have this is something else that Truman said the president for the Korean War was not a declared war.

So there was no act of Congress that said we are at war as had happened with World War 2. And so the question that eventually rose to the Supreme Court was whether or not the Truman administration had the power to seize the steel industry. And it was a cliffhanger at the time, but most observers believe whether they thought this was the correct result or not. They believe that the court would uphold the true administration's ability to seize the steel mills and spoiler alert the court did not. The court ruled that the true administration could not seize the steel mills under these circumstances and it was a stinging review for the president, even after he had not hit after he had three justices and a supreme and a cheap justice successfully nominated to the court. What happened after justice on Roberts resigned? That comes from from Justice Roberts Justice Owen Roberts not to be confused with our chief justice today Justice Owen Roberts enjoyed his place during the 1930s at the center of the court where in many respects you you are one of the most powerful individuals in government we saw that with Justice Anthony Kennedy before he resigned where there are four justices that generally fall on either side and you're in the middle.

You have you have extraordinary power and he enjoyed having that power so it no longer existed because the justices began to essentially to save the court they began to stop really non constitutional the new deal policies justice Roberts justice Owen Roberts resigned and that is what began to allow change to come into the court. It was such a bit it was so bitterly divided at that point it was really really something to see that was one of one of the beginning times when when we're talking about this time period of Franklin Roosevelt attempting to pack the court justice Owen Roberts resigning. This is the first time there were leaks and gossip from the Supreme Court that were getting into America's newspapers because before that it was just something you know that just the court issue ruling okay and they go on with their lives this was the beginning of kind of what we're familiar with now where we kind of see it just as another part of our government.

As back then it was just a much quieter part of the government what was the process that President Truman went through to nominate the justices and we're going to go through at least a couple of them because we do want people to purchase the book here I think the first just to see nominated was Harold Burton. Correct and so Harold hits Burton was a Republican senator and this is actually an important point John that the American public at that time looked at when there was this vacancy that Truman could still very early in his presidency. Americans said according to the Gallup polls which Gallup had just established itself as the permanent polling operation in the country and so according to major Gallup poll that was conducted American said President Truman should nominate a Republican and that we did the Americans were under no illusion or fallacy of the all these justices are not Republicans or Democrats. They're not Republicans or Democrats in the sense that they caucus together or they they go to party meetings but for crying out loud their adults they're sentient human beings they're educated human beings they have political opinions and Americans understood that and were allowed to say so at the time and so what they what they said it is Franklin Roosevelt got to nominate a great many good number of justices before was all said and done and they were all Democrats we believe that the that the current Democratic president should nominate a Republican.

And Harry Truman and his White House is new administration so politically this would be a good thing for him to do particularly to establish favor with Congress so he said well I know a Republican who might happen to light because I just left the Senate a few months ago and so he nominated Republican senator held Burton of Ohio to the Supreme Court and it was a unifying unifying event and American politics and no one had had to go to these you know say cooler hoops of acting right now. The hoops of acting right someone who was a Republican suddenly stops becoming Republican because you put a robot over his suit. As I said they don't caucus as Republicans or attend meetings but they're still Republicans and someone who the Democrat working a democratic administration is still going to be a Democrat and Americans that Americans are mature enough to understand that and it really irritates me that our political leaders in part led by our article three judges sometimes.

Act as if this basic truth is somehow anathema to the judicial process just as burden rides. I believe I read that he selected Elliott Ness as the director of public safety and Cleveland did I read that correct. That's right he was the mayor of Cleveland right but when he was climbing his way through the ring and one of his lasting contributions. Well as this electing Elliott Ness because clean I mean clean it was out of control at the time you said there are gangsters everywhere they're running the streets of this and he was known as the Boy Scout mayor because he was so honest and so you know righteous and he found someone who he believed fit the mold for him and and hiring Elliott Ness to help rain into some of the crime corruption. I understand if you're just joining us I'm Johnny Owens in junior and you're listening to in black America from KUT radio and we're speaking with attorney Ron James junior former assistant attorney general for the district of Columbia and also failed to mention that he was the attorney in the department of the Navy.

Author of the Truman court law and the limits of loyalty I cannot complete this interview without talking about time clock talk to us about here. Tom Clark whose whose son recently passed away Ramsey Clark recently passed away at the age of 91 or 94 fact that Tom Clark the surprising individual to end up on the supreme court. He would admit to that he was quite a middling student but Franklin Roosevelt owed favorites some political Republican. No to some democratic political bosses and said okay well send me anybody what who we want it was Tom Clark's brother who was an excellent student highly regarded lawyer all this stuff brothers and no I am not going to wash it in my life is good here in Dallas and so the center to say well how about we send Tom. And so they sent him up there long story story he ends up working with while he's at the Department of Justice he gets assigned to work with Harry Truman when Truman still a senator on the Truman committee and they become friends and Truman when Truman becomes president of the United States names Tom Clark to be his attorney general.

And I believe Clark was 46 years old at the time and he becomes a attorney general of the United States and something which African Americans were quite nervous about because he was from segregated Dallas and had net he had not spoken up on some of the issues that even Harry Truman had spoken up about many of the issues that Harry Truman had spoken up about it regarding civil rights in the way African Americans were denied the basic rights of American citizens. So so then Tom Clark had to go on a tour basically one of the first times a white politician had done this going to tour to the black press and to African American political stakeholders to plead his case of why he would be a good attorney general and he should be confirmed so he was confirmed and then Truman later named him to the Supreme Court but that was the first time things finally began to get a little controversial for Truman where senators and the public said. It's this is the third time now and it seems that everyone he dominates is his friend and everyone he dominates is not that I shouldn't say but it's not one of the signing judicial stars right in America and so which one does not have to be to be a successful attorney general.

I think that Tom Clark was a successful attorney general sometimes I think being an excellent lawyer can get in the way actually of running the department because you don't let people who might be better than you take over and do the stuff they need to do. But Tom Clark was the third nomination and that was when things finally did get controversial and there were votes and there were some outcry against the fact that Harry Truman just seemed to not look at any list provided by the White House. He seemed to have a list in his mind that list consisted of his friends and those folks got nominated. Now, Justice Clark had I guess in epiphany after he was put in charge of the internment of Japanese Americans. Yes, this was he he regretted this and he regretted it even after he resigned from the court. He deeply regretted the role that he played in the Department of Justice during the Roosevelt administration, the Roosevelt White House put him.

He's one of the top individuals in charge of running the Japanese internment camps and he really publicly publicly expressed his deep remorse and pain for not having spoken up at the time for something that he believed was wrong even as he was he was doing it. I am looking through here. Okay, the path to Brown, I found quite interesting. Tell us about that particular chapter. The past Brown is I mean, it's kind of it's a long one. I mean, that's what my first book was about is the long winding past to Brown, but also the path in the true record, part of what explores the path to Brown from the other side, from the justice's side. And the five cases that were consolidated that we now call Brown versus Board of Education and how it got to the to the justices and I when it got there. It was a hot potato and they knew something that I truly wish current justices would try to find a way to do they knew that when they issued a major decision that it should be unanimous and in their first hearing of brown cases during the conference.

Justice Felix Frankfurter, who was appointed by Franklin Roosevelt does this Frankfurter quickly realized that they were not close to unanimity. And he thought it would be a disaster for the court to have a six to three opinion, which is what it was looking like a six to three opinion for desegregating. And he said, we just can't do this. So he worked with his clerks to come up with some questions that we can punt this back and bring it back for next session and basically without saying so that give me a year to try to work with you know on the court to try to get us there. So they pointed it back to the to the attorneys with a list of questions that ostensibly came from the court were actually were written by Justice Frankfurter's law clerk. And during the interim during that time, Chief Justice of during the time when the cases were pointed back to circuit Marshall and his legal team and the the opposing sides legal team was what was pointed back to the lawyers during that time, Chief Justice Fred Vincent died suddenly of a heart attack.

There's a there I research this is as deeply as I research anything and there is evidence on both sides of whether or not of what of it's not clear entirely where Fred Vincent would fall. I shouldn't say that it's just preliminary vote was said, well, we can't overturn this. That was in progress. It was not the final say because he agreed to punt back. It's unclear whether he would have changed what is clear is that there was no way that Chief Justice Fred Vincent who I think it's a bum rap on many other respects, but there was no way to keep justice Fred Vincent would be able to marshal a nine to zero decision for brown versus board of education. And so Justice Frankfurter who I was telling them at a loss for words actually said privately to another justice at the Chief Justice funeral. This is the first indication that I've ever had that there is a guy.

Exactly. Why was they trying to tap dance around the pressy workers Ferguson issue by this point and we're talking the 1952 term, which then becomes 50 green. So by this point, the third marshal's legal team, the NAACP legal defense fund have been pushing the court to overturn. For at least six years now, they've been actively asking the court to do it. The problem this was such an excellent in the court did is the court did not affirm. Even as it essentially just ignored the NAACP's request to overturn plastic, they said, but we can we can rule on these case on this case. And we are right. We can rule on this case without affirming, pressing or overturning it because the court did not want the justice did not want to overturn. We're termed plus he was out a nine to nothing decision to do so. But had they, but, but had they affirmed the Plessy? I honestly got only knows where we would be.

Had they affirmed Plessy versus versus. Exactly. So this was really something that really, really struck me and spending years of researching and writing about this in different books is how, how deeply the court took its responsibility. And so how it must speak clearly on these issues. And it's just something that's part of what it's not part of it's a large part of what stood what allowed their decisions to stand as legitimate and stand as honest readings of the law rather than the decision of six lawyers who happen to be confirmed and work on first street northeast. Ron, as an attorney researching other attorneys and justices, what have you come away with this experience? So much it really is something when you have to spend this much time with individuals who are deceased and you read through their papers and read their, you know, look at their driver's licenses and all this stuff. It really is something I like to think at least what I try to do is present, present the individuals who have an effect on her country.

And as much of 360 degrees as I can in the words that I'm allowed to write as well as keep the pages moving for the reader. What I do sense though is that for most of them, they truly did feel the weight of the responsibility. Even when they came out on not the right side of things, one day, one gets the feeling that they truly felt the weight of what they were trying to do, the effect that they were trying to have in the country what they believed was the best thing. When you look back at Truman and his appointments to the court and those four that he did nominated and they were confirmed. One didn't go through a confirmation here because I think that was burdened I believe that didn't actually have to go through a confirmation hearing.

But when you look at what happened then and you look at the justice system nomination processes now, does any of that distribute that it has become so partisan to the point where it's difficult for individuals to actually go through a confirmation hearing without any drama. Yeah, I'm deeply concerned about the confirmation process entirely, particularly the confirmation process as it relates to Article 3 judges, which would be federal judges. Attorney Ron James Jr., former Assistant Attorney General for the District of Columbia, an author of the Truman Court Law and the Limits of Lawality. If you have questions, comments or suggestions that's the future in Black America programs, email us at inBlackAmerica at kut.org. Also let us know what radio station you heard us over. Don't forget to subscribe to our podcast and follow us on Facebook and Twitter.

And in previous programs online is kut.org. You can also listen to a special collection of in Black America programs at American Archive of Public Broadcasting. That's American Archives.org. The views and opinions expressed on this program are not necessary, those of this station or of the University of Texas at Austin. Until we have the opportunity again for Texas co-produced today with Alvarez, I'm John L. Hanson Jr. Thank you for joining us today. Please join us again next week. CD copies of this program are available and may be purchased by writing in Black America CDs. KUT Radio, 300 West Dean Keaton Boulevard, Austin, Texas, 78712. This has been a production of KUT Radio.