The August 1973 contretemps over President Nixon's bombing of Cambodia was a turning point in how the Supreme Court handles emergency applications—and a harbinger of things to come.
How many times does it appear that the vagaries, petulance, and prejudices of the Justices have been in play in life or death decisions, rather than a clear headed, honest, and courageous consideration of the rule of law? Seems, at times, it is not a “Supreme” Court; it is, instead, the “Court of Human Folly, Fallacy, and Failure.”
I mean, it’s a court. It’s made up of judges (justices). Those judges are people. People are fallible. So I don’t believe this mythical court that only engages in “clear headed, honest, and courageous consideration of the rule of law” without “vagaries, petulance, [or] prejudices, nor “folly, fallacy, [or] failure” is even possible. Of course none of that changes the fact that we should hold these justices to a high standard, but holding them to an impossible one seems impractical, counterproductive, and doomed to failure.
Nixon’s conduct in Cambodia still grinds my gears. For all Trump’s domestic illegality, it doesn’t come close to matching Nixon’s death in the world. And in contemporary terms, I blame the deaths due to DOGE cuts on Musk and Russ Vaught.
The 20 plus years in the Middle East should be our lesson that Vietnam taught us nothing about meddling in the affairs of other nations. And, with yet another ending not unlike the fall of Saigon.
I don’t know if that’s the right lesson either. Seoul would be North Korea if it weren’t for America. We had a huge impact in Europe. Lindbergh isolationism doesn’t help the world win against Nazism.
Vietnam and the Middle East. I'm not sure how the other wars got caught up in my opinion on Vietnam and the Middle East wars. Isolating ourselves from helping other countries in need is necessary most definitely. Determining what the world should look like shouldn't be our priority. IMHO
While trying, perhaps vainly, to stay on top of the news of the day, I'm also reading "Legacy of Ashes, The history of the CIA" by Tim Weiner, with his sequel "The Mission" waiting in the wings. It's making me wonder: is "horrified amusement" a legitimate term?
Professor - a nice recall from your book, which is excellent. Of the justices at that time who have permitted their papers to be openly reviewed, do any comment on the Cambodia case? I would love to see Marshall’s thoughts. Thank you so much for your work. I look forward to your comments every week. Dave
So would the Court act differently today if Zoom existed at the time of this case? No doubt Liz Holtzman and Norm Siegal remember this fascinating bit of Court history. NYT should republish this intro from your book.
I've read Burt Neuborne's account of this previously. I've always found it telling that "In those days, the ACLU kept a 24-hour watch on the whereabouts of Justice William O. Douglas, in case an emergency vote was needed to slay a dragon, square a circle, or stay an execution." ("I Fought the Imperial Presidency, and the Imperial Presidency Won", ACLU website)
How many times does it appear that the vagaries, petulance, and prejudices of the Justices have been in play in life or death decisions, rather than a clear headed, honest, and courageous consideration of the rule of law? Seems, at times, it is not a “Supreme” Court; it is, instead, the “Court of Human Folly, Fallacy, and Failure.”
I mean, it’s a court. It’s made up of judges (justices). Those judges are people. People are fallible. So I don’t believe this mythical court that only engages in “clear headed, honest, and courageous consideration of the rule of law” without “vagaries, petulance, [or] prejudices, nor “folly, fallacy, [or] failure” is even possible. Of course none of that changes the fact that we should hold these justices to a high standard, but holding them to an impossible one seems impractical, counterproductive, and doomed to failure.
After their immunity ruling, I'm inclined to stick with my thoughts on their "failures".
Nixon’s conduct in Cambodia still grinds my gears. For all Trump’s domestic illegality, it doesn’t come close to matching Nixon’s death in the world. And in contemporary terms, I blame the deaths due to DOGE cuts on Musk and Russ Vaught.
For all Trump’s domestic illegality, it doesn’t ^^ YET ^^ come close to matching Nixon’s death in the world.
Give it time. :(
The 20 plus years in the Middle East should be our lesson that Vietnam taught us nothing about meddling in the affairs of other nations. And, with yet another ending not unlike the fall of Saigon.
I don’t know if that’s the right lesson either. Seoul would be North Korea if it weren’t for America. We had a huge impact in Europe. Lindbergh isolationism doesn’t help the world win against Nazism.
It’s complicated.
Vietnam and the Middle East. I'm not sure how the other wars got caught up in my opinion on Vietnam and the Middle East wars. Isolating ourselves from helping other countries in need is necessary most definitely. Determining what the world should look like shouldn't be our priority. IMHO
*Not isolating ourselves....
While trying, perhaps vainly, to stay on top of the news of the day, I'm also reading "Legacy of Ashes, The history of the CIA" by Tim Weiner, with his sequel "The Mission" waiting in the wings. It's making me wonder: is "horrified amusement" a legitimate term?
Professor - a nice recall from your book, which is excellent. Of the justices at that time who have permitted their papers to be openly reviewed, do any comment on the Cambodia case? I would love to see Marshall’s thoughts. Thank you so much for your work. I look forward to your comments every week. Dave
Any recommendations for books on Douglas would be greatly appreciated.
James Simon, INDEPENDENT JOURNEY: THE LIFE OF WILLIAM O. DOUGLAS (Harper & Row, 1980; pb ed. 1981.)
James Simon, INDEPENDENT JOURNEY: THE LIFE OF WILLIAM O. DOUGLAS (Harper & Row, 1980; pb ed. 1981.)
Thank you, much appreciated. I see our library has a copy too.
Also there’s his two volume autobiography— Go East Young Man (Random House 1974, and the Court Years (Random House 1980).
*Volume
Do you feel he was honest with himself in the two Autobiographies?
I am protesting and creating signage. I am getting burnt out on polls. I get a lift from them occasionally, but think them meaningless in the end result. We need meat behind our platform. https://hotbuttons.substack.com/p/lot-of-polls-no-platform?r=3m1bs
This is fascinating. I'm going to have to reread it at least once more before I feel that I have extracted the meaningful "juice" from it. Thank you.
So would the Court act differently today if Zoom existed at the time of this case? No doubt Liz Holtzman and Norm Siegal remember this fascinating bit of Court history. NYT should republish this intro from your book.
I've read Burt Neuborne's account of this previously. I've always found it telling that "In those days, the ACLU kept a 24-hour watch on the whereabouts of Justice William O. Douglas, in case an emergency vote was needed to slay a dragon, square a circle, or stay an execution." ("I Fought the Imperial Presidency, and the Imperial Presidency Won", ACLU website)