The Warren Court : Constitutional Decision

The appointment in 1953 of Earl Warren as Chief Justice of the United States marked the beginning of a new era in the development of constitutional law. In the ensuing years changes of vast dimension and historic impact have taken place. Few men are better qualified to assess the significance of the decisions of the Warren Court than Archibald Cox, student of law, teacher of law and, from 1961 to 1965, Solicitor General of the United States. As Solicitor General, he literally sat at the feet of the Justices while profoundly important and incredibly complex issues were presented for their decision. He presented many of them himself. In his rather too brief book,' Professor Cox discusses decisions of the Warren Court affecting civil rights, criminal procedure, judicial power, first amendment freedoms and electoral procedures. He repeatedly emphasizes the need for judicial action when both the legislature and the executive have failed to take affirmative steps to correct abuses. The Warren Court readily accepted the responsibility, and the judicial branch began to decide major aspects of our most pressing and divisive social, economic and political questions. As a result, constitutional development under the Warren Court has resulted in a redistribution of governmental power between the state and federal governments and among the branches of the federal government itself. Professor Cox does not believe that it is possible in modern times and under our democratic system to divorce law from politics. The docket of the Supreme Court in any recent term reflects the fact that "[i]n the United States, as nowhere else in the world," ' the courts are asked to participate in the disposition of critical aspects of social, economic, political, and philosophical questions. "[C]onstitutional adjudication presents an insoluble dilemma," since the questions