A court's deliberations revealed; critics charge library's release of Marshall papers thwarted the justice's intent
Article Abstract:
There have been many complaints from both sitting members of the US Supreme Court and members of Thurgood Marshall's family complaining that the Library of Congress' making the former justice's papers available to the public immediately after his 1993 death cannot have been what Marshall intended. Some of the complaints stated that the clause in the instrument of gift making the papers available to researchers and scholars cannot have meant journalists, but Librarian of Congress James H. Billington claims Marshall's wishes were followed in making his papers available to journalists as well.
Publication Name: ABA Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-0088
Year: 1993
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Yes: an abuse of discretion
Article Abstract:
The Library of Congress abused its discretion in the public release of Justice Thurgood Marshall's papers within days of his death. In taking this action, the Library disregarded the importance of confidentiality to the Court's internal deliberations. This confidentiality should obtain for a decent period after a justice's death. Some investigation would have revealed that Marshall could not possibly have wanted his papers released so quickly. After all, he would not even give biographer Carl Rowan access to them. Instant access also did nothing to enhance public debate.
Publication Name: ABA Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-0088
Year: 1993
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
No: more respect for the court
Article Abstract:
The Library of Congress' release of Justice Thurgood Marshall's papers very shortly after his death did not damage the Supreme Court's prestige or jeopardize the confidentiality of its deliberations. The papers show the justices proceed in a very serious and strictly logical manner. They are also very collegial. The information about the Court's decision-making processes may help lawyers prepare their arguments better and help the executive and legislative branches focus more on what type of person would be a good Supreme Court nominee.
Publication Name: ABA Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-0088
Year: 1993
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: Generations; for one Southern family, the passage of time is also the saga of changes in the profession. Not in my parents' back yard
- Abstracts: Suit: death defense is a sham; claim is Fla. provides lawyers but makes it so they can't save inmates. Justices struggle with a 'Lemon;' landmark church-state ruling needs updating - but how?
- Abstracts: Big objections to brief decisions; critics contend one-word appellate rulings give short shrift to justice. Much to do about ADR
- Abstracts: What's left of Unocal? The life and adventures of Unocal - Part I: Moore the marrier
- Abstracts: A protest resignation from ABA. United ABA criticizes house moves; previous meetings' rancor seems but a memory