How would Brown v Board of Education have been decided if Fred Vinson had lived?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 11:50:45 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  Constitution and Law (Moderator: World politics is up Schmitt creek)
  How would Brown v Board of Education have been decided if Fred Vinson had lived?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: How would Brown v Board of Education have been decided if Fred Vinson had lived?  (Read 774 times)
I’m not Stu
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,747


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: March 13, 2023, 10:08:44 PM »
« edited: March 13, 2023, 10:11:58 PM by Feel the rhythm in my blood »

Vinson himself was undecided after it was first heard, but died before the rehearing was held. Vinson himself said: "I am not sure what we should do here today". I know Stanley Reed almost voted to uphold school segregation, but Earl Warren convinced Reed at the last minute. What would the outcome have been if Vinson hadn't died?
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,124
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: March 13, 2023, 10:13:00 PM »

I guess Warren probably would have been able to convince Vinson too?
Logged
brucejoel99
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,449
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: March 13, 2023, 10:28:11 PM »

What is your problem?

Logged
I’m not Stu
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,747


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: March 13, 2023, 11:00:13 PM »

I guess Warren probably would have been able to convince Vinson too?
Warren wouldn’t have been appointed yet. Felix Frankfurter believed that Vinson’s death changed the game
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,124
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: March 13, 2023, 11:01:45 PM »

I guess Warren probably would have been able to convince Vinson too?
Warren wouldn’t have been appointed yet. Felix Frankfurter believed that Vinson’s death changed the game
Oh. Ah.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,522
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: March 13, 2023, 11:38:54 PM »

I guess Warren probably would have been able to convince Vinson too?
Warren wouldn’t have been appointed yet. Felix Frankfurter believed that Vinson’s death changed the game

It definitely changed the game.  The rumor was that it was initially 5/4 to desegregate without Warren, with Black, Douglas, Minton, Burton, and Frankfurter for desegregation, and Vinson, Clark, Reed, and Jackson dissenting.  Jackson was apparently conflicted and might well have flipped to make it 6/3, though it's well documented he was initially opposed.  Needless to say, it would have been much more challenging to make a 5/4 decision stick.  It was challenging enough when it was unanimous.

With Vinson dissenting, Justice Black would have been the most senior justice in the majority and would most likely write the opinion.  Assuming a 5/4 Brown sticks, I would expect Hugo Black to be much more widely known and remembered as the St. Paul of civil rights.  His "conversion" would have been decisive.
Logged
Death of a Salesman
Rookie
**
Posts: 238
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: March 20, 2023, 10:13:55 PM »

Vinson himself was undecided after it was first heard, but died before the rehearing was held. Vinson himself said: "I am not sure what we should do here today". I know Stanley Reed almost voted to uphold school segregation, but Earl Warren convinced Reed at the last minute. What would the outcome have been if Vinson hadn't died?

The more interesting counterfactual is if Truman appointed James Byrnes instead of Fred Vinson.

Vinson was a well-qualified appointee, in that he had experience in the executive (serving Secretary of the Treasury), legislative (former Congressman from Kentucky), and judicial (former circuit court justice) branches. However James Byrnes was another Truman cabinet member who was strictly better qualified. He was the serving Secretary of State, had served as a Senator from South Carolina, and had been a Supreme Court Justice. Why Truman picked Vinson is somewhat unclear, and may have been the result of personal tensions between Byrnes and Truman, as Byrnes had viewed himself as Roosevelt's heir apparent.

In any case, Truman easily could have chosen Byrnes, and he would have been approved by voice vote. In our world, Byrnes lived until 1972.

As a white South Carolinian born in the 19th century, he was a committed segregationist, and was in fact one of the parties being sued in Brown v. Board (he became the governor of South Carolina in 1950). There's a chance he could have convinced Frankfurter to oppose the decision. In any case, a 5-4 decision with a dissent from the sitting Chief Justice would be far harder to enforce than an unanimous decision, especially given Eisenhower's own doubts.

Eisenhower's promise to Warren would lead to Warren replacing Jackson when he passed, so the likelihood of something like Brown v. Board being issued would be high. Nonetheless, Warren would be the most junior Justice, rather than the Chief.

The liberal turn in American public opinion on racial issues during the 50s and 60s was not entirely the result of the court, and something like that probably would have happened regardless of the influence of one man. Still, the Chief Justice is a powerful office, and Byrnes would have fought a number of rearguard actions.

Baker v. Carr & Reynolds v. Sims (which dealt with state legislative districts which were not equipopulous), probably would have been decided the other way. Miranda v. Arizona almost certainly would have. A 5-4 decision in Brown v. Board would delay any further efforts along those lines.

The impact that this would have on electoral politics is unclear.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,522
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: March 21, 2023, 08:39:14 AM »

Vinson himself was undecided after it was first heard, but died before the rehearing was held. Vinson himself said: "I am not sure what we should do here today". I know Stanley Reed almost voted to uphold school segregation, but Earl Warren convinced Reed at the last minute. What would the outcome have been if Vinson hadn't died?

The more interesting counterfactual is if Truman appointed James Byrnes instead of Fred Vinson.

Vinson was a well-qualified appointee, in that he had experience in the executive (serving Secretary of the Treasury), legislative (former Congressman from Kentucky), and judicial (former circuit court justice) branches. However James Byrnes was another Truman cabinet member who was strictly better qualified. He was the serving Secretary of State, had served as a Senator from South Carolina, and had been a Supreme Court Justice. Why Truman picked Vinson is somewhat unclear, and may have been the result of personal tensions between Byrnes and Truman, as Byrnes had viewed himself as Roosevelt's heir apparent.

In any case, Truman easily could have chosen Byrnes, and he would have been approved by voice vote. In our world, Byrnes lived until 1972.

As a white South Carolinian born in the 19th century, he was a committed segregationist, and was in fact one of the parties being sued in Brown v. Board (he became the governor of South Carolina in 1950). There's a chance he could have convinced Frankfurter to oppose the decision. In any case, a 5-4 decision with a dissent from the sitting Chief Justice would be far harder to enforce than an unanimous decision, especially given Eisenhower's own doubts.

Eisenhower's promise to Warren would lead to Warren replacing Jackson when he passed, so the likelihood of something like Brown v. Board being issued would be high. Nonetheless, Warren would be the most junior Justice, rather than the Chief.

The liberal turn in American public opinion on racial issues during the 50s and 60s was not entirely the result of the court, and something like that probably would have happened regardless of the influence of one man. Still, the Chief Justice is a powerful office, and Byrnes would have fought a number of rearguard actions.

Baker v. Carr & Reynolds v. Sims (which dealt with state legislative districts which were not equipopulous), probably would have been decided the other way. Miranda v. Arizona almost certainly would have. A 5-4 decision in Brown v. Board would delay any further efforts along those lines.

The impact that this would have on electoral politics is unclear.


Miranda was 5/4 IRL, so I agree that almost certainly flips with a conservative CJ  (be that Byrnes or a very old Vinson).  However, the equal population districts cases all had at  least 6 votes in favor of enforcing equal population, so I think those would still happen.  At a minimum, the 2 applying equal protection to mean equal population districts for state level elections were 8/1, so I don't see that going anywhere.  The equal population congressional districts case was 6/3 and perhaps somewhat more vulnerable.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.036 seconds with 12 queries.