The Warren years: The great decisions.
- Publication date
- 16mm Film, Educational Film, Warren, Earl, 1891-1974, United States. Supreme Court, Series: The Warren Years (1969), Education, History, Lawyers, Legal cases, U S Supreme Court, Government, Civil rights and liberties, Crime (Social issues), Crime (Law enforcement), Criminology, Crime
- National Educational Television, Released by Indiana University Audio-Visual Center
- Digitizing sponsor
- Internet Archive
- Internet Archive
Producer, Jim Karayn; director, Max Shindler; editor, Howard Milken
Examines the major Supreme Court rulings in the areas of school desegregation and civil rights, reapportionment, and criminal procedure in light of the consequences of the decisions. Presents an evaluation of these decisions by allies and critics of Earl Warren
Discusses major Supreme Court rulings in the areas of school desegregation, civil rights and criminal procedures. Evalutes these decisions by allies and critics of the Warren Court such as .ormer Justice Arthur Goldberg and former Attorney General Ramesy Clark.
- 2015-01-16 19:39:36
- Over. One hundred years of racial discrimination. Had created intolerable conditions of inequality and deprivation for the black minority at the heart of the problem was segregation. In one nine hundred fifty four soon after Warren's tenure began a negro child Linda Brown seeking admission to an all white public school brought suit against the Board of Education have to be good Kansas. They're going to unanimous decision in this case was the first in a series of civil rights decisions which was to change the lives of black people across the country. It advanced a national ideal to eliminate racism the lawyer who argued the case for the N.E.A. C.B. was Robert Carter any I think people use had decided to make an attack on the segregation and at the time by one thousand nine hundred fifty which was the first argument I had made in the in the Supreme Court. Case was decided which held at the graduate level that segregation itself was a denial of equal educational opportunities and on the basis of that decision we decide and the N.E.A. C.P. the time was right to make an all out attack on segregation at the elementary school level. Like millions of other black children in the south. Linda Brown had been denied entrance to the school under laws permitting racial segregation in one thousand nine hundred six that court had condoned this practice with it's separate but equal doctrine which I permitted segregation in all areas of life in the south. Mr Carter to Justice WARREN Right. Simply the decision well understood and T. said that this issue and as beautiful as any judge could possibly done. Does segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race even of all the tangible factors may be equal to bribe the children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities. We believe that it does. We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of separate but equal has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently on the go. It's decision divided the country. White Southern reaction was angry and to find. The man who argued markets is what brought the wine court than anyone else. Jack Greenberg the Brown decision ran into such severe opposition particularly. From the southern state. That we hand almost a series of minor revolutions on our hands at Little Rock and New Orleans we had all the declarations of into position enough occasion we had the Congress of the United States at the Senate in any event that coming within a single vote of a stripping the court of if you're a stick Sion and during this period of time that is a Shortly after fifty four and fifty five the court did very little with regard to implementation except to sort of play its role in the clearing that these revolutions that is Little Rock and the like could not stand the educational effect of the courts work however was profound. During this period of time and what happened was what became known as the movement began. And for a plate it's wrong with regard to that protected those who in the movie into a being arrested in club by police and so the fact that their First Amendment right to free speech and ultimately the principles proclaimed by the court and the activism of the movement led to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of one hundred sixty four nine hundred sixty five at which point Congress and the executive branch the president and the court had all caught up with one another. After the court ruled for the concept of school integration it's set out in one nine hundred fifty five to ensure implementation it called for integration in public schools with all deliberate speed this phrase was widely interpreted in the South as a signal that the guard would tolerate delay so the pace of integration was painfully slow. Eventually the court to game in patients with this open defiance and ruled in one nine hundred sixty four that further delays and disaggregating school systems are no longer tolerable in a recent decision that God has provided strict criteria of compliance project Greenberg It was another important victory. In the last term of course in case of a greening Yes you can't County the Corps proclaiming that a desegregation order must work in order to be effective wasn't enough to have formal provisions like from them of choice which their permit. Intimidation or permit the old habits of segregation in to new in desegregating a phony segregate assistant enough to have standards which actually bring about abolition of the previous two sets of schools we have to end up with a single unitary school system the Supreme Court essentially said was look we're not interested in excuses it just got to work and if this can make it work any other way in this in a way to make it work well this is how it's going to be having said that they caught. Record in the race relations feel is excellent. IOW I have to make some modifications but one I think that the court was was in error in. It's all deliberate speed formula new term for the implementation and Brian quite a good reason for doing this but this is a part of what blacks are now complaining about that I think a part of the present box now complaining about because what the court really did in that this issue was the saying that we will sacrifice the rights of the individual black trial for the Equal Education operative. And postpone it and put it off in or out of that this decision will become more palatable and acceptable more acceptable to both from the white by the majority for constant goal was racial equality. Its decisions have sought to eliminate segregation in virtually every area of life it has ended the poll tax which had been widely used to limit black voting It has ruled against the drawing of political districts along racial lines. It has sought to bring about all racial discrimination both private and public in the sale or rental of property but it's power to achieve full racial equality is limited by the willingness of the nation to comply. Thus after sixteen years the courts go remains unfulfilled. Weisberg already had addressed itself to a quality of law for a black and white citizens alike. Its next task was to secure an equal rights for the citizens of our cities by nine hundred sixty two critics felt that the legislatures were grossly mile up or send in favor of rural areas. In a series of I'm president of decisions that God said that federal and state legislative districts must be apportioned equally according to population. One man one vote that great adventure into what had been regarded as the domain of Congress and state legislatures author Goldberg was associate justice of the court at that time. It took a lot of judicial courage to cross that bridge because they traditionally had been but this was not a judicial matter I was on the card when those cases were decided. And seem to May as it seemed to the chief and a majority of the court. We could not justify that kind of decision but can be more important in a democratic society then a man's vote this is what our democratic society depends upon in the first two reapportionment decision maker versus car the current Senate had the right to evaluate a passion of State Legislatures. In a subsequent decision Reynolds versus same as the chief justice said that legislators are i wanted by voters not farms our cities our economic interests as long as ours is a representative form of government and our legislature is on those instruments of government I like to directly by him directly representative of the people the right to elect legislators in a free and unimpaired fashion is a bedrock of our political system. Senator Dirksen the constant critic of the reapportionment decisions is interviewed by any tease Paul Neville. There isn't an iota. Of sorry in the Constitution. Farley's still frames or it will always in legislatures on that basis and nobody knew that better then just as Feeney Frank for it because the skull in the car in the said they had no business venturing into it is a legislative think that this was an invasion of the domain of gunless. Justice frankfurters angry to send to the Baker vs car decision the current software at a possessed of neither personal of a sword. Ultimately rests on sustained public confidence in its morrow sanction such feeling must be nourished by the courts complete attachment in fact and in appearance from political entanglements and the by abstention from injecting itself into the clash of political forces and political settlements. Now then be allowed in a program one man one though what is wrong with it I don't find any of the overall in that he said. Five find this to be wrong. Namely that if a legislature wants to do it it's quite all right with me but I'm not going to say that I be by my canal boat and scene look are doing or a general candidate for a seat representing a handful of paper likely to come out for the abolition of let's. Say as a matter of balance in any state and of course you've got rural and you've got urban drove it now it could well be that a State your slanted in one direction or another in the a marching in their legislation but there may be some reason Why do but the court's decisions were implemented with a minimum of delay and drastically change the makeup of election districts across the country in Connecticut for example before reapportionment the town of the Union with a population of three hundred eighty three and the city of Hartford with a population of one hundred sixty two thousand and two representatives each in the state house the new districts gave Hartford ten seats and reduce Union to part of one seat. Legislators very large so their seats were alarmed and critical of the decision. Connecticut State Senator John Breaux up to perhaps the worst decision the Supreme Court in the remains because there are a minority is going to need protection which are not just minorities of people minorities over local interests were all interests. Non populous areas which need political protection which is provided with proper safeguards to all of people by the Reason of the fact that you have a unit representation in one house. Happy lace and representation in the other and then the executive branch is elected by popular representation but the courts discovered there was a problem in determining fair districts. Yeah Law Professor Alexander pickles but he don't somehow evolved sound principle that explains what of fairness big is and that enabled the court to require the formation of fair districts and to prevent the formation of on the fair districts that he don't know that it is quite apparent to me and I think it'll soon be apparent to everyone that simply said one man one vote this place must be equal. Said something at best friend you something that has the best sound symbolic significance but which is in practice in affecting the the structure and operations of government through an important indeed there is some evidence that it may be worse than that even if a state is apportioned on the basis of equal population you can still have political inequality here is how gerrymandering may be accomplished. Party haze straight to centered in the western third of the state by state wide they are outnumbered by party B. By the criterion of equal population only a good end up with no representation as in this example. Or with one seat out of three. Depending upon which party was drawing the new mines. Professor Biggles feels the decision may make it easier to gerrymander in the future. That a legislature that is told that it has to apportion a perfect one man one vote basis and is that this tree is to disregard all other for additional initio apportionment like county lines or what have you that such a legislature is there by freed in a sense more free than it would have then. If it were none of the one man one vote mandate freed in a certain sense the gerrymander and accordance with partisan political objectives. All states now have reapportion they're my. Just like yours in this sense it has been a great victory for the court but many thought that the decisions might revitalize our political system might save our crumbling cities while there is some evidence that more urban oriented legislation was passed by the new state houses for most states it is business as usual. Gerrymandering continues to be an effective weapon to maintain the status quo and the Court has declined to rule on this practice. Reapportionment. To deal with the rights of the individual. Criminal justice it found that the administration of the law the technique of police interrogation and the lack of council for indigent defendants was hardly consistent with the Bill of Rights and indecision after decision set out to protect the individual against abuse of power in the case of getting in versus Wainwright any person who is to abort a higher lawyer cannot be assured of a fair trial unless counsel is provided for him. Miranda versus Arizona. Without proper safeguards the bride says that he in custody interrogation works to compel the suspect to speak or you would not otherwise do so freely. As go beat overs as Illinois. No system worth preserving should have to fear that have been accused is permitted to consult with a lawyer he will become aware of and exercise his constitutional rights. Critics of these decisions. Moist allowed concern that the court was coddling criminals. Senator McClintock increasing the corridors fashioning explosion as a rule they are facto which is Daryn there in unmissable logical and positive probative evidence of guilt. Including violent Terry confession. On a blow just this last dispensed by the court you know number of these five four decision has grabbed broad and this fire raged up valid rights of society. Wow I've been to five and exulting fictitious an exaggerated rights of the GRAHAM know. Ramsey Clark former attorney general and son of retired Justice Tom Clarke the Supreme Court has to deal with the conflict that time to create and the conflicts between poor in urban America and the police they're very real and very great so they say they kneel with such questions as the confession. What role does the confession play in line for a month in Criminal Justice in America today. Me Elise. Interrogation questioning seeking to secure an admission or a confession in the one nine hundred fifty nine hundred sixty S. very much as they need it and I know in the eighteen I need in the nineteenth and this prisoner was subjected to pretrial interrogation that would now be outlawed by the Miranda decision here is a recording about interrogation I told you when I die I can't. Have my. Permit for murder number one the car group that confessions obtained in interrogations are inadmissible in court I was to suspect this first advised of his right to remain silent and his right to legal counsel. Many police officials feel this restriction will hinder their lawn for us remember it's detective Russell Group or Minneapolis police. And more you talk to a man and why he's going to admit the he's going to see more accidentally anywhere on purpose and especially if you start cutting him. USA We want the police department cons man and tricks man but what else are we have to fight with. Why should a placement. Why should I risk my life jacket. Change what I've heard in biology no danger my life. Had a Brain you know and I know you're a liar. When you walk. Ramsey Clark disagrees. We know this that the rich person charged with crime and the intelligent and informed in the educated person and a hardened criminal in the organized criminal we're not you know confession and have not given confession and then are not going to give confession and whatever the law says that it's mean in that we have two standards one for the poor and one for the ignorant one for the person who doesn't know is right and the other for the wealthy the in vanity inform the person who knows rights and knows how to protect them. The Supreme Court basically said no we have one standard. Equal justice it is noble and forming the general public the implementation of the court's decision took place on the precinct level a basic rule to remember is that all statements and confessions must be given voluntary you must advise the suspect of his right to remain silent. The question remains are most police forces complying with regard to say she's Ramsey Clark. Most of the studies that have raised this question. Indicate that police compliant with the Miranda said decision is far from perfect fact in a number of nearest actions the indication is that the police are generally ignoring or disregarding the rule that intolerable. Well many critics say these decisions tend to protect. Criminals others feel the girl hasn't gone far enough. University of Pennsylvania Law School Professor hand from the MC damn comments the most important areas of Criminal Justice are. The barrier and whether or not one may be detained and of enough money to buy is released before trial. Adequate representation of counsel the galley play because eighty percent of cases go off on a guilty plea and because of persons are held in the fall of BAL and if they don't have adequate representation by counsel they will plead guilty sentencing and then a probation and parole area and in a case which goes through the process of the gallery play all of them are Rand and map in Ohio search and seizure decisions come down to nothing they mean nothing. Defending planes killed he is convicted he is sentenced to all of these important areas which affects every case it go through the Supreme Court of United States has essentially said nothing. There is great speculation as to what the new card will do amid the cries for Law and Order and indeed the new chief justice Warren Burger has already stated in a recent federal court opinion this seeming anxiety of judges to protect every accused person from every consequence of his voluntary other instance is giving rise to myriad rules and exceptions which even the most alert and sophisticated lawyers and judges aren't taxed tomorrow. Will be another cord from the Warren court it was years of response to human needs a surge for racial equality. Criminal justice and Igor representation in these concerns the court may be sent to express not only the will of the long but also the conscience of the nation.
- Run time
- Internet Archive HTML5 Uploader 1.6.0
- Lasergraphics ScanStation
- Worldcat (source edition)