 | This articleneeds additional citations forverification. Please helpimprove this article byadding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "The Brethren: Inside the Supreme Court" – news ·newspapers ·books ·scholar ·JSTOR(August 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
 First edition | |
| Author | Bob Woodward andScott Armstrong |
|---|---|
| Language | English |
| Subject | Supreme Court of the United States |
| Publisher | Simon & Schuster |
Publication date | 1979 |
| Publication place | United States |
| Pages | 467 |
| ISBN | 978-0-671-24110-0 |
| OCLC | 61201839 |
The Brethren: Inside the Supreme Court is a 1979 book byBob Woodward andScott Armstrong. It gives a "behind-the-scenes" account of theUnited States Supreme Court duringWarren Burger's early years asChief Justice of the United States. The book covers the years from the 1969 term through the 1975 term. Using Woodward's trademark writing technique involving "off-the-record" sources, the book provides an account of the deliberations leading to some of the court's more controversial decisions from the 1970s. The book significantly focused on the Supreme Court's unanimous 1974 decision inUnited States v. Nixon, which ruled thatPresidentRichard Nixon was legally obligated to turn over theWatergate tapes. In 1985, upon the death ofAssociate JusticePotter Stewart, Woodward disclosed that Stewart had been the primary source forThe Brethren.[1]
The book begins with the 1969 retirement ofChief JusticeEarl Warren from the Supreme Court after theU.S. Senate refused to allowPresidentLyndon Johnson to elevate sitting Associate JusticeAbe Fortas to Chief Justice in 1968. Newly inaugurated as president,Richard Nixon considered nominating moderate Justice Potter Stewart, but ends up selecting Judge Warren Burger. Upon Burger's successful confirmation, theRepublican Party begins pursuing reversals of liberalWarren Court decisions.John Marshall Harlan II comprised the more conservative side of the court, often joined byByron White, whileWilliam Douglas,William Brennan andThurgood Marshall took up the left. Serving as the narrator, Potter Stewart was portrayed as the Supreme Court's ideological center alongsideHugo Black.
Over the course of the book, Woodward and Armstrong portray the nominations of six additional justices, including the Senate's rejection ofClement Haynsworth andG. Harrold Carswell as successors to Abe Fortas. The replacement of Hugo Black and John Marshall Harlan II withLewis F. Powell Jr. andWilliam Rehnquist reinforces theBurger Court's conservatism, and the book ends with William Douglas suffering a stroke at the end of 1974, allowingGerald Ford to appointJohn Paul Stevens as his successor. While Douglas despised Ford over a 1970 attempt to impeach him, Stevens would ultimately lead the court's liberal bloc.
Warren Burger is described by others as pompous, devious, and intellectually mediocre. The book is also critical of William Douglas, who is portrayed as having gone from one of America's greatest jurists to a "nasty, petulant, prodigal child" who was overly political.[2] Woodward and Armstrong also criticize Thurgood Marshall for being intellectually lazy and apathetic, which legal scholarMark Tushnet has portrayed as racially charged.[3][4] The accuracy of the book was questioned by some of the Justices, particularly Brennan, who privately called it a "goddamn shit sheet."[5]
In the 1972baseballanti-trust caseFlood v.Kuhn, JusticeHarry Blackmun circulated a first draft listing more than 70 baseball greats to illustrate the role of baseball in American society. Armstrong and Woodward claimed that he included noAfrican-American players until prodded to do so by JusticeThurgood Marshall. However, when the papers of JusticeWilliam O. Douglas were opened to the public in 1986, the namesJackie Robinson,Roy Campanella, andSatchel Page were already included in Justice Blackmun’s 1st draft.[6]
Regarding the 1972 caseMoore v.Illinois, Armstrong and Woodward claimed that JusticeWilliam Brennan did not vote in favor of giving a man a new trial because he was trying to build JusticeHarry Blackmun’s confidence and independence from Chief JusticeWarren Burger, potentially winning Blackmun's votes on other cases. Legal writerAnthony Lewis has since argued that this casual "vote swapping" did not happen based on interviews with Supreme Courtclerks.[7][8]
In a review, educatorGene Nichol argued that the book's claims of law clerks overseeing most of the writing showcased a bias from sourcing the history of key cases from these clerks. Nichol similarly criticized the book for its overly negatively portrayal of Warren Burger as the result of law clerks biased against conservative jurisprudence after recent decades of liberal decisions. Furthermore, Nichol felt that the book's excessive focus on the personal lives of Supreme Court justices led it to improperly ignore the ethical issues surrounding Warren Burger and William Rehnquist.[2]