Gale Encyclopedia Of American Law 3Rd Edition Volume 2 P12 ppsx

Bradley’s appointment to the Supreme Court on February 7, 1870 came shortly after the Court ruled that the Legal Tender Act was unconsti-tutional.. Illinois decision 1877 Served as swing

Trang 1

Code, within which a taxpayer falls based upon his or her taxable income

vBRACTON, HENRY DE Henry de Bracton was a medieval JURIST and priest whose masterful treatise onCOMMON LAW

and procedure provided a framework for the early English legal system

Bracton’s famous De legibus et consuetudi-nibus Angliae (On the laws and customs of England) was a systematic explanation of

ENGLISH LAWfor judges and practitioners during the reign of King Henry III De legibus and another of Bracton’s works, Note-Book, helped shape the system ofCASE LAWand pleadings that began during the monarchy of King Henry II

Although reliance on Bracton’s works declined

as English statutory law grew, historians con-sider De legibus the high point of medieval legal scholarship

Bracton’s exact date of birth early in the thirteenth century is unknown His family, whose name sometimes appears as Bratton or Bretton, owned land near Devon, England

Richard, Earl of Cornwall, the brother of King Henry III, and William de Raleigh, a prominent common-law judge, were important benefactors who helped advance Bracton’s legal career

By 1240 Bracton had the job of civil servant,

a relatively lucrative position during the Middle Ages In 1245 he was appointed to the judiciary

In 1247 he became a member of the King’s Bench, where he served for ten years After 1257

he held several assignments, including that of

chancellor of Exeter Cathedral During the Middle Ages it was not unusual for a priest to serve also as a judge

De legibus first appeared after Bracton’s death in 1268 Although the original manuscript

is lost, approximately 300 reedited and hand copied manuscripts circulated during the thir-teenth and fourthir-teenth centuries Intended as a guide to English law and procedure, De legibus combines aspects of Roman and CANON LAW Bracton was influenced by the Institutes of Justinian I and by medieval textbooks of Axo, Tancred, and Raymond of Penafort His treatise includes a section of basic principles and a section of writs and commentary It emphasizes the development and application of case law as written by judges grappling with medieval legal questions

Bracton’s Note-Book is a compendium of two thousand judicial opinions Some historians believe that other medieval jurists contributed

to the work, which was discovered in 1884 Note-Book was edited by FREDERIC W MAITLAND

and published in 1887

vBRADFORD, WILLIAM (1729–1808) William Bradford, born November 4, 1729, in Plympton, Massachusetts, was a student of both law and medicine After practicing medicine in Warren, Rhode Island, Bradford was admitted

to the bar in 1767 and established his legal practice in Bristol, Rhode Island

From 1764 to 1765 Bradford was a member

of the Rhode Island House of Representatives, and served as speaker He continued his career

Henry De Bracton c 1210–1268

❖

◆

1216 King Henry III crowned king of England

1235 Estimated time Bracton started writing

De legibus

1240 First official record of Bracton;

held job as civil servant

1245 Appointed justice itinerant for Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire

1247 Became a member

of the King's Bench

1259 Estimated time Bracton finished writing

De legibus

1260–67 Served as justice itinerant for western counties of England

1272 Henry III died

1268 Died, England;

De legibus published

1264 Became chancellor

of Exeter Cathedral

1887 Note-Book

published, edited by Frederic W Maitland

1884 Note-Book

discovered by Professor Vinogradoff of Moscow

1225

◆

Born, England

98 BRACTON, HENRY DE

Trang 2

in that state, serving on the Rhode Island

Committee of Correspondence in 1773, and

acting as deputy governor of Rhode Island from

1775 to 1778

Bradford was elected senator from Rhode

Island in 1793, serving in the U.S Senate until

1797, and acting as president pro tem in that

same year He died July 6, 1808, in Bristol

vBRADFORD, WILLIAM (1755–95)

William Bradford was born September 14, 1755,

in Philadelphia He graduated from Princeton

University with a bachelor of arts degree in

1772 and a master of arts degree in 1775

Before beginning his legal career Bradford

served in the Revolutionary War from 1776

to 1779, fought in numerous battles, including

Valley Forge, and emerged with the rank of

colonel in the Continental army After his tour

of duty, he was admitted to the Pennsylvania

bar and established a legal practice in Yorktown, Pennsylvania

Bradford served as Pennsylvania attorney general for an eleven-year period, from 1780

to 1791 He entered the judiciary in the latter year and presided as judge of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court for three years

In 1794 Bradford was selected by President

GEORGE WASHINGTON to serve as U.S Attorney General for one year, the second man to hold this post He died August 23, 1795, and was buried in Burlington, New Jersey

vBRADLEY, JOSEPH P

Joseph P Bradley was appointed to the U.S

Supreme Court in 1870 in a successful move

by PresidentULYSSES S.GRANTto pack the court, or fill vacancies on the bench with jurists who supported the president’s actions Grant nomi-nated Bradley and fellow Republican WILLIAM STRONG with the almost public understanding

William Bradford 1729–1808

❖

◆

❖

1729 Born,

Plympton, Mass.

1764–65 Served as speaker of the Rhode Island House of Representatives

1773 Served on the Rhode Island Committee of Correspondence

1767 Admitted

to bar in Rhode Island

1775–78 Served as deputy governor of Rhode Island

1775–83 American Revolution

1797 Retired from U.S Senate

1793 Elected to the U.S Senate

1790 Rhode Island became last colony to ratify U.S.

Constitution; became 13th state in the Union

1787 Delaware was first colony to ratify U.S.

Constitution; became first state in the Union

1808 Died, Bristol, R.I.

1750

William Bradford 1755–1795

❖

1755 Born, Philadelphia, Pa.

1772 Earned B.A from Princeton University

1776–79 Served on the American side in the Revolutionary War

1775–83 American Revolution

1782 Pleaded Pennsylvania's case against Connecticut before the Congressional Commmission on Wyoming land titles

1780–91 Served

as attorney general of Pennsylvania

1791 Appointed justice

of Pennsylvania Supreme Court by Governor Mifflin

1795 Died, Burlington, N.J.

1794 Appointed U.S attorney general by President Washington

1792–93 Led drive to revise Pennsylvania's criminal jurisprudence

1775

Trang 3

that they would save the invalidatedLEGAL TENDER

Act (12 Stat 345, 532, 709) As expected, Bradley and Strong voted to uphold the constitutionality

of the act Bradley went on to serve as an associate justice for 22 years and, as was the custom, as a traveling circuit judge for the Fifth (Southern) Circuit

The eldest of 11 children,JOSEPH BRADLEYwas born March 14, 1813, in Berne, New York, and raised on a farm He was given no middle name

at birth; his middle initial was likely an expansion he made of his name to honor his father He relied on his intelligence, ambition, and strong work ethic to make a name for

himself in the legal profession An 1836 graduate

of New Jersey’s Rutgers College, Bradley was a self-taught lawyer who was admitted to the New Jersey bar in 1839 In 1859, he received

an honorary law degree from Lafayette College,

in Easton, Pennsylvania

Bradley’s MARRIAGE to Mary Hornblower helped to open doors in the legal community His wife’s father,WILLIAM HORNBLOWER, was chief justice of the New Jersey Supreme Court Bradley built a successful law practice with a large business clientele that included the troubled Camden and Amboy Railroad His expertise was inPATENTandCOMMERCIAL LAW

Bradley’s appointment to the Supreme Court

on February 7, 1870 came shortly after the Court ruled that the Legal Tender Act was unconsti-tutional In 1862, Congress had used the act to issue treasury notes as a substitute for gold in its efforts to pay off Civil War debts Upon reviewing the legislation, the Supreme Court invalidated the issuance of the paper money,

in Hepburn v Griswold, 75 U.S (8 Wall.) 603,

19 L Ed 513 (1870) (the first of what became known as the Legal Tender Cases)

Court observers predicted that Grant’s new appointees would agree to reverse Hepburn because of their long-standing ties to commer-cial interests They were right: Bradley and Strong did vote to overturn, thereby upholding the legality of the notes (Knox v Lee, and Parker

v Davis, 79 U.S [12 Wall.] 457, 20 L Ed 287 [1871], heard concurrently)

Bradley’s Supreme Court andCIRCUIT COURT

opinions often fail the test of time Although his contemporaries praised him for his keen intellect and legal acumen, many of his deci-sions are, by today’s standards, objectionable

in outcome and reasoning

Joseph P Bradley 1813–1892

❖

1813 Born, Berne, N.Y.

1836 Graduated from Rutgers College

1859 Received honorary law degree from Lafayette College

1861–65 Civil War

1870 Nominated to U.S Supreme Court by President Grant

1873 Concurred with

Bradwell v Illinois decision

1877 Served as swing vote in Hayes-Tilden election decision

1883 Wrote Civil

Rights opinions

that paved way for Jim Crow laws

1892 Died, Washington, D.C.

1825

Joseph P Bradley.

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

LIVING INTEREST AND

INDE-PENDENT OF ITS

ATTRACTIONS AS A

PROFESSIONAL

—J OSEPH P B RADLEY

100 BRADLEY, JOSEPH P.

Trang 4

For example, Bradley wrote the majority

opinion in the infamous CIVIL RIGHTS CASES, 109

U.S 3, 3 S Ct 18, 27 L Ed 835 (1883), which

declared the Civil Rights Act of 1875 (18 Stat

336) unconstitutional The Civil Rights Act

was established to ensure the equal treatment

of African-Americans in public facilities and

accommodations In effect, that decision

sanc-tioned racialSEGREGATIONand paved the way for

discriminatory JIM CROW LAWS

According to the Court, civil rights

legisla-tion could not prevent discriminalegisla-tion by private

individuals Although the THIRTEENTH

AMEND-MENTof the U.S Constitution outlawedSLAVERY,

and the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT barred racial

discrimination by states, discrimination by

private citizens was allowable, according to the

Court Bradley argued that prejudice was not

amenable to legislation If private business

owners refused to serve or accommodate

African-Americans, Congress could not force

them to do so In this view, purely private

conduct was not covered by the post–Civil War

constitutional amendments

In a famous dissent, Associate JusticeJOHN

MARSHALL HARLAN pointed out that because the

restaurants, inns, theaters, and hotels owned

by private citizens are actually quite public,

discrimination against African-Americans in

these places should not be tolerated Harlan’s

dissent was later used to bolster support for

the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C.A §§

2000 et seq.)

In Bradwell v Illinois, 83 U.S (16 Wall.)

130, 21 L Ed 442 (1872), Bradley concurred in

the decision to reject Myra Bradwell’s bid to

practice law in Illinois Bradwell had studied law

with her husband and had passed the Illinois

BAR EXAMINATION However, Illinois denied her

ADMISSION TO THE BAR because she was female

Bradwell appealed her case to the U.S Supreme

Court, claiming that the Fourteenth

Amend-ment to the U.S Constitution protected her

right to practice in her chosen profession The

Supreme Court ruled otherwise Bradley wrote

in concurring DICTA that God had created

woman to be wife and mother, not lawyer

In the SLAUGHTER-HOUSE CASES, 83 U.S

(16 Wall.) 36, 21 L Ed 394 (1873), Bradley’s

dissent foretold the Court’s changing

philoso-phy on due process for businesses In those

cases, Louisiana butchers objected to a state law

that allowed only one company to slaughter

cattle in New Orleans The Court sided with the state, but Bradley’s dissent was later used to argue for the protection of commercial enter-prises from state government intrusion

Bradley was chosen in 1877 to sit on the Hayes-Tilden Electoral Commission to deter-mine the results of the presidential election between Republican candidate RUTHERFORD B

HAYES and his Democratic opponent, SAMUEL J

TILDEN Bradley was the swing vote; he replaced Justice DAVID DAVIS, a political independent who could not fulfill his term on the electoral commission Bradley had voted for Hayes, his fellow Republican

Bradley died in Washington, D.C., on January 22, 1892, at the age of 79

FURTHER READINGS

Cushman, Claire, ed 1996 The Supreme Court Justices:

Illustrated Biographies, 1789–1995 2d ed Washington,

D.C.: Congressional Quarterly.

Friedman, Jane M 1993 America’s First Woman Lawyer: The

Biography of Myra Bradwell Buffalo, NY: Prometheus.

Paper, Lewis J 1983 Brandeis: An Intimate Biography Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Urofsky, Melvin I 1981 Louis D Brandeis and the Progressive

Tradition Boston: Little, Brown.

CROSS REFERENCES

“Bradwell v Illinois” (Appendix, Primary Document).

BRADY CENTER TO PREVENT

GUN VIOLENCE

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence and

its sister organization the Brady Campaign to

Prevent Gun Violence are dedicated to reducing

gun deaths and injuries through education,

legislative reform, and LITIGATION The history

of the organizations can be traced back to 1974

when Dr Mark Borinsky, a victim of gun violence,

established Handgun Control, Inc (HCI), a

grassroots organization Borinsky’s goal was to

create common sense gun laws He was joined

in 1975 by Nelson “Pete” Shields, who had lost

a son to a serial killer In 1983 the Center to

Prevent Handgun Violence (CPHV) was formed

by Shields to focus on education and research

in GUN CONTROL while the HCI remained a

LOBBYINGgroup

In 1985 current chairperson Sarah Brady

joined the group after her husband, Jim Brady,

was shot and seriously wounded during the

1981ASSASSINATIONattempt on PresidentRONALD

REAGAN In 2001 Handgun Control was renamed

the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence,

and the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence

was renamed the Brady Center to Prevent Gun

Violence According to the Brady Campaign

website, its mission remains the same: to“work

to enact and enforce sensible gun laws,

regula-tions and public policies through grassroots

activism, electing pro-gun control public officials

and increasing public awareness of gun violence.”

In 2001 the Brady Center merged with

the Million Mom March Chapters The Million

Mom March effort began as a march on

Washington, D.C., and evolved into a large national organization that fights gun violence

The Million Mom March has 75 chapters around the United States

The legal arm of the Brady Center is the Legal Action Project (LAP) Its goal is to“represent gun violence victims and the PUBLIC INTEREST in the courts.” For example, LAP provides free legal assistance to victims in lawsuits against gun manufacturers, dealers, and owners It pushes for legislation that will force the gun industry to improve the safety in gun design and to change negligent methods of marketing, sales, and distribution Until LAP became involved in several landmark civil cases, gun makers and sellers were not held responsible for gun-related deaths and injuries The logic was that only the individual shooter was responsible

In Merrill v Navegar, Inc., 89 Cal Rptr.2d

146 (Cal App 1999), LAP helped obtain the first appellate court decision to hold that a gun manufacturer can be held liable for its NEGLI-GENCEin designing and selling a gun for use in crime, and promoting it so that it wouldAPPEAL

to individuals with violent intentions On July 1,

1993, Gian Luigi Ferri entered a high rise office building in San Francisco, California, with two semi-automatic ASSAULT WEAPONS manufactured and sold by Navegar, Inc., plus one other gun

He opened fire in the hallways and offices of the lower floors of the building, killing eight people and wounding six others before he shot and killed himself

The survivors and relatives of the deceased brought suit against Navegar, Inc., on three legal theories:COMMON LAWnegligence, negligence per

se, andSTRICT LIABILITY for engaging in an ultra hazardous activity The trial court dismissed the case, holding that the victims could not sue the gun manufacturer for the actions of the gunman Ferri

The case was brought before the Court of Appeals of California The court reversed on the single issue of common law negligence Judge J

Anthony Kline, writing for the court, held that,

“Fundamental fairness requires that those who create and profit fromCOMMERCEin a potentially

DANGEROUS INSTRUMENTALITY should be liable for conduct that unreasonably increases the risk of injury above and beyond that necessarily presented by their enterprise.” The court referred

to Navegar’s manufacture and marketing of the TEC-9 semi-automatic weapons used in the

BRADY CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE 103

Trang 7

killings It found that the gun had no legitimate civilian purpose; it was a weapon designed solely for the efficient killing of large numbers

of people The court also held that the TEC-9 was advertised in a manner to appeal to persons with violent or criminal tendencies Navegar advertised the TEC-9 as being “tough as your toughest customer,” “paramilitary,” and pro-viding“excellent resistance to fingerprints.”

In August 2001, Navegar appealed to the Supreme Court of California to reverse the decision of theAPPELLATEcourt The court ruled

in favor of the gun manufacturer, but declined

to address the broader issues concerning negligent business practices of the gun industry

Instead, the court pointed to a state statute that precluded the particular type of claim brought against the gun manufacturer In response to this ruling, the California Legislature, in Sep-tember 2002, became the first state to repeal a statute that gave special legal IMMUNITY to the gun industry The repeal was part of a group of far-reaching gun laws that were passed by the California Assembly and signed by then-Gover-nor Gray Davis

In addition to supporting negligence law-suits against gun manufacturers, the Brady Center attempts to ensure that gun legislation

is fairly interpreted In the 2000s, the issue of whether the SECOND AMENDMENT allows indivi-duals to carry firearms came to the forefront

as the Supreme Court agreed to review a case that directly involved the application of the Second Amendment In 2007 the D.C Court of Appeals reviewed a gun-control law that had been in force in the District of Columbia since the 1970s This law effectively prohibited most individuals from owning and keeping firearms

in their homes The D.C Circuit ruled that the law violated the Second Amendment because the Second Amendment establishes rights that apply to individuals (Parker v District of Colum-bia, 478 F.3d 370 [D.C Cir 2007])

The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case

In a 5–4 decision, the Court affirmed the D.C

Circuit’s opinion JusticeANTONIN SCALIAwrote a lengthy opinion that focused heavily on the text

of the Second Amendment Scalia concluded that the Founders had intended for the Second Amendment to apply to individuals, notwith-standing references in the amendment to

MILITIA Because the law prohibited individuals

to keep and bear arms without sufficient

JUSTIFICATION, Scalia concluded that the law violated the Second Amendment (HELLER V

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 128 S Ct 2783, 171

L Ed 2d 637 [2008])

The Brady Center did not criticize the Court’s decision in Heller After the decision in

2008, Brady Center president Paul Helmke wrote,“Our fight to enact sensible gun laws will

be undiminished by the Supreme Court’s decision in the Heller case While we disagree with the Supreme Court’s ruling, which strips the citizens of the District of Columbia of a law they strongly support, the decision clearly suggests that other gun laws are entirely con-sistent with the Constitution.”

The Brady Center is also integral in shaping new gun policy Perhaps its biggest success came with the 1993 passage of the Brady Bill, which went into effect on February 28, 1994 The law requires a background check on any individual who attempts to purchase a handgun and a five-day waiting period for handgun purchases In

1998, the law was extended to included long guns (i.e., rifles and shotguns) In 2001, the Brady Center announced that in the eight years since the law was in effect, gun deaths in the United States dropped from 39,595 in 1993 to 28,874 in 1999, a 27 percent decline

With the election of GEORGE W BUSH as president in 2002, and the gain of Republican seats in both the House and Senate in 2002, opponents of gun control gained ground However, Democrats regained control of Con-gress by the end of the decade and some of the steps taken during the Bush administration were challenged For instance, the Bush admin-istration approved a rule in December 2008 that would allow individuals to carry loaded weap-ons in national parks WhenBARACK OBAMAtook office in 2009 his administration moved imme-diately to block the rule’s implementation The Brady Center applauded the move

FURTHER READINGS Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence Available online

at http://www.bradycampaign.org/ (accessed May 13, 2009).

Million Mom March Chapters Available online at http:// www.millionmommarch.org (accessed May 13, 2009).

CROSS REFERENCES District of Columbia v Heller; Gun Control; Second Amendment.

104 BRADY CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE

Trang 8

BRAGG, THOMAS

See CONFEDERATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL

BRANCH DAVIDIAN RAID

On February 28, 1993, agents from theALCOHOL,

Tobacco and Firearms Bureau (ATF) were met

with gunfire when they tried to serve search and

arrest warrants on members of the Branch

Davidian religious cult at the compound of the

apocalyptic sect near Waco, Texas Four ATF

agents and six Davidians died of gunshot

wounds that day A 51-day standoff ensued

between more than 100 Davidians inside the

compound and 76 federal agents outside the

compound

On April 19, 1995, following a 51-day

standoff, federal agents raided the Branch

Davidian compound near Waco, Texas A fire,

later determined to have been set by the

Davidians, destroyed the compound and killed

57 of its residents

On the morning of April 19, the FEDERAL

BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (FBI) ordered tanks

to break through the compound’s walls, knock

open holes, and pour tear gas inside Around

noon fires erupted, burning the compound to

the ground Approximately 80 Branch Davidians

died, including their leader, 34-year-old David

Koresh In all, 57 Davidians died in the fire, and

23 died from gunshot wounds Of these dead, 17

were children, some of whom died from gunshot

wounds and some in the fire Eighteen children

and 22 adults left the compound unharmed

during the seven-week standoff

On the two-year anniversary of the Waco

siege, Timothy McVeigh detonated a rental

truck full of explosives outside the Alfred P

Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City,

Oklahoma, killing 168 people McVeigh later

admitted that the Oklahoma City bombing was

carried out in part to exact revenge against

the federal government for the Branch Davidian

raid McVeigh was eventually convicted on

various charges, including first degree MURDER,

and sentenced to death He was executed in

June 2001

The Branch Davidian case began in the

spring of 1992 when the FBI received

informa-tion that Koresh was running a

methamphet-amine lab at a religious compound near Waco

While investigating Koresh on possible drug

charges, the FBI and ATF learned that the cult

leader was possibly breaking federal firearms laws as well, allegedly converting semiautomatic

WEAPONS into unlawful machine guns Federal agents also learned that United Parcel Service (UPS) had been regularly delivering firearms components and explosive materials to the Davidian compound over a period of several years Using UPS invoices, federal agents tracked serial numbers on weapons as well as explosives that had been delivered to Koresh

One invoice indicated that Koresh had received

a shipment containing ammunition magazines for automatic AR-15 rifles, plus a large quantity

of powdered aluminum metal, a common ingredient in explosives

In obtaining the search and arrest warrants, federal authorities provided the issuing MAGIS-TRATEwith evidence indicating that Koresh had spent $199,715 in the previous year to buy illegal guns, gun parts, and other components, enough to build a fearsome arsenal Koresh supporters claimed that the Davidian leader was a gun dealer who had lawfully acquired the weapons However, after the siege ended, federal authorities found 156 ASSAULT rifles, a heavy machine gun, several boxes of grenades, and grenade launchers, all of which Koresh had obtained and possessed in violation of federal weapons laws

On February 26, 1994, almost a year to the day after the siege began, a federal jury in San Antonio, Texas, acquitted 11 cult members of murder and murder-conspiracy charges in the deaths of the four ATF agents However, five Davidians were convicted of voluntary MAN-SLAUGHTER, and two were convicted on weapons

On April 19, 1993, following a 51-day standoff, federal agents raided the Branch Davidian compound near Waco, Texas A fire, later determined to have been set by the Davidians, destroyed the compound and killed 57 of its residents.

AP IMAGES

BRANCH DAVIDIAN RAID 105

Trang 9

charges U.S District Judge Walter Smith sentenced the defendants to serve 10 to 15 years in prison, after the much stiffer sentences

he initially handed down were overturned on

APPEAL Following the trial the jury foreperson said that the wrong people had been prosecuted

“The federal government was absolutely out

of control there,” she said “[T]he ones who planned the raid and orchestrated it and insisted

on carrying out the plan should have been

on trial.”

The FBI blamed the Davidians for igniting the fire But on August 25, 1999, the FBI conceded that it had used “pyrotechnic” tear-gas canisters during the siege The Waco controversy had been gathering momentum ever since a 1997 documentary film, Waco: The Rules

of Engagement, presented evidence that the FBI had fired flammable tear gas into the Davidians’

prairie bunker, sometimes known as Mount Carmel Attorney General JANET RENO denied knowing about the canisters’ flammability but ordered a complete investigation of the raid On September 9, 1999, Reno named former Repub-lican senator John C Danforth of Missouri as special counsel to lead the investigation

The FBI told investigators that many of the Davidians who died during the conflagration were victims of mass SUICIDE orchestrated by Koresh But the nine Davidians who escaped the fire denied that any such suicide took place

They claimed that the FBI’s tank crushed several fuel containers and that a grenade or some other projectile set off the fire Before the fire started, however, the FBI intercepted troubling conversations coming from unidentified Branch Davidians inside Mount Carmel: “I already poured it It’s already poured Don’t pour it all out, we might need some later So we only light’em at first if they come in with that tank, right?” Additionally, FBI snipers said they saw

a Davidian start a fire and infrared pictures taken from a plane overhead detected three fires burning in separate parts of the compound before the tanks entered

On July 21, 2000, Danforth released his findings Danforth first reported that he “had

a lot of difficulty” getting relevant documents from the FBI Although he was eventually given the documents he requested, Danforth reported that he felt that “there was a spirit of resis-tance in the FBI” against his investigation

Nonetheless, Danforth’s investigation concluded

that the canisters fired by the FBI did not start any of the fires that consumed the compound,

as all available evidence demonstrated that the canisters landed 75 feet from the main building hours before the fires started Instead, Danforth placed sole blame for the conflagration on Koresh After reviewing two million pages of documents, 849 interviews, and thousands of pounds of physical evidence, Danforth said it was clear to him that the only persons who had started any fires at the Branch Davidian compound near Waco, Texas, were the Davi-dians themselves, probably at the direction of their leader David Koresh

Survivors of the Branch Davidian raid and family members of those who died during the siege filed a series of WRONGFUL DEATHcivil lawsuits against the federal government The suits were subsequently consolidated into one proceeding before Judge Walter Smith, sitting in the U.S district court at Waco However, Smith dismissed the lawsuit in September 2000, after the case was tried before anADVISORY JURY, which ruled against the plaintiffs Judge Smith

accept-ed the verdict and concurraccept-ed with Danforth’s findings that federal agents had not used excessive force in their tear-gas assault on the cult’s compound Smith found that the Davi-dians themselves had started the fire Attorneys for the plaintiffs filed an appeal; they repre-sented the estates of 14 children who died in the fire, a 15-year-old girl who was badly burned, and three parents whose children died in the blaze The sole issue on appeal was whether Judge Smith should have recused himself for alleged BIAS against the plaintiffs In 2003 the Fifth CIRCUIT COURT of Appeals found that plaintiffs had not met their evidentiary burden

to gain Judge Smith’s recusal and affirmed the dismissal (Andrade v Chojnacki,, 338 F.3d 448 [5th Cir 2003], cert den by 2004 U.S LEXIS

2035, 2036[2004])

FURTHER READINGS Cole, Michael D 1999 Siege at Waco: Deadly Inferno Berkeley Heights, NJ: Enslow.

Haldeman, Bonnie, and Catherine Lowman Wessinger.

2007 Memories of the Branch Davidians: the Autobiog-raphy of David Koresh’s Mother Waco, Tex.: Baylor Univ Press.

Treaner, Nick, ed 2004 The Waco Standoff San Diego, Calif.: Greenhaven Press.

Wright, Stuart A 1995 Armageddon in Waco: Critical Perspectives on the Branch Davidian Conflict Chicago: Univ of Chicago Press.

106 BRANCH DAVIDIAN RAID

Trang 10

CROSS REFERENCES

Conspiracy; Federal Bureau of Investigation; Oklahoma

City Bombing; Recusal; Wrongful Death.

vBRANDEIS, LOUIS DEMBITZ

Louis Dembitz Brandeis’s lifelong COMMITMENT

to public service and social reform earned him

the epithet the People’s Lawyer His 23 years on

the Supreme Court were characterized by a deep

respect for civil liberties and by an abiding

distrust of centralized power in the hands of

business and government

Brandeis was famous for his prodigious

intellect and his well-crafted, detailed dissents

He was a man of principle who enhanced the

image of the legal profession by living up to his

belief that lawyers should possess “the moral

courage in the face of financial loss and personal

ill-will to stand for right and justice.”

Brandeis was born November 13, 1856, in

Louisville, Kentucky, the youngest of four

children of Adolph Brandeis and Fredericka

Dembitz Brandeis His parents were refined and

well-to-do immigrants who left Prague, then

part of Bohemia, in 1849 A brilliant student,

Brandeis excelled in the public schools in

Louis-ville He also attended the Annen-Realschule, in

Dresden, Germany, during his family’s 1873–75

pilgrimage to Europe

Although Brandeis did not have a college

degree, he was admitted into Harvard Law

School and graduated at the top of his class in

1877 Brandeis had an obvious passion for law

and he considered the years at Harvard among

the happiest in his life His ties to the university

were strengthened further in 1886 when he

became one of the founders of the influential

Harvard Law Review Brandeis and Samuel D

Warren wrote a legendary article,“The Right to

Privacy,” in the December 1890 issue of the

Review It previewed Brandeis’s Supreme Court opinions asserting privacy as a constitutionally guaranteed right

After a year of graduate work Brandeis moved to St Louis in 1878 to begin a law practice He soon missed the intellectual sti-mulation of the East Coast and moved back

to Boston, where he began a successful law practice with Warren Their large firm had an impressive clientele and made Brandeis wealthy, although money held little interest for him As

he established himself professionally, Brandeis socialized with Boston’s intellectual elite In

1891, he married Alice Goldmark, a distant cousin, with whom he had two daughters

Brandeis zealously embraced the ideals of the Progressive movement of the early twentieth century He proved his dedication to social

Louis Brandeis.

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

Louis Dembitz Brandeis 1856–1941

1856 Born,

Louisville, Ky

1861–65 U.S Civil War

1877 Graduated top of class from Harvard Law School

1886 Helped found the

Harvard Law Review

1890 Co-wrote

"The Right to

Privacy" with

Samuel D Warren

1908 Muller v Oregon

established the use of the "Brandeis brief"

1914 Other People's

Money—and How the Bankers Use

It published

1914–18 World War I

1916 Became first Jewish American

on U.S Supreme Court—appointed

by President Wilson

1928 Wrote dissent

for Olmstead

v United States

1939 Retired from Supreme Court

1941 Died, Washington, D.C.

1939–45 World War II

1948 Brandeis University named

in his honor

1875

❖

◆◆

TEACH US TO BE MOST ON OUR GUARD

TO PROTECT LIBERTY WHEN THE

—L OUIS B RANDEIS

Định dạng
Số trang	10
Dung lượng	705,13 KB